MovieChat Forums > TV General > Tv vs. Film?

Tv vs. Film?

posted 8 years ago by DreamersxDisease (817)
14 replies | jump to latest

I'm sure this has been brought up many times before, but whatever, I've never tried it! And the more activity we can get going, the better (tis' my motto these days).

So, do you have an opinion on if either medium is better or what you prefer these days? I ask this based off of my own thoughts that have wildly changed pver the last few years. I used to be nothing, but a cinephile. I watched tv a lot, sure, but I didn't have the same kind of investment and obsessiveness as I did with movies.

Now it's the complete opposite and my favorite things are shows which I watch a ton more and just am into, on the whole more. I never thought that would happen, but I don't think anyone expected tv to become as amazing as it has so...

Just wondering if anyone has had a similar reaction or flip or the reverse of that? If so, why? Feel free to elaborate, use examples, what have you. This sounds like an essay question now, haha, whoop, oh well, go for it!

[–] Mahrez99 (236) 8 years ago

I have the exact same feeling. TV-series was great, but the good and big movies made a whole different kind of enthusiasm for me not so many years ago. Now I struggle to build up any excitement for even the most juicy looking movies, of which there seems to be less and less of too, while a number of series pops up in a seemingly endless stream that does.

I think TV series have become much much better than they used to, but the quality of movies have dropped a lot in the last say 10 (?) years. These days they spew out almost only poor remakes, run-of-the-mill superhero-movies, pretentious artsy "meaningful" movies, heavy depressing movies on serious subjects or not-funny romantic "comedies"(or chick-flicks) and horror ofc (which i don't watch). There is so few really good movies in between all the trash that it's depressing really. I guess all the best writers write for TV now :)

[–] DreamersxDisease (817) 8 years ago

Yup, I agree! There are good movies to be found still, sure, but the quality is really coming from tv. That's where most of the talent seems to be going because it values story telling over spectacle, character over Michael Bay-esque action, and just the general artistry of crafting a visual narrative. There just seems to be so much more care and thoughtfulness when approaching television than films these days.

Tv can take its time more too. I feel like every movie is rushed in the hopes of breaking the box office or garnering awards. They aren't made just for the sake of love and passion and belief in the story/vision. Not that tv is without all that as well, but not as much I'd wager. All in all it seems our attitudes towards the two mediums are split. For movies audiences and creators, largely, just want something loud, flashy, or sappy whereas with tv we're more willing to wait it out, get weird, and seem more accepting of being along for the ride.

Guess we can't call it the, "idiot box," so much anymore.

[–] frankdux (9) 8 years ago

Sometime over the past 15 years or so I definitely feel that TV has surpassed film as a storytelling medium.

Although not my favorite show, I think The Sopranos was the beginning of TV's renaissance. It really raised the bar for what TV could do. Since then, we've had many epic, gritty, and higher budgeted tv shows that have easily eclipsed the sum entertainment value of any given years worth of Oscar winners.

[–] DreamersxDisease (817) 8 years ago

I agree. While I've never actually gotten into The Sopranos (I know, I know) I'd say that's a fairly accurate jumping off point for this whole Golden Age of TV. I've seen it cited as that many times and knowing what it meant for tv, even after not really having seen it, I can understand why.

Like you said because of that and others that came after it really started to show how tv can be made and taken as seriously as films. That not everything had to be confined into late night or sitcoms. There was a whole landscape of it out there not explored and that had been ignored. Technology too has actually helped it, I think, in that it's allowed stories to be made for the sake of the story and not because of ratings.

Ratings are becoming more and more obsolete and I couldn't be happier about that. Of course, for some it can still make or break the show, but if tech hadn't developed to the point where we could watch anything, anywhere, on anything than it might not have lifted that ratings obligation from creators shoulders as much to let them feel free to just make whatever they wanted no matter the niche. Tv is just so much more daring these days too while films seem chained by studio systems. They tow the line, while tv regularly seems to walk over it...or write new ones.

[–] Cornelia123 (784) 8 years ago

Well I think Twin Peaks was the beginning of TV's renaissance, but it certainly picked up momentum with The Sorpranos, and even more so later when Al Pacino starred in the 2003 mini-series Angels in America, and took away a lot of the stigma associated with Film actors taking on TV roles. Now they are fighting for them. Matthew McConaughey, Woody Harrelson Rachel McAdams, Vince Vaugn ( all in True Detective) , Mads Mikkelsen (Hannibal), Tom Hardy (Taboo), Nicole Kidman (Top of the Lake).... the list just goes grows and grows.

I still prefer Films to tv though, although I don't go to the cinema as much as I used to because I don't like the films on offer. I prefer to stay home and watch good tv shows or one of the many many films that are in my 'to watch list', or even just re-watch old favourites.

[–] DreamersxDisease (817) 8 years ago

Ohhh...you replied to this one, haha, there is also another similar thread on the General Boards (not started by me, but basically asking the same thing). My bad, I wasn't specific enough, but hey, I'm glad you saw this one and responded too, thanks!

Twin Peaks works too, for this eras kind of starting point. I think Lynch definitely went on the diving board and just jumped right off. I think, as is usual for him, he was a bit ahead of the ball on that though. Audiences wouldn't quite catch up to its niche and weirdness till years later. If he had aired some time in the 00s or last like five years I think it would've been a hit as it was on tv, as opposed to a cult classic. I suppose, since it's coming back...we'll see, right?!

The influx of A-listers has helped too, for sure. Once that barrier was broken of it not being look down upon and they realized and passed it along to their friends that tv work was just as rewarding (and getting them awards) as film acting it's just gonna keep happening I'd guess. I have so many films on my "to watch list," and yet I still tend to opt towards tv. Maybe I've gotten lazy or my attention span has, I don't know...but my interest just lies there a lot these days. It kind of bums me out since film was my first love, but at the same time, that's films fault for not being as good anymore, haha, totally said subjectively, of course.

p.s. you mentioned Hannibal, are you a fan of that show? It's one of my absolute favorites so I was just curious.

[–] Cornelia123 (784) 8 years ago

Not another 'there is also similar thread on.....' LOL

Talking about Lynch, I wonder how Mullholland Drive would have panned out as a tv series, as it has originally intended to be? They filmed the pilot and everything (with Naomi Watts), and then it got axed. Oh how I would love to see that pilot episode! I guess it never even aired, otherwise there would be some obscure copy in Youtube.

Yes, I loved Hannibal. I only binge watched it last year, after a friend recommended it to me. The actors are keen for a Season 4, but I kind of liked the ending it was given, with both of them falling of the cliff. (Seriously, if there ever was a Season 4, how on earth will they explain both of them surviving 'that'?). And then again, I would love the series to continue a couple of more seasons.

I don't understand why Hannibal even got the axe to be honest, seeing what great quality work they were churning out, and the great fan base the show had, although apparently audience numbers fell in Season 3, which is why they axed the show. I blame it on the very slow first episodes that kept Hannibal and Will in different continents, which bored some people.

[–] DreamersxDisease (817) 8 years ago

Haha, my apologies, I wasn't clear about the threads!

It's hard to say with Mullholland Drive because I can't picture it any other way than it is. Could that sort of thing be sustained over periods of time like a tv show? Would it have continued to be intriguing or just get tiresome? That story feels like it needs the time constraint, ya know? That said, I totally would've checked it out as a tv show all the same.

So cool you like Hannibal too! I think it got the axe because it was on one of the "original" networks (NBC) that still very much relies and cares about ratings. I and some other fans believe it would've lasted longer if it had been on a cable channel instead and I still think that. I also still believe it could come back some day since so much stuff does now that we have the means what with Netflix, and streaming, and many examples of old shows being revived. Seems like it's only a matter of time....

I don't know how they'd come back from that cliff, but they do as we got that dinner table hint! It's quite a corner they painted themselves into, but I have faith that Fuller would pull something crazy out of his hat to make it work!

You should go over and post on that board some time. I've tried, but I'd hate to be that one, insane poster who posts on everything :P as I'm quickly becoming on far too many boards/threads it feels....oops.

[–] Cornelia123 (784) 8 years ago

Oh we'll never know how the 'series' of Mullholland Drive would have been, and in the end condensing it all to fit one movie turned out well, so I'm not complaining. However, I have always wondered why Lynch has never put the Pilot episode out there for fans.

You know what, I totally forgot about the dinner table hint! Who was one- legged Bedelia (lol) expecting for dinner? And was she serving her own roasted leg? (lol)

[–] DreamersxDisease (817) 8 years ago

Fuller has said, despite fans thinking she did it herself, that Hannibal had come back...and there were 3 chairs there so presumably Will made it too.

What hot messes they all are, lol!

[–] MarlonBrawndo (122) 8 years ago

I just wanted to hop over and read your thread. I wouldn't have posted mine if I'd known about this one. Great conversation!

[–] DreamersxDisease (817) 8 years ago

Oh hey, no worries! It's worthy of 2 threads, I think ;) Yours had a lot of great discussion on it as well.

[–] Wintr_Fir3 (49) 8 years ago

TV is where the creativity is at.

When I look at older films, the ones I love, they're usually ones that portray ideas and themes that film makers wouldn't even touch now. Everything today is big budget, blockbuster, predictable must-make-money trash. There are a few gems here and there, but there's so much money in it now that there's no one really taking risks, with the exceptions still being plundered of creativity and then failing to reach audiences anyway. I think it's telling that it's more shocking to see a minority or female character in a lead or supporting role today than it was 20 years ago. Why is that?

Almost everything that's missing from films, is being made up for on TV. You get variety of character and plot. Characters are actually developed. Your jaw doesn't drop whenever someone who isn't Ryan Gosling or Jennifer Lawrence appears. Actors are allowed to have facial hair and weight problems and be human beings. Children aren't merely resigned to corners with stuffed animals and made to baby talk whenever convenient, or peer through long hair and whisper in the dark. You aren't able to predict every event before it comes and actually experience 'holy ship, did that just happen?' moments from time to time.

I'm not saying that TV is perfect. It certainly has it's troughs, it's ups and downs. But it trumps (excuse the curse word) film at the moment.

I'm also not saying film can't improve. I don't believe in golden ages - I'm open and ready for change. I think there's still a chance of having that same 'The Sixth Sense' experience; when a movie comes out of nowhere and just surprises you, and everyone lifts their game. Fingers crossed that happens again.

[–] DreamersxDisease (817) 8 years ago

I largely agree with all of this! Your first line sums it up, it is where the creativity is at and that's basically why it's so much better these days. Shows want their audience to think, question, and almost be like an active participate in the story whereas films seem content on just treating us (for the most part, not all of course) like dribbling babies that just want to see explosions, skin, and saving the day....so yes, I'd take the former almost any day!