Television versus Movies: Which is better?

[Hoss]

I think it is obvious that the answer is "depends" or "it is a matter of personal preferences."

For me, television has become a far superior medium. Technological advancement, profitability, and the extended format have made it possible for television to produce superior work.

I''m going to name a few shows in different genres that have come out in the 2000's and I challenge you to come up with movies that did a better job:

War: Generation Kill

Cop: The Shield, The Closer

Courtroom Drama: Damages

Gangster: Sons of Anarchy, Sopranos

Sci Fi: Battlestar Galactica, Fringe

Drama: Madmen, Breaking Bad, Six Feet Under,

Action: Lost, 24,

Comedy: Curb Your Enthusiasm, 30 Rock, Weeds

Buddy: Entourage

Horror/Thriller: Supernatural, Dexter

[EZMOHR]

I voted for TV, because no matter what, the greatest movie I've ever seen (for me...that is The Right Stuff), can't hold a candle to the investment I had in Buffy characters. Or the stories on Lost. Or how I feel about Dunder Mifflen employees. TV just has more ample time to flesh out it's characters. I have an investment in TV characters I like. Great movies, no matter how great...get about 2 hours.

[Ronald Bryan]

Right now TV. Apart from all of the good series that can last for so long, I have one answer that proves the point.

Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles vs Terminator Salvation.

[aut0matic]

sorry, but nothing on tv is as funny as the movies. a few animated shows come close, but no. and yes, i have seen curb your enthusiasm, the office, and weeds.

action-wise? movies usually win this again. bigger budgets mean better stunts, special effects, etc...

tv does do better drama, though. and sometimes sci-fi.

that being said, i loved the sopranos and angel when they were on air with a passion. now, all i watch are lost and 24.

[The Black Guardian]

Generally, I'm only moved to see about 10 movies per year. I find television shows to be much funnier than any movie. Not that it matters, because I tend not to like comedies. When it comes to action, I get just as much enjoyment from something like Xena or Hercules as I go something like Matrix. Take that, you big budgets!

[Hoss]

action-wise? movies usually win this again. bigger budgets mean better stunts, special effects, etc...



I agree that with bigger budgets movies can do better stunts and speciall effects. But I have a hard time thinking of an action movie that has come out in the past decade that is an overall superior product to 24. Or an onscreen adventure movie that is an overall superior experience to Lost - even if the movie has better special effects.

As far as comedy, that is probably the closest between the two mediums for me - mainly because of the Judd Apatow family tree and Todd Phillips movies.

[Chiasm]

TV

I can invest hundreds of hours into a good multi season show but a movie is still just two hours.

[jesse_custer]

I'll take the bait even though television and movies have different formats and traditions and probably shouldn't be compared.

War: Generation Kill

Inglourious Basterds. Mainly because it's funnier and more thought-provoking.

Also, Letters From Iwo Jima.

Cop: The Shield, The Closer

Surprised you didn't mention The Wire. Cop movies don't come out very often, so I'll pose this: Can you name a cop show in the 1970s that's more daring than Dirty Harry?

Courtroom Drama: Damages

Courtroom stuff bores me, so I don't know.

Gangster: Sons of Anarchy, Sopranos

Broaden this category to crime, and I'll give you:

Eastern Promises. Ichi The Killer.

Sci Fi: Battlestar Galactica, Fringe

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Primer.

Drama: Madmen, Breaking Bad, Six Feet Under,

The Piano Teacher. Joint Security Area.

Action: Lost, 24,

Ong-Bak. Casino Royale. Bourne Trilogy.

Comedy: Curb Your Enthusiasm, 30 Rock, Weeds

Sideways. The Royal Tenenbaums. Tropic Thunder.

Buddy: Entourage

Buddy stuff is pretty despicable, so I'll refrain here.

Horror/Thriller: Supernatural, Dexter

The Descent. Memories of Murder. Zodiac.

[Ogre U AHole]

TV

I can invest hundreds of hours into a good multi season show but a movie is still just two hours.

For me, that's a point in favor of movies. TV shows seem to never freaking end and I have to schedule a same time every week to watch them as they occur on TV or watch a DVD marathon after the fact.

With movies, 2 hours, in and out, story's over. Go movies.

[maczero]

For me, that's a point in favor of movies. TV shows seem to never freaking end and I have to schedule a same time every week to watch them as they occurInvest in a DVR. It's probably the most useful piece of a/v equipment that I've ever owned.

[ThisMortalSoil]

It depends. I can't imagine a long-running horror TV series, and if the plots of something like How I Met Your Mother or Sons of Anarchy was compressed for the big screen it would probably lose a lot of its charm.

[Hoss]

It depends. I can't imagine a long-running horror TV series, .

Have you watched Dexter? Give it a try - the basic premise is that he is a serial killer who was raised by a cop who realized what he was at an early age. So his father focuses him into a serial killer that hunts other serial killers. Imagine a police procedural that ends with bad guy being murdered.

[Hoss]

[QUOTE=jesse_custer;9796159]

Also, Letters From Iwo Jima.

Fell asleep.

Can you name a cop show in the 1970s that's more daring than Dirty Harry?

IMO it is a modern phenomenom created by less censorship and cable.

Eastern Promises. Ichi The Killer.

My taste is better than yours :smile:

Eternal Sunshine

Not a fan of Charlie Kaufman's writing


The Piano Teacher. Joint Security Area.

Reading movies is dumb :smile:

Bourne Trilogy

I'll give you Bourne 1 - I found the series went from great to good to mediocre

I still say Jack Bauer loses a fight to Bourne but then shoots Bourne in the back, puts him on a rack and makes him talk.

I'll also put the first season of Prison Break in this category - but man, did that show spiral into awfulness.

Zodiac.

Boringestest movie evah

[jesse_custer]

Reading movies is dumb

No, but I think I've proven that this thread is pretty dumb.

[Hoss]

Invest in a DVR. It's probably the most useful piece of a/v equipment that I've ever owned.

Or buy them on DVD - I spent the summer watching the first 4 seasons of Supernatural and loved it. I now in finishing season I of Fringe on DVD and have been DVRing season 2 from day one. At the mid year break I'll watch the first half in about a week and then watch the second half the same way next summer.

[Hoss]

No, but I think I've proven that this thread is pretty dumb.

Edited out cause my response was silly -

[maczero]

Or buy them on DVD - I spent the summer watching the first 4 seasons of Supernatural and loved it. I think the poster I responded to didn't care for that option. I'm not a fan of TV series on DVD either. The extras aren't appealing enough to make me want to purchase the DVD. Not to mention waiting for the DVD means waiting for the season to end, so there's the actual wait time plus avoiding spoilers.

[Ontir]

The question is rather like which is better: Prime Rib or Porter House?

It depends upon what you're looking for. The thing that's great about film, is that it's a
Shoot your wad!" medium. You can get a lot of money to deliver a big bang in 90 minutes to 3 hours. Television, on the other hand, has the luxury of time. You can unwind a story, across seasons, exploring the characters as you go. Both have great strengths and inherent weaknesses. Both are equally valid as mediums, and there should be more crossover between the two.

[Slam_Bradley]

Surprised you didn't mention The Wire. Cop movies don't come out very often, so I'll pose this: Can you name a cop show in the 1970s that's more daring than Dirty Harry?



Not more daring. But the most realistic cop show I've watched belongs to the 70s. Barney Miller.

[jesse_custer]

Not more daring. But the most realistic cop show I've watched belongs to the 70s. Barney Miller.

And unfortunately, I haven't watched one episode. I don't even think I've seen it on television.

[Hoss]

The question is rather like which is better: Prime Rib or Porter House?


The question would be - who is currently producing the better cut of beef, people who specialize in porter house or prime rib? Or, is the talent level among short story writers currently better than novelists?

The answer is ultimately subjective, but there are definitely plenty of themes to explore. I enjoy these conversations because they tend to open my eyes to new works and ways of thinking more than "what have you watched recently" type discussions.

[EZMOHR]

Hoss, u are absolutely wrong with Zodiac.....it's one the best movies ever made. Like The Right Stuff, this was a poweful movie that had ample time to flesh out characters. Where Bullit and Dirty Harry were exagerations of a real life man.....Zodiac let you meet the real man. You got to know the man, and found out that Bullit and Dirty Harry were you. You saw obsession and how it ruined Robert Graysmith's life. I hate fast movies. HATE THEM. If I don't get 120 minutes from a movie....most of the time I find it pointless (Yes, I realize there are great movies under 120 minutes, but I still feel cheated...sorry.)

[art of martial arts]

Besides being two different mediums, no way TV can compete with cinema. No way. Let me repeat that, no way. No way, no way. I just can't see it. Movies are an art form. TV is just TV. Just the fast paced nature of television alone can't compete with the time and care devoted to a movie. And this isn't a slight on TV. I like that medium too, but I love cinema.

I was going to go through each TV show you listed point by point, but then I saw you had Lost listed in the action genre :confused: . I'm sorry, but if Lost is the best action thing you can think of (even 24), then you haven't watched nearly enough action movies. Just on budget alone, TV can't compete with a movie. And find me a better performance than Denzel Washington in Training Day on TV. I can't think of any.

The only thing I like better on TV is comedy. Besides 30 Rock being my favorite show, I just love sitcoms in general.

[EZMOHR]

Besides being two different mediums, no way TV can compete with cinema. No way. Let me repeat that, no way. No way, no way. I just can't see it. Movies are an art form. TV is just TV. Just the fast paced nature of television alone can't compete with the time and care devoted to a movie. And this isn't a slight on TV. I like that medium too, but I love cinema.

I was going to go through each TV show you listed point by point, but then I saw you had Lost listed in the action genre :confused: . I'm sorry, but if Lost is the best action thing you can think of (even 24), then you haven't watched nearly enough action movies. Just on budget alone, TV can't compete with a movie. And find me a better performance than Denzel Washington in Training Day on TV. I can't think of any.

The only thing I like better on TV is comedy. Besides 30 Rock being my favorite show, I just love sitcoms in general.

I can name you two cop esque performances on TV that were better than Alonzo Harris..........Season 7 Walton Goggins on The Shield and Season 5 Forrest Whitikar on The Shield. Next Question.

This is brought to you buy a guy who thinks Alonzo Harris is one the best villians ever on screen. So much so, I still believe Green Lantern as a movie should be a Sci-Fi Training Day Script with some sci-fi in it. But, Alonzo Harris can't hold a candle to anything The Shield ever did between Season 2 and 7. NOTHING. Let me repeat that...NOTHING.

TV may not be "art" or whatever...but it does it's job....it entertains. Sorry if I'm trashing the art of Inglorious Basterds....a great movie by the way. Just a movie that the director has stated on numerous occassions......he wished would've been a TV mini.

[art of martial arts]

I can name you two cop esque performances on TV that were better than Alonzo Harris..........Season 7 Walton Goggins on The Shield and Season 5 Forrest Whitikar on The Shield. Next Question.

This is brought to you buy a guy who thinks Alonzo Harris is one the best villians ever on screen. So much so, I still believe Green Lantern as a movie should be a Sci-Fi Training Day Script with some sci-fi in it. But, Alonzo Harris can't hold a candle to anything The Shield ever did between Season 2 and 7. NOTHING. Let me repeat that...NOTHING.

TV may not be "art" or whatever...but it does it's job....it entertains. Sorry if I'm trashing the art of Inglorious Basterds....a great movie by the way. Just a movie that the director has stated on numerous occassions......he wished would've been a TV mini.

I've never watched The Shield before, so I can't really say. But based of the best performances on TV that have won golden globes or whatever. They still can't hold a candle to the acting in movies. And I raise you one Shield to the whole cast of The Departed.

RE: Inglorious Basterds. Yes it could've been a TV mini-series if Tarantino chose to go in that direction. However ultimately he chose film, and I think for the better. Just because something is longer doesn't make it better. A lot of times, they just pad things out on TV.

[Hoss]

I've never watched The Shield before, so I can't really say. But based of the best performances on TV that have won golden globes or whatever. They still can't hold a candle to the acting in movies. And I raise you one Shield to the whole cast of The Departed.


I'll put the whole cast of the Sopranos against the cast of the Departed. I'll put Gandolfini's performance up against Nicholson. And name one performance on the Departed that is clearly superior to what Edie Falco delivered as Camiila or is currently doing as Nurse Jackey?

I'll put Hugh Laurie's performance as House or John Hamm's performance as Don Draper up against any film acting to have come out during the same time period. Damages stars Glenn Close, IMO the 3d best female actress out there behind Streep and Lange. And you have Holly Hunter destroying it on Saving grace. Some of our most briliant actors are finding work on TV because they are either not "in" enought to be stars in movies or because they've gotten too old.

That said, you bring up some fantastic movies that really make the best of the medium.

And thinking about it, there is definitely a genre that IMO lends itself much more to film than TV - mainly because of budgets and effects. Fantasy - nothing that has come out on TV holds a candle to LOTR, the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe or what looks like is going to be a great Where the Wild Things Are.

[Hoss]

Not more daring. But the most realistic cop show I've watched belongs to the 70s. Barney Miller.

You reminded me of All in the Family. I'm hard pressed to find a better acting performance anywhere than Carrol O'Connor as Archie Bunker. It wasn't ever episode that he got to go deep with Archie, but when he did, it was just a thing of absolute beauty.

[jesse_custer]

TV may not be "art" or whatever...but it does it's job....it entertains. Sorry if I'm trashing the art of Inglorious Basterds....a great movie by the way. Just a movie that the director has stated on numerous occassions......he wished would've been a TV mini.

And I have no idea why. I don't see the "power of film" theme having as much, um, power outside the movie realm.

[art of martial arts]

I'll put the whole cast of the Sopranos against the cast of the Departed. I'll put Gandolfini's performance up against Nicholson. And name one performance on the Departed that is clearly superior to what Edie Falco delivered as Camiila or is currently doing as Nurse Jackey?

I'll put Hugh Laurie's performance as House or John Hamm's performance as Don Draper up against any film acting to have come out during the same time period. Damages stars Glenn Close, IMO the 3d best female actress out there behind Streep and Lange. And you have Holly Hunter destroying it on Saving grace. Some of our most briliant actors are finding work on TV because they are either not "in" enought to be stars in movies or because they've gotten too old.

That said, you bring up some fantastic movies that really make the best of the medium.

And thinking about it, there is definitely a genre that IMO lends itself much more to film than TV - mainly because of budgets and effects. Fantasy - nothing that has come out on TV holds a candle to LOTR, the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe or what looks like is going to be a great Where the Wild Things Are.

Well I could list of some of my favorite movie performances (Clint Eastwood, Morgan Freeman, Gene Hackman in Unforgiven, Tom Hanks in Philadelphia, Cast Away, Heath Ledger in Dark Knight, and so on) but you'll do the same, and it'll just go around in circles. Suffice to say, there's good acting in both. I just think movies are more epic than TV. It's called small screen for a reason.

Beyond that however, movies also has: Harry Potter, Pixar, 3-D (good 3-D, none of that red blue glasses garbage), Marvel movies, Spielberg, Tarantino- and no directing an episode of ER doesn't count, Star Wars (though there is a live action SW TV show coming up), big screen, less time to devote to, more diverse, a chance to go out, Uma Thurman, Jodie Foster, Tom Hanks, Indiana Jones... the real Indy, none of that Chronicles stuff, Wizard Of Oz, real martial arts rather than that Kung Fu stuff with Carradine, real Bruce Lee rather than Kato, and the list goes on and on... :smile:

[Joe Rice]

They're both terrible. They both have brilliant work that shines from time to time, but they're still almost completely shit.

"So turn off the TV/Cause that's what others see/And movies are as bad/as eating chocolate ice cream," --my main man MC RC.

[Hoss]

Well I could list of some of my favorite movie performances (Clint Eastwood, Morgan Freeman, Gene Hackman in Unforgiven, Tom Hanks in Philadelphia, Cast Away, Heath Ledger in Dark Knight, and so on) but you'll do the same, and it'll just go around in circles.

Picking knits - I'm talking about movies in the 2000s and TV in the 2000s. I think because of a jump in salaries, the freedom of cable, and advancement in technology, television is doing things that were impossible just 20 years ago. And because opportunities in television are coming fast, you are getting a talent drain from movies.

As we go along, talented writers and producers are going to ask themselves - am I financially better off developing this idea into a film or a TV series. As far as directors, film budgets still seem to make that a much more favorable medium. Though I at one time thought that Nichols brilliant HBO Angels in America was going to start a trend that never seemed to have materialized. I guess it is too big a financial risk for too narrow an audience pool.

[Hoss]

, real martial arts rather than that Kung Fu stuff with Carradine,

Shoot, I want real martial arts, I watch Spike Wednesday nights at 10. TUF rules

[Simbob4000]

I've never watched The Shield before, so I can't really say. But based of the best performances on TV that have won golden globes or whatever. They still can't hold a candle to the acting in movies. And I raise you one Shield to the whole cast of The Departed.

RE: Inglorious Basterds. Yes it could've been a TV mini-series if Tarantino chose to go in that direction. However ultimately he chose film, and I think for the better. Just because something is longer doesn't make it better. A lot of times, they just pad things out on TV.

You're not missing much, The Shield is ok as far as cop tv shows go, which isn't saying much really. And it's not like they were doing anything that a number of cop movies haven't already done better.

[art of martial arts]

Picking knits - I'm talking about movies in the 2000s and TV in the 2000s. I think because of a jump in salaries, the freedom of cable, and advancement in technology, television is doing things that were impossible just 20 years ago. And because opportunities in television are coming fast, you are getting a talent drain from movies.

As we go along, talented writers and producers are going to ask themselves - am I financially better off developing this idea into a film or a TV series. As far as directors, film budgets still seem to make that a much more favorable medium. Though I at one time thought that Nichols brilliant HBO Angels in America was going to start a trend that never seemed to have materialized. I guess it is too big a financial risk for too narrow an audience pool.

I can't think of anyone though. Anyone who's ever made in Hollywood (or not in a career slump) would never do TV. It's like a step backward. The closest I can think of is Gary Sinise, and he was never a leading man in movies.

And despite all the great stuff on TV today, it's getting more and more clogged up by reality shows. Why spend millions of dollars on something like 24, when you can have something much more popular and cheaper like American Idol? That's why so many shows are cancelled nowadays... before they're even given a chance. To make way for reality and late night talk shows.

[art of martial arts]

You're not missing much, The Shield is ok as far as cop tv shows go, which isn't saying much really. And it's not like they were doing anything that a number of cop movies haven't already done better.

Yeah I checked out a few clips on youtube, and it didn't really draw me in. Even if I was interested, I don't think I'm ready to devote 60-70 hours of my life to it.

[rick]

I've never watched The Shield before, so I can't really say. But based of the best performances on TV that have won golden globes or whatever. They still can't hold a candle to the acting in movies. And I raise you one Shield to the whole cast of The Departed.


Nope, you'd lose.

As good as the Departed was, it simply did not hold a candle to the quality, the tension and yes, the acting in the Shield.

Leo, Jack, Matt, Martin and Marky Mark all put in fine performances in the Departed, but not one of them approached the realism or the tension brought to life by Chiklis and Goggins.

You would be doing yourself a favor by watching it.

And besides, how the heck can you make the claim that one thing is better than another, when you haven't even seen it?

[mgs]

break even for me. both have great, valid expressions.

[Simbob4000]

Nope, you'd lose.

As good as the Departed was, it simply did not hold a candle to the quality, the tension and yes, the acting in the Shield.

Leo, Jack, Matt, Martin and Marky Mark all put in fine performances in the Departed, but not one of them approached the realism or the tension brought to life by Chiklis and Goggins.

You would be doing yourself a favor by watching it.

And besides, how the heck can you make the claim that one thing is better than another, when you haven't even seen it?

I've seen both, and The Departed blows The Shield out of the fucking water.

[Slam_Bradley]

I've seen both, and The Departed blows The Shield out of the fucking water.

That must mean The Shield isn't all that great. The Departed was an adequate film that telegraphed pretty much everything that happened in it.

[jessecuster3]

That must mean The Shield isn't all that great. The Departed was an adequate film that telegraphed pretty much everything that happened in it.

Not too mention, it is crazy talk. The Shield was a fantastic show and developed a character totally unlike any that has been on TV or film.

[art of martial arts]

Nope, you'd lose.

As good as the Departed was, it simply did not hold a candle to the quality, the tension and yes, the acting in the Shield.

Leo, Jack, Matt, Martin and Marky Mark all put in fine performances in the Departed, but not one of them approached the realism or the tension brought to life by Chiklis and Goggins.

You would be doing yourself a favor by watching it.

And besides, how the heck can you make the claim that one thing is better than another, when you haven't even seen it?

I have seen it... at least a few scenes on youtube. And what I saw didn't interest me. I read a synopsis of what the show is about. Again, it didn't interest me. Even though I've never watched an episode, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't like it. It's like people telling me Veronica Mars is the greatest show ever a few years ago, and I didn't like it at all after watching the first season.

[rick]

I have seen it... at least a few scenes on youtube. And what I saw didn't interest me. I read a synopsis of what the show is about. Again, it didn't interest me. Even though I've never watched an episode, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't like it. It's like people telling me Veronica Mars is the greatest show ever a few years ago, and I didn't like it at all after watching the first season.

If you are going to make the claim that one dramatic presentation is better than another without actually having watched both items, you do not have an educated opinion on the matter.

It is as simple as that.

You jave watched a couple of clips, but not even one episode.

As such, I'm sorry, but it is safe to say that you have no idea what you are talking about.

[Cloudman]

This is a stupid thread.

[Hoss]

This is a stupid thread.

Only if you take it , yourself, or people with names like "Hoss", "Cloudman", or "art of martial arts" too seriously.

[gorthon616]

I can't think of anyone though. Anyone who's ever made in Hollywood (or not in a career slump) would never do TV. It's like a step backward. The closest I can think of is Gary Sinise, and he was never a leading man in movies.

And despite all the great stuff on TV today, it's getting more and more clogged up by reality shows. Why spend millions of dollars on something like 24, when you can have something much more popular and cheaper like American Idol? That's why so many shows are cancelled nowadays... before they're even given a chance. To make way for reality and late night talk shows.

Because there isn't the clog of "chick flick," "minority overcomes adversity," "family friendly fantasy adventure," and "cute computer generated film with an audience that is far older than it should be" movies?

Unless you are not counting this because there is a variety to movie trash, I don't see how you can complain about TV being clogged up by something. There are more chances being taken in the television industry then there is in the film industry, and high-end more quality products.

[noh-varr]

Personally, when it comes to American entertainment, movies are the better entertainment. Because they do something 99% of tv shows don't do, end on purpose. They have endings, character arcs conclude, plots are tied up. Once our tv shows start ending on purpose, and not because they are abruptly cancelled, things will be different. But we only have HBO, Showtime, and a few other shows that actually do this.

[Hiromi]

A genre I haven't really seen talked about, I don't think I've ever seen a military based movie that can stack up to the realism, drama, or acting that Band of Brothers has, not Saving Private Ryan, Blackhawk Down, etc.

[Hoss]

Because they do something 99% of tv shows don't do, end on purpose. They have endings, character arcs conclude, plots are tied up. ..

Because nothing says quality like a telenovela

Just kidding, my favorite shows have defined arcs and endings. As much as I love Supernatural, it lost something for me after the resolution in season 2. And if Lost was an open ended show I'd a dropped it two seasons ago.

[Hoss]

A genre I haven't really seen talked about, I don't think I've ever seen a military based movie that can stack up to the realism, drama, or acting that Band of Brothers has, not Saving Private Ryan, Blackhawk Down, etc.

Well, the first 30 minutes of Saving Private Ryan are my probably my favorite 30 minutes on film, but that's usually when I jump off that movie so I agree.

[Eric D.]

for me it's film, even though it's much easier to stumble across a bad movie then a good one. With most film just about making money, and TV breaking newground over the years with great series like Breaking Bad, 24, Lost, Pushing Daisies, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, The Sopranos, Six Feet Under, it's easy to see why a lot of people would lean to TV.

[noh-varr]

Because nothing says quality like a telenovela

Just kidding, my favorite shows have defined arcs and endings. As much as I love Supernatural, it lost something for me after the resolution in season 2. And if Lost was an open ended show I'd a dropped it two seasons ago.

Lost faltered in season 2 because they were making it to keep going and no clue if and when they would give it a proper ending.

Now every show doesn't have to have a proper ending, story arcs, etc. House is great as it is, Sitcoms don't need to change either. And the boring procedural cop shows (CSI, Law and Order, etc) don't need to be reinvented. But I'd just love it if there were more shows that are set to tell a story and then leave .If they come up with a sequel later, cool, if not, just as well. British tv does this for the most part, and anime is mostly a season or so and then done. I just like stories that have some form of a definitive ending or at least have some character pieces to them and things actually change. But I'm not the biggest fan of most super hero books either, so who am I to judge?

[art of martial arts]

If you are going to make the claim that one dramatic presentation is better than another without actually having watched both items, you do not have an educated opinion on the matter.

It is as simple as that.

You jave watched a couple of clips, but not even one episode.

As such, I'm sorry, but it is safe to say that you have no idea what you are talking about.

I'm solely commenting on the acting. I don't see why I would have to watch an entire episode in order to do that. Last time I checked, the people in those Shield clips were doing the thing called acting.

It's not unreasonable to gauge some of the acting based on a few scenes. A great acting performance will draw you in. Period.

[art of martial arts]

Because there isn't the clog of "chick flick," "minority overcomes adversity," "family friendly fantasy adventure," and "cute computer generated film with an audience that is far older than it should be" movies?

Unless you are not counting this because there is a variety to movie trash, I don't see how you can complain about TV being clogged up by something. There are more chances being taken in the television industry then there is in the film industry, and high-end more quality products.

I'm not complaining. Just pointing it out. And it's true. Reality shows are dominating the airwaves.

[Paradox]

I picked TV for the sole reason that I don't have to leave my house.

[jessecuster3]

I'm solely commenting on the acting. I don't see why I would have to watch an entire episode in order to do that. Last time I checked, the people in those Shield clips were doing the thing called acting.

It's not unreasonable to gauge some of the acting based on a few scenes. A great acting performance will draw you in. Period.


Yeah, this is completely untrue. How can you judge a a 7 season arc by a couple of clips? More importantly, how can you compare the performances in a 2 hour movie to those of a 5 minute Youtube clip? The Shield was a slow burn, the characterization that began in Season 1 was vastly different from what they became by season 7.


As an aside, would you doubt that Glenn Close and Forest Whitaker are great actors? They both acted for full seasons of The Shield.

[jesse_custer]

A genre I haven't really seen talked about, I don't think I've ever seen a military based movie that can stack up to the realism, drama, or acting that Band of Brothers has, not Saving Private Ryan, Blackhawk Down, etc.

As Tarantino demonstrated in Inglourious Basterds, realism alone does not make a good war film. I would make the same argument for a war television series. The idea of watching a long war miniseries for realism bores the shit out of me.

[Ilash]

Yeah, ya know what, they really are very different media with very different strengths and weaknesses. There's some great TV and there's some crap TV, there are great movies and some terrible movies. I love loads of both.

[Cloudman]

Only if you take it , yourself, or people with names like "Hoss", "Cloudman", or "art of martial arts" too seriously.

Um...what?

And it's a stupid thread because it's just too vague. If you'd made it something like 'TV comedy vs. Film comedy' that would have been possible to answer properly.