Which is better, series or movies?

[JesterFace]

There are TV series and there are movies. That made me think which do you think is the better way to enjoy entertainment.

I like series more for one simple reason, continuity. After a great movie you might want more of that awesomeness you just witnessed. But wait, it was a 2 hour movie and.... that's it. After you watch a great episode of a good series you can watch the next episode and so on. Enjoying a good movie is fun but after the movie you need some other movie. And there are many to choose from. However with series you can get more of the great thing you just watched, perhaps the plot gets even more interesting? Don't get me wrong, I like a good movie but after you watch something great it's nice to know there's more good stuff just waiting, But it's also true that some stories are shorter and only work as a movie or maybe short miniseries. But if I had to choose I would pick series.

 

[cardinal biggles]

Why not both? Some stories are better suited to one format over another. I wouldn't want to see a weekly series of The Godfather or Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, but I couldn't imagine a story like Roots or John Adams being condensed into 2-3 hours, either. Sometimes I'm in the mood for a show, other times I want that convenient stopping point of the film ending and that's it.

 

[JesterFace]

Why not both?

Why not.... but I was curious which one is more to your liking.

 

[cardinal biggles]

I'm going to let this vintage TV commercial explain.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Movies and TV shows both have their place. It's not an either-or situation.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

For character driven adventure stuff I prefer series. It gives you something to follow and be excited about for a longer period of time, discuss with people and speculate about, and it gives you the time and space to really flesh out the world and all of the characters.

Movies are better for more artistic statements.

 

[Kor]

For me, one downside to series is that they can be so time-consuming due to having so many episodes.
A movie or even a trilogy of movies is a little easier to "digest" since there is less content.

Kor

 

[JesterFace]

From the start maybe the question should have been:
Pick one, series or movies. If you could pick only one, which one would it be?

 

[Owain Taggart]

Depends on the content and direction, doesn't it? Especially when the trend these days is for seasons to have cinematic style season-long arcs. They're practically movies split up into episodes, and IMHO there's actually very little difference in this case. So then the main difference is in how they leverage that.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Series for:
Adventure
Action
Political drama
Space opera

Movies for:
Art
Historical drama
Relationship comedy
Hard sci-fi

 

[RandyS]

Movies and TV shows both have their place. It's not an either-or situation.

Pretty much what I was going to say.

 

[cardinal biggles]

Series for:
Adventure
Action
Political drama
Space opera

Movies for:
Art
Historical drama
Relationship comedy
Hard sci-fi

That's a good breakdown, though I think certain kinds of action/adventure work better as movies; if we're just talking "cop show" or something like Knight Rider or The A-Team,* then TV is great, but a weekly James Bond or Fast & the Furious series would wear its welcome (and blow its budget) pretty quick.

*yes, I'm old.

 

[Mojochi]

Movies are better.

Movies make a thing, & finish that thing, & then they give us that thing. It can be a ridiculous & bloody battle while making that thing. They might take that thing & completely undermine the originator, before they give us that thing. It might be a good thing, or a bad thing, but that thing is it. (Unless you're a lunatic like Lucas who wants to keep taking back his thing to make it into a different thing) They can also maybe decide later to add more onto that thing, but those things they add on will be their own thing too.

A series, no matter how hard they fight it, is an ongoing thing, with always the looming prospect that while they're giving us that thing, someone's going to interfere with that thing, because they think it should be on some level a different thing. There's been less of this in the streaming age, but it's still there... because they go on too long for people to not be tempted to tamper.

It can be anyone doing the tampering too, even the originator. The problem isn't those tampering. It's why they're tampering. We're why. They're paying attention to how we're responding to the thing, & that can potentially shape the thing while we're getting the thing. I don't want a thing that was designed by how the audience reacts to it. This is art, not group participation.

There's plenty of series I've liked, & far more than not, they're ones that this happened to, but a movie? Once the dust settles... there it is.

 

[Owain Taggart]

A series, no matter how hard they fight it, is an ongoing thing, with always the looming prospect that while they're giving us that thing, someone's going to interfere with that thing, because they think it should be on some level a different thing. There's been less of this in the streaming age, but it's still there... because they go on too long for people to not be tempted to tamper.

A perfect example of this would be House of Cards. And at the other opposite end of the spectrum, I'd say anything with 11+ seasons, like Stargate. As good as that show is, it long overstayed its welcome.

 

[Saul]

When it's a movie you're in and you're out. You got the emotional impact done in 2 hours or less, you got the complete story. You're free. You might hate it, you might never forget it.

With a series it's like committing to a relationship and with a relationship it's going to take twists and turns, you'll have the highs and lows, you'll have days where you'll wonder "what the **** was that all about?" but if it goes mostly well you're going to keep those memories with you.

To be honest, the landscape has changed over the years. TV shows are becoming like movies with the 'Game of Thrones' and 'Breaking Bad' and movies are becoming like TV shows with the Marvel Cinematic Universe and Star Wars. Things have been flipped.

But ultimately I'm a movie guy. I think because it's one vision, one Director, often one writer or two, one cinematographer. There's something special about a piece of art that's done by a few people. Everything that they have goes into those few hours they are blessed with. It's a a roulette wheel compared to a game of poker.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Movies are better.

Movies make a thing, & finish that thing, & then they give us that thing. It can be a ridiculous & bloody battle while making that thing. They might take that thing & completely undermine the originator, before they give us that thing. It might be a good thing, or a bad thing, but that thing is it. (Unless you're a lunatic like Lucas who wants to keep taking back his thing to make it into a different thing) They can also maybe decide later to add more onto that thing, but those things they add on will be their own thing too.

A series, no matter how hard they fight it, is an ongoing thing, with always the looming prospect that while they're giving us that thing, someone's going to interfere with that thing, because they think it should be on some level a different thing. There's been less of this in the streaming age, but it's still there... because they go on too long for people to not be tempted to tamper.

It can be anyone doing the tampering too, even the originator. The problem isn't those tampering. It's why they're tampering. We're why. They're paying attention to how we're responding to the thing, & that can potentially shape the thing while we're getting the thing. I don't want a thing that was designed by how the audience reacts to it. This is art, not group participation.

There's plenty of series I've liked, & far more than not, they're ones that this happened to, but a movie? Once the dust settles... there it is.

My argument against genre movies (That does not apply to straight comedies and art films) is that the needs of the formula severely limits the range of storylines. All superhero movies have basically the same story. They have to spend a third of the movie introducing you and another third of the movie on the major fight scenes leaving you with maybe 20 minutes of wiggle room to be unique. Superhero series on the other hand have much more flexibility to tell different stories and develop characters.

 

[auntiehill]

When it's a movie you're in and you're out. You got the emotional impact done in 2 hours or less, you got the complete story. You're free. You might hate it, you might never forget it.

With a series it's like committing to a relationship and with a relationship it's going to take twists and turns, you'll have the highs and lows, you'll have days where you'll wonder "what the **** was that all about?" but if it goes mostly well you're going to keep those memories with you.

To be honest, the landscape has changed over the years. TV shows are becoming like movies with the 'Game of Thrones' and 'Breaking Bad' and movies are becoming like TV shows with the Marvel Cinematic Universe and Star Wars. Things have been flipped.

But ultimately I'm a movie guy. I think because it's one vision, one Director, often one writer or two, one cinematographer. There's something special about a piece of art that's done by a few people. Everything that they have goes into those few hours they are blessed with. It's a a roulette wheel compared to a game of poker.

Excellent explanation. That's pretty much how I feel--only I ended up choosing TV shows over movies for that very reason. I love movies and TV shows, but I'm a fairly tough critic and choose carefully what I'm going to see. But because a TV series seems to have a bigger impact on my life than most films, I develop more of an emotional response to many of my favorite shows that I might not have with many of my favorite films. The attachment is greater simply because of the time spent, the sheer hours invested, and the affection for the characters becomes greater.

Which is probably why I'm posting this on Star Trek board.

 

[Mojochi]

^@antichristhill the time investment = more personal investment observation is an excellent point, & very true. I still feel like there are many cinematic examples where I can be as invested in them as I am a series. For example, a movie like Citizen Kane, The Shining, or 2001 imho inspire just as much scrutiny from its fans as a series. People spend countless hours going over those things because of how brilliant they are.

My argument against genre movies (That does not apply to straight comedies and art films) is that the needs of the formula severely limits the range of storylines. All superhero movies have basically the same story. They have to spend a third of the movie introducing you and another third of the movie on the major fight scenes leaving you with maybe 20 minutes of wiggle room to be unique. Superhero series on the other hand have much more flexibility to tell different stories and develop characters.

And you're right. These types of movies are not the kind I'm referencing above. I am not a fan at all of the superhero movie model. It really is pablum. I kind of identify with where Martin Scorsese is coming from, despite these movies being exceedingly well liked & fruitful. I have no attachment. I'll never watch the Avengers or Guardians stuff again. That bubblegum is chewed IMHO man

 

[Saul]

But because a TV series seems to have a bigger impact on my life than most films, I develop more of an emotional response to many of my favorite shows that I might not have with many of my favorite films. The attachment is greater simply because of the time spent, the sheer hours invested, and the affection for the characters becomes greater.

That's why I love movies. They have a bigger impact on my life and I have a more emotional response to them. If they can get me like that in 2 hours then I'm more impressed by that compared to a TV show that needs hours and hours to get me to that level. That's no slam on TV shows though. I still love them and the payoff to the stories they built is so sweet (as long as it doesn't get cancelled).

 

[Owain Taggart]

And you're right. These types of movies are not the kind I'm referencing above. I am not a fan at all of the superhero movie model. It really is pablum. I kind of identify with where Martin Scorsese is coming from, despite these movies being exceedingly well liked & fruitful. I have no attachment. I'll never watch the Avengers or Guardians stuff again. That bubblegum is chewed IMHO man

Yep, agreed with this. I don't watch them or have any interest in them. I was into superhero movies before all this formula came to be, and I find it sad what they've turned into. I miss the days when Christopher Reeve as Superman was the superhero event, because at least back then it wasn't just a superhero movie for superfans, but a good movie in general that just happened to have a superhero as main character. Now they've become a license to print money, yet they'll never give anyone the same sense of attachment you could get from Christopher Reeve's portrayal.

Independent movies are where it's at now, imho. They often have more to say than the bloated Hollywood productions.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

When movies go for the profound artistic statement they are better. But most of them don’t do that. And when they don’t, when they’re just trying to do good for the genre, it’s better when you can put the introduction in the premier and big resolution in the finale and do whatever the hell you want in between.

 

[cardinal biggles]

While there are many movies that I love and that affect me deeply, I have yet to find one that generates the same sense of emptiness and longing for more that I get from a good binge-watch — DS9, West Wing, 2000s Battlestar Galactica, Buffy, Angel...