Last week I lauded the efforts of the small screen in recent years. Due to a variety of factors, television has managed to outshine its bigger, older brother when it comes to producing original and compelling entertainment. Well, I’m an equal opportunist, so this week I’m here to heap accolades upon my first love. I’ll always have a soft spot for film, no matter how many times it disappoints me. For me, nothing beats the feeling of trekking to the local cineplex to see a flick I’ve been eagerly anticipating for months. Yeah, you gotta put up with people talking, kids crying and dopes asking stupid questions, but it’s still worth it if the finished product is a winner.
Here are ten reasons why movies top TV:
10) No restrictions – Nudity, language and violence are no big deal. Television has upped the ante with cable, but even a network as progressive as FX has limits. There’s nothing sillier than watching a clothed sex scene in Rescue Me. It takes me right out of the episode.
9) Brevity is the soul of wit – My old screenwriter professor used to tell us, “If you can’t tell a story in 120 pages, it’s not worth telling.” I enjoy serialized TV, but a solid, well executed two-hour film is the shit. No need to wait until next episode or season to have all your questions answered.
8) C’mon, a seventy-foot screen rules! – There’s nothin’ better than watching a big budget summer blockbuster on a massive screen. Even if I had the chance to watch Lost in a theater, it wouldn’t be the same.
7) Anything is possible – James Cameron sunk the Titanic. In his latest, Avatar, he has constructed an entirely new planet. If you can dream it, it’s possible with today’s CGI and animatronics to make it a reality. Television will always be limited in this department.
6) Time invested – This relates to #9. What’s worse: spending two hours at a bad movie, or wasting ten or twenty weeks on an awful series? Having sat through chapter after chapter of some really horrible TV shows, I’ll take a crap movie every time.
5) Directors make a difference – Auteurs like Spielberg, Scorsese, Tarantino, Soderbergh and Fincher don’t just make random movies. They have styles and visions that are uniquely their own. Quick, name a famous television director. Show runners and writers rule the small screen. Directors rule the big screen.
4) There’s room to experiment – David Lynch wouldn’t have a career if he worked in television. Twin Peaks worked for one season, then fell apart. Filmmakers like Lynch, Gaspar Noé, Francois Ozon and Sally Potter are given room to breathe in their avante-garde endeavors.
3) Blade Runner – Watch is on your HDTV at home. Then go see it on one of those seventy-foot widescreens. No contest. It is a sterling example of why celluloid exists. Some stories are made for the movies.
2) Movie stars – I think the so-called stars of today pale in comparison to their pioneering ancestors, but the George Clooneys and Brad Pitts of the world do carry a certain amount of appeal. I’ll check out a movie solely for its cast. I can’t say the same thing about a TV show.
1) They are timeless – Certain series such as I Love Lucy and The Honeymooners will live on forever. But I would argue film stands the test of time better than its little bro. Movies have the advantage of being around longer; however, the number of TV shows I’d be willing to sit through again can be counted on one hand. On the contrary, there are literally dozens of flicks I can revisit again and again.
Both mediums have much to offer. Choosing between the two would be difficult. Luckily, I don’t have to.
Clacked by Scott Tunstall 
on Jul 21, 2009 @ 09:00 EST5EDT
Ron D. Moore needs to take a lesson from many of the things you mention in your list. I believe his form of storytelling is best suited for the movies. He can’t handle a multi-season show because there’s just too much room for mistakes and inconsistencies. He uses the “painted myself into a corner” term way too often, and it’s a lot harder to do that when you have a smaller canvas.
Couldn’t agree more about Moore (hah!). The main reason why I love BSG is because it’s cinematic. After watching most of the series, I think he could have easily told the entire story in a trilogy of films. I doubt anyone would have given him the cash to do it, but it would have been interesting to see how he approached the same material on the big screen.
And yet, if I compare ratings of TV shows versus movies on something like NetFlix, the top TV shows are consistently rated higher than the top movies.
I don’t think ANYTHING on the top 250 list of IMDB is above the ten top-rated TV shows.
I’m a huge fan of true miniseries. A series that only has 13-20 episodes and that’s that. No multiseasons of filler and not knowing when the end will come.
While talking about BSG I think it would have been perfect if they did the miniseries, three 13 episode seasons, and then a finishing miniseries. Most of seasons 3 and 4 can be cut from 40 episodes to about 10.
One point I don’t get, why are you watching crappy shows week after week? lol
*POST AUTHOR*
Wishful thinking that the show will actually get better. I did it with Mad Men, but the show never did anything for me.
Well, there is no celluloid anymore, but the concept makes sense.
Thanks for being a Literal Larry ;)
Escalation of Drug Use in Early-Onset Cannabis Users vs. ,