Posts by Carl Hill53

wiredraven82 said:SPOILER.

That episode was so visceral I could barely process it—and that scene involving the baby? Good grief... look, I’m a father, and seeing that idiot threatening an infant nearly drove me over the edge. But when that guy finally took him out with his bare hands because of it? Honestly, I can't remember the last time I felt that level of pure, cathartic satisfaction from a show or a movie. It's been a long time. My mind was racing with how much I wanted to jump through the screen and beat him myself—maybe he should have been tortured a bit longer first, just to be sure.

Beyond that, everything else we witnessed in this episode was genuinely shocking...

Exactly. That level of violence caught me completely off guard. Honestly? Looking back, the first four seasons felt like nothing more than softcore compared to this. This is... something else entirely.🤦

I have always been a massive fan of zombie stories, and I think this series really has the potential to take the whole concept in a million different directions. It's got so much depth to work with.🍿

Now that I've finally sat down to watch it, I have to say—what an absolutely stellar start to season 5 of The Walking Dead. 🙏

Look, this isn't the place to be dropping spoilers for shows. *The Walking Dead* is one of a kind—and yeah, maybe some people find it slow, but I don't find it boring at all because I’m completely sucked into that world while I'm watching. People can say whatever they want, but honestly? It handles its themes incredibly well.

James Garcia50 said:When you've got nothing left to say about the actual topic, you just start picking apart how someone else talks.

I mean, seriously—what exactly am I supposed to say to your little claim that you "just can't stop watching" after a single episode? What do you want from me? Should I just nod along to such utter nonsense? If that’s your standard, then fine—just admit you're only judging the quality of the show based on your own limited perspective.

James Garcia50 said:Sure you can, but why would you? Almost every series nails the pilot just to see if they can actually stick the landing or if they're headed for a crash. A movie is just what it is—no second chances, no post-mortem.

If you say so, I guess I'll take your word for it. What kind of woman are you even...

while

incredibly irritating.

James Garcia50, you can honestly stop watching a series after the first episode—or whenever you feel like it—but if it's a movie, you *really* ought to sit through the whole thing before you even think about judging it.

William Hall93 said:It’s good that someone brought up sitcoms. I definitely agree there.

In my opinion, comedy is the one genre where TV shows actually outshine movies. Honestly, there are just so few feature films that are genuinely funny...

They are absolutely better than movies. In fact, there barely even *are* any good 🙂 movies left, right?

So, here is a recommendation for you: A Million Ways to Die in the West—I watched it just the other day! It was a fantastic comedy! 😁I might even call it my surprise hit of the year! 👍

James Garcia50 said:You're the only one trolling here; I'm just talking about how movies compare to their TV shows.

But hey, we don't all need "believable" characters, right?

If you want to be bold, take it to my DMs instead of ruining the thread.

Please, you aren't even talking about the content—you're just talking about me. It's transparently obvious. And honestly? I can see everyone else starting to see right through you, too.

James Garcia50 said:There have been three or four movies based on Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina, and none of them hit the mark.
I think there was an American series made too, but I wouldn't bet on it being any good.
The thing is, Tolstoy—just like Stephen King—doesn't play well when you try to move his work to a different medium.
You can film it, but it’ll never feel right (if you don't believe me, just look at Under the Dome).

Why are you even trolling?

shadowangler50 said:I was just using that to show how poorly they adapt classics these days, compared to how much better they were handled twenty years ago.
Besides, a limited series would definitely be superior to a single movie.

Of course it would be better! I mean, come on—you just can't cram that kind of depth and narrative weight into a standard 90 or 120-minute movie. It’s just impossible.

bluenomad2 said:Not even that—they don't bother investigating anything. Hollywood is their entire world; maybe if they stumbled upon a recommendation from outside the studio system, they'd force themselves to watch it.

Nowadays, South Korean and Romanian productions are dominating. Last year was a powerhouse. Movies will always be stronger regardless of all the garbage out there, and better yet, there are dozens of bad series to choose from.

A million shows come out every year, most of them being those mindless comedies that inevitably fail. Very few series actually manage to sustain high quality long-term. That's just a fact. And we aren't even in a golden age of television. There were much better eras before, and movies were superior back then because they were better than what we have today. It's a cycle that repeats itself.

Who?

You’re low-key messing with people's heads here, aren't you?🤦

James Garcia50 said:Everyone’s out here bragging about hype instead of actual quality.
Everyone keeps bringing up Game of Thrones, yet not a single soul mentions Rectify, which is hands down the best series from the last decade.

James Garcia50, please. You're being way too extreme here.

shadowangler50, look, it’s just the truth of the matter. I mean, if I’m being generous—and I usually am—we barely get maybe ten decent movies a year on a global scale that are actually worth sitting down for.

Since we’re already talking about series, I have to mention this one mini-series I find myself revisiting every few years—mind you, I’ve always been a massive fan of Dumas. It is quite simply a perfect adaptation!

The Count of Monte Cristo

And honestly, if you draw a parallel to the movie The Count of Monte Cristo, you realize the film is absolutely nothing compared to the series. I was actually genuinely shocked to see it holding such a high rating 😲

But... yeah, the series is incomparably better.

James Garcia50 said:First off, I'm not here to attack people just because they have different tastes.

So why are you using "we"?

Well, he was including me in that too, I suppose.😉

Let me lay it out for you one more time:

''@James Garcia50 NOD14 asked me something.''

@James Garcia50 NOD14 was asking you something.

shadowangler50 said:Obviously, there were successful periods in the past referred to as golden ages. I never said series weren't successful before now. My point is that this is the absolute peak of all golden ages. We've never seen this many high-quality series packed into just a few years.

I have no idea what you think defines a successful or "golden" period. Success is built on viewership and popularity. Why do they film pilot episodes then? Why don't they just film a full season and skip the single episode test? Because everything revolves around ratings and popularity. It always has been, and it always will be.
I'm sure series from the fifties had higher viewership than what we see now. Go ahead, name those fifties series you've watched that actually meant something more than the shows airing today. I can easily list ten current shows that have massive audiences.
And why would anyone write books about this golden age while it's still happening? How could you possibly know what kind of impact current shows will leave? This mindset that "old is always better than new" isn't always grounded in reality.
More quality series lead to greater popularity, and greater popularity makes something more successful—more "golden." And if movies fail and the audience shifts even further toward series, that golden glow only gets brighter.

Movies have never been worse compared to series until this period. Now, series are definitively better.
Are you seriously suggesting that The Avengers, Spider-Man, Batman, Twilight, or The Hunger Games are better than Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, True Detective, or The Wire?

He just doesn't get it. Honestly...

I bet those shows from the fifties had way higher viewership than anything today. So, go ahead—name a single show from the fifties that you actually watched which offered anything more substantial than what we have hitting our screens nowadays.

He can't name them because they don't exist—or at least, he clearly doesn't know them (unless you count The Twilight Zone).

...how can you possibly know what kind of lasting impact the shows currently airing will end up having?

Exactly. That's the whole point.

James Garcia50 said:Dexter is trash; only four shows on your list actually hit.

Everyone thinks their own posts are gold, but that isn't always the case.
If you think someone's being a know-it-all, just keep it to yourself or send them a DM instead of cluttering the thread.

Twin Peaks is trash.

Yeah, four 🤦 all ☕

James Garcia50 said:There's no difference in quality between a series and a movie—bad is bad, good is good.
Where are all these "masterpiece" new shows everyone keeps talking about? I'm clearly missing them.
The title itself is a bit Dubiozan—why does EVERYONE prefer series? Who exactly is this "EVERYONE"?

Your posts on this thread.

Well, maybe consider this post a substitute for a pair of glasses:

HBO
HBO
HBO
HBO
AMC
HBO
Netflix
Dexter
Netflix
Netflix

Regarding your posts in this thread.

My posts are actually great. Honestly, I just can't stand all the pretentious lecturing and "well, actually" nonsense—there seems to be way too much of that going around lately, I guess.

James Garcia50 said:I’m not stalking anyone or throwing around ad hominems like you are; I'm just posting in the Movie - Television thread.

There isn't even a comparison being made here—a Movie is a Movie (and people watch series wherever they want).

What on earth are you even talking about?