CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Culture & Entertainment › Movies › Why are TV shows rated higher than movies?

Why are TV shows rated higher than movies?

Started by Michael Harris20 · · 👁 8 views · 101 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants Michael Harris20David Price5Terry Scott34silvergardener6Angela Alvarez10Lawrence Booth2redsailor15goldenscout14amberviper24James Garcia50silvertiger11Jessica Morris6boldnomad45Taylor Cox12Larry Walker24Frank Chase6vivideagle7granitetiger69Karen Smith9Nicholas NguyenRichard Wilson4redbear2Keith Jones36bolddrifter16 …
James Garcia50 James Garcia50 Active Member
137 messages
joined Oct 2014
#21 ·
David Price5 said:I was speaking in general terms here. Whether it’s an original work or an adaptation, scriptwriting can take three days—like a quick Rocky montage—or it can take years.

There are no rules. You could produce five seasons with thirteen episodes each and still have everything you filmed turn out to be total garbage.

Exactly. But I would say NEVER. That was my main point. A series will never be better than the movie.

In general? Or a series based on a movie, or a movie based on a series?...

All these lovely people either have their own criteria or they don't, but to me, that doesn't matter in this situation.

The issue is that these same people clearly have standards when they happen to agree with your taste in movies, but suddenly those standards vanish the moment a series shows up. Is the problem with them, or is it something else?

No mention at all, David Price5?
The point is that a vote of three hundred random people doesn't make a film or series good. That's all there is to it.

Of course. But then you have to wonder how statistically you just happen to find three hundred random folks who disagree with you in one place... only for those same folks to suddenly align with your opinion on movies. I suspect your views on film will largely align with the consensus of, say, professional critics.

If only it were true, but it simply isn't.
Test screenings. Films get cut and edited specifically because of the audience.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_screening

Sure, you could spend years writing a love letter too, but those are exceptions.

David Price5 said:I was speaking in general terms here. Whether it’s an original work or an adaptation, scriptwriting can take three days—like a quick Rocky montage—or it can take years.

There are no rules. You could produce five seasons with thirteen episodes each and still have everything you filmed turn out to be total garbage.

Exactly. But I would say NEVER. That was my main point. A series will never be better than the movie.

In general? Or a series based on a movie, or a movie based on a series?...

All these lovely people either have their own criteria or they don't, but to me, that doesn't matter in this situation.

The issue is that these same people clearly have standards when they happen to agree with your taste in movies, but suddenly those standards vanish the moment a series shows up. Is the problem with them, or is it something else?

No mention at all, David Price5?
The point is that a vote of three hundred random people doesn't make a film or series good. That's all there is to it.

Of course. But then you have to wonder how statistically you just happen to find three hundred random folks who disagree with you in one place... only for those same folks to suddenly align with your opinion on movies. I suspect your views on film will largely align with the consensus of, say, professional critics.

If only it were true, but it simply isn't.
Test screenings. Films get cut and edited specifically because of the audience.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_screening

Doesn't matter to me. I don't care who agrees with my taste; what matters is that I don't shift my opinion on a movie or show just to please some crowd of 300 viewers.

And I’m always careful when recommending something. I make sure to frame it as just my own opinion, or warn someone that they might not like it even if I thought it was great.

David Price5 said:I was speaking in general terms here. Whether it’s an original work or an adaptation, scriptwriting can take three days—like a quick Rocky montage—or it can take years.

There are no rules. You could produce five seasons with thirteen episodes each and still have everything you filmed turn out to be total garbage.

Exactly. But I would say NEVER. That was my main point. A series will never be better than the movie.

In general? Or a series based on a movie, or a movie based on a series?...

All these lovely people either have their own criteria or they don't, but to me, that doesn't matter in this situation.

The issue is that these same people clearly have standards when they happen to agree with your taste in movies, but suddenly those standards vanish the moment a series shows up. Is the problem with them, or is it something else?

No mention at all, David Price5?
The point is that a vote of three hundred random people doesn't make a film or series good. That's all there is to it.

Of course. But then you have to wonder how statistically you just happen to find three hundred random folks who disagree with you in one place... only for those same folks to suddenly align with your opinion on movies. I suspect your views on film will largely align with the consensus of, say, professional critics.

If only it were true, but it simply isn't.
Test screenings. Films get cut and edited specifically because of the audience.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_screening

I don't wonder. I don't give much weight to either the audience or the critics.

If you read our film section, you'll see why ratings fluctuate: either someone relates to the plot personally, or it reminds them of something their aunt or sister went through, or the actor is hot, or the actress has a great body, or the soundtrack is cool, or someone has a voice so distinctive it overshadows the whole film (like Ellen Page), or the movie just isn't good because it isn't some heavy social drama...

An impression backed by actual arguments simply has no competition.
David Price5 David Price5 Regular
435 messages
joined Jul 2012
#22 ·
James Garcia50 said:Sure, you could spend years writing a love letter too, but those are exceptions.

Doesn't matter to me. I don't care who agrees with my taste; what matters is that I don't shift my opinion on a movie or show just to please some crowd of 300 viewers.

And I’m always careful when recommending something. I make sure to frame it as just my own opinion, or warn someone that they might not like it even if I thought it was great.

I don't wonder. I don't give much weight to either the audience or the critics.

If you read our film section, you'll see why ratings fluctuate: either someone relates to the plot personally, or it reminds them of something their aunt or sister went through, or the actor is hot, or the actress has a great body, or the soundtrack is cool, or someone has a voice so distinctive it overshadows the whole film (like Ellen Page), or the movie just isn't good because it isn't some heavy social drama...

An impression backed by actual arguments simply has no competition.

But honestly, it's rare for any script to stay in its original state without some changes... and just like that, a month maybe has passed.

It doesn't bother me. I don't care if people agree with my taste; what matters is that I don't change my opinion on a movie or show just to please a crowd of 300 viewers.

But we aren't talking about ordinary viewers here. These are people whose full-time job is watching, commenting on, and rating movies—and now shows.
I am very careful when I recommend something. I always add a disclaimer, making it clear it's just my personal take, or warning that they might not like it even if I did.

That is exactly what we should all be doing. No issues there.
I don't ask. I don't care about the opinions of either the audience or the critics.

Fine, the audience is one thing, but a consensus among critics? They aren't exactly teenagers...

If you read our film section, you'll see why ratings fluctuate: maybe someone related to a situation, or their aunt or sister went through something similar, or an actor is hot, or an actress is stunning, or the soundtrack is cool, or someone has a voice so captivating it overshadows the whole film (like Ellen Page), or the movie simply isn't good because it isn't some heavy American social drama...

As long as there's an explanation.
An impression backed by solid arguments simply leaves no room for debate.

Of course..

But all of this started because of what you said.

Quote: never a series is better than a movie; a series is just eye candy for the casual viewer who wants to know what happened before or after the film.

That's why this whole debate kicked off...

It isn't even responsible.
In general? Is it a series based on a movie, or a movie based on a series?...
boldnomad45 boldnomad45 Active Member
148 messages
joined Dec 2020
#23 ·
Angela Alvarez10 said:To me, it honestly feels like TV shows can actually be higher quality than movies. It’s kind of fascinating, really—how a writing team tasked with crafting 22 episodes per season can deliver much better material than someone spending years grinding away on a single ninety-minute film.

Plus, I'd argue you just get more invested in series. You actually grow to love the characters and everything... you end up becoming a genuine fan, which makes it easy to hit that higher rating.

Exactly. Shows like The Sopranos, The Wire, and even stuff like Band of Brothers have completely redefined what television can be.
James Garcia50 James Garcia50 Active Member
137 messages
joined Oct 2014
#24 ·
David Price5 said:But honestly, it's rare for any script to stay in its original state without some changes... and just like that, a month maybe has passed.

It doesn't bother me. I don't care if people agree with my taste; what matters is that I don't change my opinion on a movie or show just to please a crowd of 300 viewers.

But we aren't talking about ordinary viewers here. These are people whose full-time job is watching, commenting on, and rating movies—and now shows.
I am very careful when I recommend something. I always add a disclaimer, making it clear it's just my personal take, or warning that they might not like it even if I did.

That is exactly what we should all be doing. No issues there.
I don't ask. I don't care about the opinions of either the audience or the critics.

Fine, the audience is one thing, but a consensus among critics? They aren't exactly teenagers...

If you read our film section, you'll see why ratings fluctuate: maybe someone related to a situation, or their aunt or sister went through something similar, or an actor is hot, or an actress is stunning, or the soundtrack is cool, or someone has a voice so captivating it overshadows the whole film (like Ellen Page), or the movie simply isn't good because it isn't some heavy American social drama...

As long as there's an explanation.
An impression backed by solid arguments simply leaves no room for debate.

Of course..

But all of this started because of what you said.

Quote: never a series is better than a movie; a series is just eye candy for the casual viewer who wants to know what happened before or after the film.

That's why this whole debate kicked off...

It isn't even responsible.
In general? Is it a series based on a movie, or a movie based on a series?...

Month maybe, years not (unless I'm feeling crazy).

David Price5 said:But honestly, it's rare for any script to stay in its original state without some changes... and just like that, a month maybe has passed.

It doesn't bother me. I don't care if people agree with my taste; what matters is that I don't change my opinion on a movie or show just to please a crowd of 300 viewers.

But we aren't talking about ordinary viewers here. These are people whose full-time job is watching, commenting on, and rating movies—and now shows.
I am very careful when I recommend something. I always add a disclaimer, making it clear it's just my personal take, or warning that they might not like it even if I did.

That is exactly what we should all be doing. No issues there.
I don't ask. I don't care about the opinions of either the audience or the critics.

Fine, the audience is one thing, but a consensus among critics? They aren't exactly teenagers...

If you read our film section, you'll see why ratings fluctuate: maybe someone related to a situation, or their aunt or sister went through something similar, or an actor is hot, or an actress is stunning, or the soundtrack is cool, or someone has a voice so captivating it overshadows the whole film (like Ellen Page), or the movie simply isn't good because it isn't some heavy American social drama...

As long as there's an explanation.
An impression backed by solid arguments simply leaves no room for debate.

Of course..

But all of this started because of what you said.

Quote: never a series is better than a movie; a series is just eye candy for the casual viewer who wants to know what happened before or after the film.

That's why this whole debate kicked off...

It isn't even responsible.
In general? Is it a series based on a movie, or a movie based on a series?...

How can you trust people who make that their entire identity? They just aren't credible.

David Price5 said:But honestly, it's rare for any script to stay in its original state without some changes... and just like that, a month maybe has passed.

It doesn't bother me. I don't care if people agree with my taste; what matters is that I don't change my opinion on a movie or show just to please a crowd of 300 viewers.

But we aren't talking about ordinary viewers here. These are people whose full-time job is watching, commenting on, and rating movies—and now shows.
I am very careful when I recommend something. I always add a disclaimer, making it clear it's just my personal take, or warning that they might not like it even if I did.

That is exactly what we should all be doing. No issues there.
I don't ask. I don't care about the opinions of either the audience or the critics.

Fine, the audience is one thing, but a consensus among critics? They aren't exactly teenagers...

If you read our film section, you'll see why ratings fluctuate: maybe someone related to a situation, or their aunt or sister went through something similar, or an actor is hot, or an actress is stunning, or the soundtrack is cool, or someone has a voice so captivating it overshadows the whole film (like Ellen Page), or the movie simply isn't good because it isn't some heavy American social drama...

As long as there's an explanation.
An impression backed by solid arguments simply leaves no room for debate.

Of course..

But all of this started because of what you said.

Quote: never a series is better than a movie; a series is just eye candy for the casual viewer who wants to know what happened before or after the film.

That's why this whole debate kicked off...

It isn't even responsible.
In general? Is it a series based on a movie, or a movie based on a series?...

I said what I said, and I meant it.

Quote: never a series is better than a movie. A series is just eye candy for the suburban dad who needs to know what happened before or after the film.
David Price5 David Price5 Regular
435 messages
joined Jul 2012
#25 ·
James Garcia50 said:Month maybe, years not (unless I'm feeling crazy).

How can you trust people who make that their entire identity? They just aren't credible.

I said what I said, and I meant it.

Quote: never a series is better than a movie. A series is just eye candy for the suburban dad who needs to know what happened before or after the film.

But they exist. That’s why I don't call them idiots; they spend that much time crafting the script.

The ones who make this their full-time job just aren't credible.

So does that mean music critics, artists, or foodies aren't credible either?

I said it before and I stand by it:

Quote: never a series is higher quality than a film. A series is just filler for the casual viewer at home who wants to see what happened before or after the movie.

So, based on that "never," we can conclude that no series will ever be better than any film.
James Garcia50 James Garcia50 Active Member
137 messages
joined Oct 2014
#26 ·
David Price5 said:But they exist. That’s why I don't call them idiots; they spend that much time crafting the script.

The ones who make this their full-time job just aren't credible.

So does that mean music critics, artists, or foodies aren't credible either?

I said it before and I stand by it:

Quote: never a series is higher quality than a film. A series is just filler for the casual viewer at home who wants to see what happened before or after the movie.

So, based on that "never," we can conclude that no series will ever be better than any film.

I’ve got my own favorites that don't run longer than a year.
These slow burners... let's just say they aren't stupid. They're just filler.

David Price5 said:But they exist. That’s why I don't call them idiots; they spend that much time crafting the script.

The ones who make this their full-time job just aren't credible.

So does that mean music critics, artists, or foodies aren't credible either?

I said it before and I stand by it:

Quote: never a series is higher quality than a film. A series is just filler for the casual viewer at home who wants to see what happened before or after the movie.

So, based on that "never," we can conclude that no series will ever be better than any film.

Obviously a pro foodie isn't the same as me, being a natural foodie.

All you can really take away is that this is my opinion. I don't feel the need to spell that out in every single post. I'm speaking for myself (who else would I be speaking for?)...
Taylor Cox12 Taylor Cox12 Newcomer
2 messages
joined May 2012
#27 ·
I was honestly quite taken aback when I came across this rating 😲, especially considering that nearly 53,000 people actually cast
their votes.
David Price5 David Price5 Regular
435 messages
joined Jul 2012
#28 ·
James Garcia50 said:I’ve got my own favorites that don't run longer than a year.
These slow burners... let's just say they aren't stupid. They're just filler.

Obviously a pro foodie isn't the same as me, being a natural foodie.

All you can really take away is that this is my opinion. I don't feel the need to spell that out in every single post. I'm speaking for myself (who else would I be speaking for?)...

It's tough to know how much work went into those scripts, when production actually started, or what counts as the final day... so yeah, more filler.

It's obvious a professional gourmet isn't the same as someone like me, who is just a natural foodie.

All you can conclude is that this is my opinion. I don't feel any need to emphasize that in every single post. I write for myself (who else would I be writing for?)...

Then don't be surprised if we see debates like this—or even worse ones—down the road. It's not just about your opinion; it's about how you back it up and the arguments you use. Otherwise, people will just assume you're trolling.

Taylor Cox12 said:I was honestly quite taken aback when I came across this rating 😲, especially considering that nearly 53,000 people actually cast
their votes.

It was deserved. It was one of the most talked-about episodes.
Jessica Morris6 Jessica Morris6 Active Member
195 messages
joined Nov 2022
#29 ·
David Price5 said:The real struggle is being lost in such a massive ocean of series and movies; there's just no way to catch everything. Sometimes you really have to hunt for a solid opinion first.

They serve a purpose, I suppose. But the thing is, those ratings basically spoon-feed you how much something is worth instead of letting you come to your own conclusions... For instance, that episode of Breaking Bad holds a perfect 10, yet I haven't even touched the show because it's just not my thing. If we're talking about how much sense these scores actually make, I could list plenty of examples where something is rated incredibly low, yet I find it absolutely brilliant... On the flip side, there are shows sitting above an 8 that I personally think are total garbage. Most of today's younger cinephiles don't really have the depth to offer a real argument for why something works; instead, I constantly run into comments like, "It's great, it has a high rating on IMDb."😂
James Garcia50 James Garcia50 Active Member
137 messages
joined Oct 2014
#30 ·
David Price5 said:It's tough to know how much work went into those scripts, when production actually started, or what counts as the final day... so yeah, more filler.

It's obvious a professional gourmet isn't the same as someone like me, who is just a natural foodie.

All you can conclude is that this is my opinion. I don't feel any need to emphasize that in every single post. I write for myself (who else would I be writing for?)...

Then don't be surprised if we see debates like this—or even worse ones—down the road. It's not just about your opinion; it's about how you back it up and the arguments you use. Otherwise, people will just assume you're trolling.

It was deserved. It was one of the most talked-about episodes.

It doesn't matter if it's the first day or the last; all that counts is the enrollment I was talking about. It takes years to make a movie like that. Ever wonder how much blood, sweat, and tears actually goes into a single frame?Not exactly. You don't just whip up a series in a month maybe.

David Price5 said:It's tough to know how much work went into those scripts, when production actually started, or what counts as the final day... so yeah, more filler.

It's obvious a professional gourmet isn't the same as someone like me, who is just a natural foodie.

All you can conclude is that this is my opinion. I don't feel any need to emphasize that in every single post. I write for myself (who else would I be writing for?)...

Then don't be surprised if we see debates like this—or even worse ones—down the road. It's not just about your opinion; it's about how you back it up and the arguments you use. Otherwise, people will just assume you're trolling.

It was deserved. It was one of the most talked-about episodes.

That's exactly what the people will think—those who only think a movie is good because it has some high rating on IMDb.
Having an actual argument isn't trolling. Is there a difference?
amberviper24 amberviper24 Newcomer
6 messages
joined Jul 2012
#31 ·
This is truly top-tier quality 🤣🤣🤣

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1405406/?ref_=nv_sr_1

An 8.1 rating just goes to show that when it comes to TV shows, the vast majority of ratings are driven by die-hard fans... whereas with most movies, you don't see that same level of bias, so the scores tend to be much more grounded in reality.
James Garcia50 James Garcia50 Active Member
137 messages
joined Oct 2014
#32 ·
Don't mess with Vampire Diaries fans, they'll eat you alive 😂🤣😛

Who else besides the fanatics actually watches and rates this stuff?
David Price5 David Price5 Regular
435 messages
joined Jul 2012
#33 ·
Jessica Morris6 said:They serve a purpose, I suppose. But the thing is, those ratings basically spoon-feed you how much something is worth instead of letting you come to your own conclusions... For instance, that episode of Breaking Bad holds a perfect 10, yet I haven't even touched the show because it's just not my thing. If we're talking about how much sense these scores actually make, I could list plenty of examples where something is rated incredibly low, yet I find it absolutely brilliant... On the flip side, there are shows sitting above an 8 that I personally think are total garbage. Most of today's younger cinephiles don't really have the depth to offer a real argument for why something works; instead, I constantly run into comments like, "It's great, it has a high rating on IMDb."😂

I've said it before. Everything up until Season 3 was just a warm-up; that's when the real fighting actually starts.

I honestly wonder how much sense your ratings actually make. I could easily list a few examples where something has a terrible score but I absolutely love it, or things rated over an 8 that I think are total garbage. It seems like today's younger movie buffs struggle to provide any real arguments for why a film is good; instead, I constantly run into comments like, "It’s great because it has a high rating on IMDb."😂

Trash movies are always such a mess. People tend to judge them by the same standards they use for serious cinema, which just doesn't work. For those kinds of films, you really need to find specialized critics who actually get it.

James Garcia50 said:It doesn't matter if it's the first day or the last; all that counts is the enrollment I was talking about. It takes years to make a movie like that. Ever wonder how much blood, sweat, and tears actually goes into a single frame?Not exactly. You don't just whip up a series in a month maybe.

That's exactly what the people will think—those who only think a movie is good because it has some high rating on IMDb.
Having an actual argument isn't trolling. Is there a difference?

That's not really how you calculate it. You can't possibly know exactly when a script wraps up. These things can drag on for years, especially when you're constantly swapping out writers mid-stream. It’s the same story with TV pilots—they can take forever to get right.

People who only care about high IMDb ratings are going to think this movie is actually good.
Having an actual argument isn't trolling.

Yeah, you're making some points... but none of them seem to be coming from your side.

amberviper24 said:This is truly top-tier quality 🤣🤣🤣

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1405406/?ref_=nv_sr_1

An 8.1 rating just goes to show that when it comes to TV shows, the vast majority of ratings are driven by die-hard fans... whereas with most movies, you don't see that same level of bias, so the scores tend to be much more grounded in reality.

Aged 18-29 90772 8.3
Males Aged 18-29 39082 7.8
Females Aged 18-29 51690 8.6
Aged 30-44 24307 7.5
Males Aged 30-44 11111 6.8
Females Aged 30-44 13196 8.3

It’s actually one of those rare series where women showed up in higher numbers to vote.
Larry Walker24 Larry Walker24 Veteran
1K messages
joined Jun 2022
#34 ·
TV shows these days are absolutely crushing movies when it comes to budget, production value, and pure creative ideas.

Back in the day—like in the 90s—it was honestly kind of embarrassing to be seen starring in a series, but now? Everyone’s fighting to get cast in them.
Frank Chase6 Frank Chase6 Member
20 messages
joined Nov 2012
#35 ·
If you want my advice, stick to shows rated above a 7—basically anything in that 7 to 10 sweet spot. That’s how you get a real sense of quality. See, the crowds voting on IMDb are usually just casual viewers who get totally swept up in modern junk—people who somehow manage to feel "intense" watching episode 1156 of CSI or something similar.
David Price5 David Price5 Regular
435 messages
joined Jul 2012
#36 ·
Frank Chase6 said:If you want my advice, stick to shows rated above a 7—basically anything in that 7 to 10 sweet spot. That’s how you get a real sense of quality. See, the crowds voting on IMDb are usually just casual viewers who get totally swept up in modern junk—people who somehow manage to feel "intense" watching episode 1156 of CSI or something similar.

That's nonsense again. The same people voting on series are the ones voting on movies. It's the exact same pool of voters. You can't separate movie fans from series fans.
vivideagle7 vivideagle7 Active Member
135 messages
joined Oct 2014
#37 ·
Of course the fans are the ones calling the shots when it comes to TV shows, so how on earth could something like GoT or Sherlock be ranked higher than The Wire? 🤷
granitetiger69 granitetiger69 Member
24 messages
joined Jan 2009
#38 ·
Michael Harris20 said:I was just scrolling through IMDb looking for some movies when I stumbled upon a bunch of series... and man, I realized most of them are rated between an 8 and 10. Honestly, they seem even better than the movies.

What do you guys think is the reason for that? Is it because people have more patience when they're following a series over several seasons, or is there something else going on?

I mean, personally, I’ll always prefer a local production over something like *The Sound of Music*.

Do Americans just have different standards, or do they simply prefer series more? What's your take on this?

I guess it's because—if it's good—I rate it as soon as I start the first season.
But then (usually) the quality drops, while the rating stays stuck at that initial level of "enthusiasm" and excitement.
And mostly, it’s those die-hard fans who rate it, the ones who got hooked early and don't even realize how much of a mess the show has become.
An IMDb rating for a series isn't really an indicator of anything anymore.
James Garcia50 James Garcia50 Active Member
137 messages
joined Oct 2014
#39 ·
David Price5 said:I've said it before. Everything up until Season 3 was just a warm-up; that's when the real fighting actually starts.

I honestly wonder how much sense your ratings actually make. I could easily list a few examples where something has a terrible score but I absolutely love it, or things rated over an 8 that I think are total garbage. It seems like today's younger movie buffs struggle to provide any real arguments for why a film is good; instead, I constantly run into comments like, "It’s great because it has a high rating on IMDb."😂

Trash movies are always such a mess. People tend to judge them by the same standards they use for serious cinema, which just doesn't work. For those kinds of films, you really need to find specialized critics who actually get it.

That's not really how you calculate it. You can't possibly know exactly when a script wraps up. These things can drag on for years, especially when you're constantly swapping out writers mid-stream. It’s the same story with TV pilots—they can take forever to get right.

People who only care about high IMDb ratings are going to think this movie is actually good.
Having an actual argument isn't trolling.

Yeah, you're making some points... but none of them seem to be coming from your side.

Aged 18-29 90772 8.3
Males Aged 18-29 39082 7.8
Females Aged 18-29 51690 8.6
Aged 30-44 24307 7.5
Males Aged 30-44 11111 6.8
Females Aged 30-44 13196 8.3

It’s actually one of those rare series where women showed up in higher numbers to vote.

It happened a long time ago, but you don't value anyone's perspective except your own. I guess that's just how some people are—they just need to be right while everyone else is wrong.
Karen Smith9 Karen Smith9 Active Member
183 messages
joined Apr 2013
#40 ·
vivideagle7 said:Of course the fans are the ones calling the shots when it comes to TV shows, so how on earth could something like GoT or Sherlock be ranked higher than The Wire? 🤷

It isn't just limited to TV shows, either; it’s the same deal with music and pretty much everything else. Honestly, fanboy blindness is one of the biggest flaws in modern pop culture.

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads