Why is everyone into series more than movies these days?

@James Garcia50

The main thing is you guys always have a crowd, even when you're flying solo. 🙂

I mean, there’s always someone ready to jump in and start an argument. You’ve got one guy who hates TV shows so much he’d probably rather take a bullet than waste precious minutes on them when there are actual cinematic masterpieces out there worth studying. Then there’s the other, who’s watched so much junk in his life that he thinks he’s an expert on basically every single show ever made. Then we have the third, a die-hard hater of > who refuses to respect anything that isn't some hyper-original masterpiece—you know, the kind of stuff birthed from the mind of a director who actually earns the title of "artist." The fourth one? He’s fine with unoriginality, as long as it’s labeled a "remake" instead of a blatant rip-off. And then the fifth guy thinks "copying" someone else's work without permission isn't plagiarism unless the creator actually catches you and sues you—at which point you just grab a six-pack of Budweiser and call it a misunderstanding.

Anyway, glad you guys are having such a blast. With this group around, you’re never truly alone. 🎉

You're the one obsessed with sticking to definitions. I'm not.

You just throw them out there and refuse to stand by them. What kind of tactic is that? When you run out of actual arguments, you just start acting crazy. Is that really your best move?

How am I supposed to deal with this? Everyone. It reminds me of those imaginary sixty thousand people who are automatically on your side. Who actually believes that?

And what about these people? Sixty thousand? Is that all? People always start pivoting when they realize they have zero arguments left. Is that really the best you can do?

You’ve got nothing left to say. These are your final death throes.

You're wrong.
This discussion has become so utterly pointless that I have nothing left to say.

Maybe that’s easy for you to say, but for me? There are a million different ways to look at this.

More vague, murky, and half-baked answers. Is anyone actually going to provide some clarity?

wiredraven82 said:I caught the season premiere of The Walking Dead yesterday—look, I’ll be the first to admit I’m a fan of the series, no shame there. 🙂 But man, that was absolutely depraved. The sheer sickness of some of those characters in this new episode... it was beyond the pale. Honestly, it was so visceral I actually felt physically ill.

I watch The Walking Dead too, but I can't stand waiting for weekly releases. I'd rather just binge an entire season once seven or eight episodes have dropped. Why wait around?
Based on the trailer, this season looks absolutely brutal—even more intense than the previous ones.

shadowangler50 said:I watch The Walking Dead too, but I can't stand waiting for weekly releases. I'd rather just binge an entire season once seven or eight episodes have dropped. Why wait around?
Based on the trailer, this season looks absolutely brutal—even more intense than the previous ones.

Look, I get where you're coming from, but waiting for an 8-episode chunk is way too long for me—haha. You know what my biggest pet peeve is? It’s when you’re following a series, and then life happens and you can't watch it for a while, and THEN—boom—you suddenly have to binge the whole thing all at once to catch up.🤣

But regarding the brutality—that's the Truth. Judging by that first episode, I haven't seen anything quite like this yet...

wiredraven82 said:Look, I get where you're coming from, but waiting for an 8-episode chunk is way too long for me—haha. You know what my biggest pet peeve is? It’s when you’re following a series, and then life happens and you can't watch it for a while, and THEN—boom—you suddenly have to binge the whole thing all at once to catch up.🤣

But regarding the brutality—that's the Truth. Judging by that first episode, I haven't seen anything quite like this yet...

It’s been a few years since I started treating series like movie marathons. I just wait until the full season drops, blast through it in a couple of days, and then wait a whole year for the next one.
If TV shows were drugs, I’d be a total addict.🤣

Now I have this uncontrollable urge to watch the pilot. I feel hooked.

I’m more into dramedies than straight-up comedies, mostly because I actually end up caring about the characters.

And honestly, I'll take a drama series over a movie any day since the character arcs have way more room to breathe.

It’s an interesting point, though. You could probably draw some parallels between the '90s and especially the '80s, but let's be real—TV production quality today is just on a whole different level.

Since we have been discussing comedies on this forum, here is a recent recommendation: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2004420/
At certain points, it reminded me of Hangover. The plot feels somewhat tedious and slow at the start for my taste, but it eventually gives way to several hilarious scenes. All things considered, it is one of the few decent comedies I have watched lately. 👍

It is important to note that we shouldn't claim TV series are always superior; occasionally, an actual good movie surfaces (though that is a rare occurrence 😁 ).

Richard Wilson4 said:It’s an interesting point, though. You could probably draw some parallels between the '90s and especially the '80s, but let's be real—TV production quality today is just on a whole different level.

I disagree. Personally, I still find the 90s to be superior in terms of quality. Maybe the early 2000s could compete when we had The Sopranos, Wire, Deadwood, and The Shield, but the 90s offered incredible quality and variety.

The 90s were peak era for drama, sci-fi, and horror. Coming-of-age stories hit different back then. As for the best comedies? Don't even get me started.

It’s been declining over the last seven or eight years, though viewership stayed up because everything just scaled so much. Everyone watches series now since they're all available at your fingertips.

shadowangler50 said:

You're the one obsessed with sticking to definitions. I'm not.

You just throw them out there and refuse to stand by them. What kind of tactic is that? When you run out of actual arguments, you just start acting crazy. Is that really your best move?

How am I supposed to deal with this? Everyone. It reminds me of those imaginary sixty thousand people who are automatically on your side. Who actually believes that?

And what about these people? Sixty thousand? Is that all? People always start pivoting when they realize they have zero arguments left. Is that really the best you can do?

You’ve got nothing left to say. These are your final death throes.

You're wrong.
This discussion has become so utterly pointless that I have nothing left to say.

Maybe that’s easy for you to say, but for me? There are a million different ways to look at this.

More vague, murky, and half-baked answers. Is anyone actually going to provide some clarity?

I’m not dropping anything; you're the one talking in circles while acting like an expert on everything.

shadowangler50 said:

You're the one obsessed with sticking to definitions. I'm not.

You just throw them out there and refuse to stand by them. What kind of tactic is that? When you run out of actual arguments, you just start acting crazy. Is that really your best move?

How am I supposed to deal with this? Everyone. It reminds me of those imaginary sixty thousand people who are automatically on your side. Who actually believes that?

And what about these people? Sixty thousand? Is that all? People always start pivoting when they realize they have zero arguments left. Is that really the best you can do?

You’ve got nothing left to say. These are your final death throes.

You're wrong.
This discussion has become so utterly pointless that I have nothing left to say.

Maybe that’s easy for you to say, but for me? There are a million different ways to look at this.

More vague, murky, and half-baked answers. Is anyone actually going to provide some clarity?

Maybe because it reminds you of yourself. It'll stay that way as long as you're just shouting into the void.

Jesse Thomas7 said:@James Garcia50

The main thing is you guys always have a crowd, even when you're flying solo. 🙂

I mean, there’s always someone ready to jump in and start an argument. You’ve got one guy who hates TV shows so much he’d probably rather take a bullet than waste precious minutes on them when there are actual cinematic masterpieces out there worth studying. Then there’s the other, who’s watched so much junk in his life that he thinks he’s an expert on basically every single show ever made. Then we have the third, a die-hard hater of > who refuses to respect anything that isn't some hyper-original masterpiece—you know, the kind of stuff birthed from the mind of a director who actually earns the title of "artist." The fourth one? He’s fine with unoriginality, as long as it’s labeled a "remake" instead of a blatant rip-off. And then the fifth guy thinks "copying" someone else's work without permission isn't plagiarism unless the creator actually catches you and sues you—at which point you just grab a six-pack of Budweiser and call it a misunderstanding.

Anyway, glad you guys are having such a blast. With this group around, you’re never truly alone. 🎉

You're barking up the wrong tree, Jesse.
That goes to the forum dwellers who'd rather bicker and lecture everyone on definitions than actually sit down and watch the show they're obsessively nitpicking.

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. 🙏

Looks like I'm going to have to start rewatching The Walking Dead from the beginning.

Carl Hill53 said: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. 🙏

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...

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.🍿

I'm not the one posting here; you're the one throwing out baseless claims while acting like an absolute expert on everything.

You lecture me on the difference between plagiarism and a remake, then play the victim. You bring up legalities in art and then immediately claim we aren't talking about law, but art. How am I supposed to have a rational debate with someone so inconsistent?

It sounds like you're describing yourself. It’ll stay that way as long as you keep writing about things you haven't even seen.

Nice tactic. When you get cornered, you just pivot to a different topic. Very clever.

You're barking up the wrong tree, Jesse Thomas7.
This is directed at those forum users who prefer endless bickering and pedantic definitions over actually sitting down to watch the show they're critiquing.

You're the one throwing around definitions—and conveniently forgetting them whenever it suits you.
Whether you've watched Red Riding Hood or not is irrelevant to whether True Detective is a rip-off.
True Detective is a massive global hit; if there were actual theft involved, there would be lawsuits. Until then, you're just shouting into the void.

shadowangler50 said:

I'm not the one posting here; you're the one throwing out baseless claims while acting like an absolute expert on everything.

You lecture me on the difference between plagiarism and a remake, then play the victim. You bring up legalities in art and then immediately claim we aren't talking about law, but art. How am I supposed to have a rational debate with someone so inconsistent?

It sounds like you're describing yourself. It’ll stay that way as long as you keep writing about things you haven't even seen.

Nice tactic. When you get cornered, you just pivot to a different topic. Very clever.

You're barking up the wrong tree, Jesse Thomas7.
This is directed at those forum users who prefer endless bickering and pedantic definitions over actually sitting down to watch the show they're critiquing.

You're the one throwing around definitions—and conveniently forgetting them whenever it suits you.
Whether you've watched Red Riding Hood or not is irrelevant to whether True Detective is a rip-off.
True Detective is a massive global hit; if there were actual theft involved, there would be lawsuits. Until then, you're just shouting into the void.

I’m not interested in labeling anything. Life isn't linear, and nothing is consistent from one movie to the next. Whether someone decides to chase a lawsuit or not? That’s their business.
Sure, we’re talking about art here, but sometimes an artist ends up suing another artist—kind of like that whole mess involving Akira Kurosawa.

shadowangler50 said:

I'm not the one posting here; you're the one throwing out baseless claims while acting like an absolute expert on everything.

You lecture me on the difference between plagiarism and a remake, then play the victim. You bring up legalities in art and then immediately claim we aren't talking about law, but art. How am I supposed to have a rational debate with someone so inconsistent?

It sounds like you're describing yourself. It’ll stay that way as long as you keep writing about things you haven't even seen.

Nice tactic. When you get cornered, you just pivot to a different topic. Very clever.

You're barking up the wrong tree, Jesse Thomas7.
This is directed at those forum users who prefer endless bickering and pedantic definitions over actually sitting down to watch the show they're critiquing.

You're the one throwing around definitions—and conveniently forgetting them whenever it suits you.
Whether you've watched Red Riding Hood or not is irrelevant to whether True Detective is a rip-off.
True Detective is a massive global hit; if there were actual theft involved, there would be lawsuits. Until then, you're just shouting into the void.

I don't have a strategy, I don't sugarcoat things, and frankly, I don't care if anyone catches my drift. I just write about movies and shows based on how they actually hit me. Why bother following the crowd?

shadowangler50 said:

I'm not the one posting here; you're the one throwing out baseless claims while acting like an absolute expert on everything.

You lecture me on the difference between plagiarism and a remake, then play the victim. You bring up legalities in art and then immediately claim we aren't talking about law, but art. How am I supposed to have a rational debate with someone so inconsistent?

It sounds like you're describing yourself. It’ll stay that way as long as you keep writing about things you haven't even seen.

Nice tactic. When you get cornered, you just pivot to a different topic. Very clever.

You're barking up the wrong tree, Jesse Thomas7.
This is directed at those forum users who prefer endless bickering and pedantic definitions over actually sitting down to watch the show they're critiquing.

You're the one throwing around definitions—and conveniently forgetting them whenever it suits you.
Whether you've watched Red Riding Hood or not is irrelevant to whether True Detective is a rip-off.
True Detective is a massive global hit; if there were actual theft involved, there would be lawsuits. Until then, you're just shouting into the void.

I don't do definitions. And that whole "watched it or didn't" argument? That's just something people say when they aren't actually real film buffs.
I don't care how "world-famous" something is; that's not how I look at things. Quality is the only metric that actually matters to me, not some hype machine. I’m not here to play judge or worry about who’s suing whom, but when I see someone ripping off someone else's work, my respect for them just hits zero. Is anyone even surprised anymore?

It matters that you're actually talking. Too much.Look, you don't even have to reply to my posts—you can just hit ignore if you want. Why bother?

Carl Hill53 said: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.🍿

I’m also a zombie enthusiast and have been following this show religiously since day one.🙂 The Truth is, the series was essentially softcore—not that I had an issue with it, it was plenty intense, just nothing on *this* level—until this current season hit. Regarding that recent episode we were discussing (spoiler alert), specifically that location where they trapped them and the things those characters were doing there... frankly, even at Auschwitz, you wouldn't see that kind of depravity; even the Mongols during the Middle Ages probably didn't inflict that kind of cruelty on conquered populations. It was just... ugh. And the way they do it so casually, as if it’s perfectly "normal," that's what makes it truly terrifying.

And don't even get me started on what they're actually doing with all those people once they find out.😲

Carl Hill53 said: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. 🙏

Then I’ll probably spend the next five episodes wondering why I even bother watching this garbage.

Let's be real here. When we talk about actual masterpieces, we're talking about The Sopranos, Oz, or Boardwalk Empire. Not The Walking Dead, which is just a total scam and a cheap little drama, and definitely not Game of Thrones, which is nothing more than shallow, soft porn.

Richard Wilson4 said:Then I’ll probably spend the next five episodes wondering why I even bother watching this garbage.

Let's be real here. When we talk about actual masterpieces, we're talking about The Sopranos, Oz, or Boardwalk Empire. Not The Walking Dead, which is just a total scam and a cheap little drama, and definitely not Game of Thrones, which is nothing more than shallow, soft porn.

What truly makes The Sopranos what it is—and why I consider it such a monumental series—is its sheer, unapologetic depth. 🙂The core issue—if you want to call it that—is that the series never actually struggled to maintain its momentum. It didn't suffer from those mid-season slumps where the tension evaporates and the performances start feeling hollow; instead, it delivered the exact same level of intensity in the middle of the season as it did during the premiere or the finale. When I really sit back and think about it, the writers didn't even seem to care about pacing the season to hook people in later on—they weren't trying to "save" anything for a big payoff. They just stayed consistently engaging from start to finish.

Some people might argue that the difference comes down to the genre itself—comparing it to something like The Walking Dead, for instance. They’ll claim that because it's a crime drama, you have more room to be an "artist." But please—and I’m not talking to you specifically, just speaking generally—let's be real: The Sopranos simply never "stood" in that same way.

I suppose I could call myself a bit of a Goodfellas type—if I’m being honest with myself, anyway. 🤣 It’s like a marathon run of Goodfellas blended seamlessly with The Godfather. 🤣 (I’m not trying to make a direct comparison here—I just want to find some way to illustrate exactly what I'm getting at.)

Take *The Walking Dead*, for example—and look, I follow the series and I actually like it, but my God, there were so many episodes that were nothing but pure shit. I’m talking about filler episodes consisting of absolute nonsense and tedious, dragging sequences designed solely to hit an episode count. It felt like they were just running out the clock instead of actually telling a story.

It’s like when you’re watching an episode where the entire plot hinges on some trivial detail—say, why one character has a mole on their hand—and suddenly everyone else in the scene starts losing their minds over it. It feels completely disproportionate, right? I’ll throw this out there as a bit of an analogy, even if it seems a little random.

I was honestly on the verge of walking away from The Walking Dead entirely because of this kind of absolute shit—I found myself sitting there thinking, "For God's sake, just get a move on already." Seriously, pick up the pace. We need some actual momentum here—some real action—instead of this endless stalling.

And then there was that previous season—which, let’s be honest, was actually fantastic. The episodes were engaging, tight, and genuinely compelling. My only hope now is that this premiere serves as a legitimate blueprint for the rest of the season, rather than just being some hollow bait used to hook the audience before they completely pull the brakes on quality. It feels cheap—frankly, it's beneath them. To manufacture hype with a strong opening only to coast on mediocrity later is such a transparent, pathetic tactic; it’s hard to even put into words how low that goes. And I don't just mean with this specific show—it's a pattern I see far too often in this industry.

Look, what I witnessed in The Walking Dead isn't even unique—I’ve seen those same patterns in other series, some that might actually hold more weight than The Walking Dead itself. Take Battlestar Galactica, for instance. Go ahead and crucify me if you want, but honestly? That show was acting like a total soap opera set in deep space, and it was completely unhingalding. It just wasn't right. In terms of sheer melodrama, The Walking Dead is practically a kitten compared to the chaos in Battlestar Galactica.

I used to find myself sitting there, staring at the screen, wondering why the hell I was even following this series—I suppose it was just that stubborn need to see how it all ends, right? And look, I’ll be the first to admit, there were some absolutely stellar episodes; the acting was top-tier, the production was solid, and everything seemed to click. But man, there were moments where it felt like such an exhausting chore to sit through. Honestly, good Lord... what a ride.

Don't get me wrong—I’ve always had a soft spot for Battlestar Galactica, and I still do—but nothing will ever quite hit the same way as certain other series. Some shows offer much more straightforward plots, sure, but they maintain that same high level of quality while delivering something far more essential: that feeling of, "Hey, move aside and let me actually see what's going on here." Take Stargate SG-1, for instance; I found following that journey significantly more engaging. At the end of the day, it probably just comes down to personal taste, but that's where I stand. 🙂

I can’t shake the memory of how that absolute pile of shit, Stargate Universe, tried to rip off Battlestar Galactica—and I mean they were total hacks about it. They leaned way too hard into that shaky-cam aesthetic, which, honestly, God, I absolutely loathe. Look, I get it—a little handheld movement can add tension or make things feel more grounded—but they took it to such an obnoxious extreme that it just became nauseating. It’s a classic case of style over substance, and we all saw how that played out when the show was tossed in the gutter after only two seasons. If I had my way, I wouldn't just let those episodes fade away; I’d gather every single Stargate Universe episode, burn them onto a stack of DVDs, toss them into a trash can made of solid iron, douse the whole mess in gasoline, and strike a match. 🙂

Some people argue that action series save their big moments for the season premiere or the finale—especially in the sci-fi genre—simply because of budget constraints. It’s not easy to pull off high-end VFX, so they ration them. But honestly? Give me a break. 😁 I’ve seen mid-season episodes in Stargate Atlantis featuring incredible effects and combat sequences that don't even come close to being inferior to the best stuff in Battlestar Galactica—yet they just deliver that... how do I put this... that sense of unprovoked, high-octane intensity right in the middle of the run.

Now, I realize I'm coming off as a total Stargate fanatic here—both SG-1 and Atlantis, ha!—but that’s not the point. I’m just trying to make a specific observation, whether anyone agrees with me or not. 🙂

I see we’ve started a debate about soap operas... so let's actually define what makes a show a "soap." I'm obviously not talking about those endless Mexican or Turkish daytime dramas designed for bored retirees...