Why is everyone into series more than movies these days?

wiredraven82 said:I'm practically a permanent fixture on this board, so I felt that same wave of déjà vu the second I laid eyes on this topic.😁

🙂
If I had actually put in the effort to find it. It really was almost 🙂.

Why are TV series dominating movies right now?

The answer is simple: they're just better.

And why are they better? Because they actually bother with a plot. Movies have become nothing more than a bloated mess of CGI and recycled storylines that we've all seen a thousand times before. Honestly, the only people finding that stuff engaging are kids under 15 who haven't seen enough cinema to know any better.
Sure, every once in a while a film comes along that feels like a breath of fresh air compared to today's Hollywood standards, but those are rare exceptions that only prove the rule.

Then you have international films from outside the US that focus on storytelling, but they run into a reality problem. Why do people watch movies and shows in the first place? For entertainment. Most people aren't looking to sit through a heavy drama about domestic violence or environmental crises; they deal with enough of that in real life. They want to unwind and escape reality, not dive deeper into it.

Series have rightfully seized the throne from movies. It’s no wonder everyone calls this the golden age of television.

goldenhound32 said:Not everyone, though most people I know.

I suspect the reason is quite simple: people have lost the capacity for sustained focus. It’s become much easier to binge three episodes of a series—each roughly 45 minutes—than it is to actually sit through a single ninety-minute movie.

I’ll be the first to admit that, personally, I find series easier to consume.

But, truth be told, I still derive far more enjoyment from movies.

To be more precise—in *good* movies. I mean, bad ones just feel like an absolute chore to sit through, and I honestly get zero enjoyment out of them. Unfortunately, there seem to be way more of those than the good stuff.

Quote: shadow dancer

shadowangler50 said:Why are TV series dominating movies right now?

The answer is simple: they're just better.

And why are they better? Because they actually bother with a plot. Movies have become nothing more than a bloated mess of CGI and recycled storylines that we've all seen a thousand times before. Honestly, the only people finding that stuff engaging are kids under 15 who haven't seen enough cinema to know any better.
Sure, every once in a while a film comes along that feels like a breath of fresh air compared to today's Hollywood standards, but those are rare exceptions that only prove the rule.

Then you have international films from outside the US that focus on storytelling, but they run into a reality problem. Why do people watch movies and shows in the first place? For entertainment. Most people aren't looking to sit through a heavy drama about domestic violence or environmental crises; they deal with enough of that in real life. They want to unwind and escape reality, not dive deeper into it.

Series have rightfully seized the throne from movies. It’s no wonder everyone calls this the golden age of television.

This is exactly what I was talking about on the last thread. That bolded part tells me you don't have the slightest clue how TV eras actually work.

Those golden eras started back in the '50s with the Twilight Zone, moved through the '90s with Twin Peaks, and hit a peak when The Sopranos arrived late in the decade. Each period produced shows that completely revolutionized television.

People are getting it completely wrong. They think we’re living in some unique golden age of television, but that’s a misconception. Golden ages have been popping up every few decades for over half a century now.

The internet works wonders.

HBO has raised the bar incredibly high—I’d argue they’ve done it all the way up to the level of cinema itself. Take ''Boardwalk Empire'', which I’m currently working my way through.

Stylistically speaking, we're looking at pure cinematic direction here. TV shows used to feel so formulaic, sterile, and frankly monotonous, but this is a whole different beast. For instance, the way they use parallel editing—it pops up several times; you'll see Nucky Thompson holding a press conference to calm the public and announce an end to the violence, while simultaneously cutting to scenes of the D'Alessio brothers being taken out on his orders. Do I even need to mention how much that mirrors the approach in ''The Godfather''? Then there are the camera angles, the framing, the movement... I mean, just think back to that 70-minute pilot directed by Martin Scorsese. What a hurricane of an opening! If they hadn't kept the series going, that single episode would have stood alone as a masterpiece.

The cinematic inspiration is obvious, too, through symbolic nods and mentions of films from that era. In the first season, Margaret Schroeder goes to the movies to watch Chaplin's Kid with the kids; in season 3, Gina Lollobrigida describes ''Nosferatu'' to her boss Rosetti; someone brings up the comedies of Buster Keaton; Mickey Doyle talks about the ''Baghdad Thief'' in season 4; and by season 5, which is set in 1931, we've already had mentions of Lewis Milestone's ''Front Page'', along with gangster classics like ''Public Enemy'' and ''Little Caesar''. I have to say, I was actually hoping for those little touches before I started watching, and it’s been such a treat when they show up. You saw similar stuff in ''The Sopranos''.

The acting is top-tier as well, and I don't think I even need to bring up the perfectionism in the production design and costuming. In some scenes where the dialogue felt a bit slow to me, I didn't actually mind because I found myself just soaking in the interiors... studying the furniture... or checking out the clothing and hairstyles. The CGI used for the Atlantic City sets doesn't bother me, though in certain shots (mostly wide or medium shots), you can definitely tell it's digital. The characterization is also excellent. Sure, there are some clichés, but every character feels like a real person with a soul... flesh and blood people... everyone has their own weight to carry.

The content of the show, much like ''The Wire'', is uncompromising and hits you right in the gut. It's the kind of thing that wouldn't fly in Hollywood today—it just wouldn't be considered. Like ''The Wire'', the series portrays corruption and depravity at the highest levels, skillfully mapping out the web of graft connecting politicians, businessmen, and criminals. The script does tend to get a little bogged down in that classic American way (you know, the last-minute rescue trope), but overall, it's very well written.

It seems like that new "New Hollywood" generation we were all calling for has landed exactly where we least expected it—on television, which has become the ultimate sanctuary for creative freedom.

bluenomad2 said:Quote: shadow dancer

This is exactly what I was talking about on the last thread. That bolded part tells me you don't have the slightest clue how TV eras actually work.

Those golden eras started back in the '50s with the Twilight Zone, moved through the '90s with Twin Peaks, and hit a peak when The Sopranos arrived late in the decade. Each period produced shows that completely revolutionized television.

People are getting it completely wrong. They think we’re living in some unique golden age of television, but that’s a misconception. Golden ages have been popping up every few decades for over half a century now.

The internet works wonders.

I guess they call this the "golden age" simply because everything is available at the click of a button, rather than having to actually wait for a weekly episode like they did in the 50s or the 90s.😁

To this day, my favorite day of the week is Thursday—mostly because back in the 90s, The X-Files aired on Thursdays around 8 PM, and I’d spend the whole afternoon counting down the minutes until I could get home from school to watch.🤣

I’m not really a big fan of those kinds of series; honestly, I’ll almost always pick a movie over a TV show. But when it comes to comedies, I definitely lean toward series—whether they’re classics or newer stuff—and, of course, Sons of Anarchy. 🙏

Carl Hill53 said:I honestly think it all boils down to the sheer amount of time spent building that connection between the audience and the characters. It’s just more intimate that way. A movie tries to achieve something similar through sequels—or at least attempts to via trilogies—but, let’s be honest, they usually fail to pull it off. Sure, a movie can deliver an impact in a much shorter, almost negligible window of time, but it just doesn't create that sense of "addiction" you get from a series. We could also probably factor the whole cultural trend aspect into this discussion, I suppose.

Exactly.

Starting a series requires a much lower barrier to entry: the initial investment is smaller—both in terms of content demand and actual time commitment (roughly 45 minutes compared to a 90+ minute film). And then, you’re hooked. Either the characters or the narrative pulls you under, and before you know it, you're just watching. Even if a series loses its way after a few episodes or seasons, you find yourself pushing through simply because you need to see how it ends. There might even be some psychological explanation for this phenomenon. 😬

Plus, while you're watching Mad Men or a medical drama, you can easily fold some laundry; you can't exactly do that while watching Dersu Uzala or The Dude.

@ hiddenbear4 — true, but for every masterpiece series, there are ten mediocre ones and a hundred pieces of garbage. I suspect the crowd that watches exclusively series doesn't particularly appreciate the cinematography or the subtle references found in Boardwalk Empire.

Of course I love both, but I’m way more into series😍 There’s just a different kind of connection you build with a show. You actually get attached to the characters, the chemistry between them, and that slow-burn plot development. For me, there's a certain thrill in watching something where I don't get all the answers handed to me after ninety minutes. A great series is basically my drug of choice. With a movie, you spend two hours on it, you either like it or you don't, and that's that—I just don't get nearly as invested in them.😉

analogpanther55 said:I’m not really a big fan of those kinds of series; honestly, I’ll almost always pick a movie over a TV show. But when it comes to comedies, I definitely lean toward series—whether they’re classics or newer stuff—and, of course, Sons of Anarchy. 🙏

If you're watching HBO's shows, you're basically just watching a movie that lasts several thousand minutes.

Angela Alvarez10 said:Of course I love both, but I’m way more into series😍 There’s just a different kind of connection you build with a show. You actually get attached to the characters, the chemistry between them, and that slow-burn plot development. For me, there's a certain thrill in watching something where I don't get all the answers handed to me after ninety minutes. A great series is basically my drug of choice. With a movie, you spend two hours on it, you either like it or you don't, and that's that—I just don't get nearly as invested in them.😉

Now, this is the kind of response I was waiting for...

My fellow X-Files enthusiast 😁

Quote: shadow dancer

bluenomad2 said:Quote: shadow dancer

This is exactly what I was talking about on the last thread. That bolded part tells me you don't have the slightest clue how TV eras actually work.

Those golden eras started back in the '50s with the Twilight Zone, moved through the '90s with Twin Peaks, and hit a peak when The Sopranos arrived late in the decade. Each period produced shows that completely revolutionized television.

People are getting it completely wrong. They think we’re living in some unique golden age of television, but that’s a misconception. Golden ages have been popping up every few decades for over half a century now.

The internet works wonders.

bluenomad2, I am asking you—one more time—to stop addressing the rest of us on this forum like you’re some kind of omniscient deity who’s seen it all and swallowed every ounce of wisdom on the planet. Seriously, just knock it off. If you keep acting like you have all the answers and talking down to everyone else, I might actually have to step in and look into some sanctions regarding your forum identity. Enough already.

Of course the series are being filmed—and will continue to be filmed—parallel to the movie. It’s just how the production works. Also, if I’m being honest, I highly doubt you’ve even seen one percent of what’s actually been shot, yet here you are, acting like some kind of ultimate authority and trying to lecture everyone else with your endless, misplaced expertise.

Let’s face it—we are living in an era where the sheer volume of television is exploding, but honestly? It feels like we’ve reached this weird breaking point where quantity is finally, desperately trying to catch up to quality. I mean, if you look at the trajectory from just a few years ago leading right up to today, there’s this massive shift happening. We’re seeing more shows than ever before, yet that transition from "just another series" to something truly substantive is becoming such a volatile balancing act. I guess you could say we're witnessing a massive influx of content, but whether that actually translates into better storytelling remains to be seen—it's a messy, complicated evolution, for sure.

Look, would you please just stop talking trash? Seriously. P.S.—Twin Peaks is nothing but pretentious garbage.

Quote: shadow dancer

hiddenbear4 said:HBO has raised the bar incredibly high—I’d argue they’ve done it all the way up to the level of cinema itself. Take ''Boardwalk Empire'', which I’m currently working my way through.

Stylistically speaking, we're looking at pure cinematic direction here. TV shows used to feel so formulaic, sterile, and frankly monotonous, but this is a whole different beast. For instance, the way they use parallel editing—it pops up several times; you'll see Nucky Thompson holding a press conference to calm the public and announce an end to the violence, while simultaneously cutting to scenes of the D'Alessio brothers being taken out on his orders. Do I even need to mention how much that mirrors the approach in ''The Godfather''? Then there are the camera angles, the framing, the movement... I mean, just think back to that 70-minute pilot directed by Martin Scorsese. What a hurricane of an opening! If they hadn't kept the series going, that single episode would have stood alone as a masterpiece.

The cinematic inspiration is obvious, too, through symbolic nods and mentions of films from that era. In the first season, Margaret Schroeder goes to the movies to watch Chaplin's Kid with the kids; in season 3, Gina Lollobrigida describes ''Nosferatu'' to her boss Rosetti; someone brings up the comedies of Buster Keaton; Mickey Doyle talks about the ''Baghdad Thief'' in season 4; and by season 5, which is set in 1931, we've already had mentions of Lewis Milestone's ''Front Page'', along with gangster classics like ''Public Enemy'' and ''Little Caesar''. I have to say, I was actually hoping for those little touches before I started watching, and it’s been such a treat when they show up. You saw similar stuff in ''The Sopranos''.

The acting is top-tier as well, and I don't think I even need to bring up the perfectionism in the production design and costuming. In some scenes where the dialogue felt a bit slow to me, I didn't actually mind because I found myself just soaking in the interiors... studying the furniture... or checking out the clothing and hairstyles. The CGI used for the Atlantic City sets doesn't bother me, though in certain shots (mostly wide or medium shots), you can definitely tell it's digital. The characterization is also excellent. Sure, there are some clichés, but every character feels like a real person with a soul... flesh and blood people... everyone has their own weight to carry.

The content of the show, much like ''The Wire'', is uncompromising and hits you right in the gut. It's the kind of thing that wouldn't fly in Hollywood today—it just wouldn't be considered. Like ''The Wire'', the series portrays corruption and depravity at the highest levels, skillfully mapping out the web of graft connecting politicians, businessmen, and criminals. The script does tend to get a little bogged down in that classic American way (you know, the last-minute rescue trope), but overall, it's very well written.

It seems like that new "New Hollywood" generation we were all calling for has landed exactly where we least expected it—on television, which has become the ultimate sanctuary for creative freedom.

Absolutely.

hiddenbear4 said:HBO has raised the bar incredibly high—I’d argue they’ve done it all the way up to the level of cinema itself. Take ''Boardwalk Empire'', which I’m currently working my way through.

Stylistically speaking, we're looking at pure cinematic direction here. TV shows used to feel so formulaic, sterile, and frankly monotonous, but this is a whole different beast. For instance, the way they use parallel editing—it pops up several times; you'll see Nucky Thompson holding a press conference to calm the public and announce an end to the violence, while simultaneously cutting to scenes of the D'Alessio brothers being taken out on his orders. Do I even need to mention how much that mirrors the approach in ''The Godfather''? Then there are the camera angles, the framing, the movement... I mean, just think back to that 70-minute pilot directed by Martin Scorsese. What a hurricane of an opening! If they hadn't kept the series going, that single episode would have stood alone as a masterpiece.

The cinematic inspiration is obvious, too, through symbolic nods and mentions of films from that era. In the first season, Margaret Schroeder goes to the movies to watch Chaplin's Kid with the kids; in season 3, Gina Lollobrigida describes ''Nosferatu'' to her boss Rosetti; someone brings up the comedies of Buster Keaton; Mickey Doyle talks about the ''Baghdad Thief'' in season 4; and by season 5, which is set in 1931, we've already had mentions of Lewis Milestone's ''Front Page'', along with gangster classics like ''Public Enemy'' and ''Little Caesar''. I have to say, I was actually hoping for those little touches before I started watching, and it’s been such a treat when they show up. You saw similar stuff in ''The Sopranos''.

The acting is top-tier as well, and I don't think I even need to bring up the perfectionism in the production design and costuming. In some scenes where the dialogue felt a bit slow to me, I didn't actually mind because I found myself just soaking in the interiors... studying the furniture... or checking out the clothing and hairstyles. The CGI used for the Atlantic City sets doesn't bother me, though in certain shots (mostly wide or medium shots), you can definitely tell it's digital. The characterization is also excellent. Sure, there are some clichés, but every character feels like a real person with a soul... flesh and blood people... everyone has their own weight to carry.

The content of the show, much like ''The Wire'', is uncompromising and hits you right in the gut. It's the kind of thing that wouldn't fly in Hollywood today—it just wouldn't be considered. Like ''The Wire'', the series portrays corruption and depravity at the highest levels, skillfully mapping out the web of graft connecting politicians, businessmen, and criminals. The script does tend to get a little bogged down in that classic American way (you know, the last-minute rescue trope), but overall, it's very well written.

It seems like that new "New Hollywood" generation we were all calling for has landed exactly where we least expected it—on television, which has become the ultimate sanctuary for creative freedom.

I have to correct you because that isn't accurate. You still have formulaic shows today, just like you did back then. But just as we have brilliantly directed shows like Boardwalk today, we had them before too. I'll point to the Twilight Zone again; we're talking about the 50s, yet most of the series takes place in the 60s.

If you watch the episode The Eye of the Beholder, you'll see camera angles you won't find in any modern series, not even in Boardwalk. The Eye of the Beholder is a classic, one of the best episodes.

Watch The X-Files, specifically the episodes Jose Chung's enough and triangle. The first is directed in a Rashomon style, while the second is shot like Hitchcockian Rop. Or take the episode Bad Blood; again, that Rashomon style.

Speaking of Hitchcock, he has an excellent series, Alfred Hitchcock Presents. You'll find top-tier direction in every single episode. And that series is over half a century old.

Do you remember the series homicide: Life on the Street? It's right up there with The Sopranos, featuring excellent direction without any of the usual formulas. So, there were brilliantly directed shows before, but we're mostly talking about the absolute best ones. Just like Boardwalk.

hiddenbear4 said:If you're watching HBO's shows, you're basically just watching a movie that lasts several thousand minutes.

Look, HBO's shows are in a league of their own when it comes to quality, but let's be honest—they can get pretty tedious, just like most other series out there.
Take The Sopranos, for instance. I absolutely love mob movies and books; if it involves that kind of subject matter, I'm reading it or watching it. So, while The Sopranos is top-tier television for me, there were definitely moments where it felt a bit slow.

Sent from my ST27i with Tapatalk 2

Look, I’m not trying to be dismissive or anything—I don't want to sound like I'm just throwing things around—but whenever I see an HBO logo attached to a series, I’m pretty much certain it’s going to be high quality.

To give you some context, some of my absolute all-time favorites are HBO productions: think *Rome*, *The Sopranos*, and even *Game of Thrones*, among others...

I’m not sure if I’m overgeneralizing here, but honestly, the moment I spot that HBO branding, I immediately go check out whatever show they're putting out—and in about 99% of cases, boom, I’m hooked (especially if it falls into a genre I already enjoy).

Carl Hill53 said:Quote: shadow dancer

bluenomad2, I am asking you—one more time—to stop addressing the rest of us on this forum like you’re some kind of omniscient deity who’s seen it all and swallowed every ounce of wisdom on the planet. Seriously, just knock it off. If you keep acting like you have all the answers and talking down to everyone else, I might actually have to step in and look into some sanctions regarding your forum identity. Enough already.

Of course the series are being filmed—and will continue to be filmed—parallel to the movie. It’s just how the production works. Also, if I’m being honest, I highly doubt you’ve even seen one percent of what’s actually been shot, yet here you are, acting like some kind of ultimate authority and trying to lecture everyone else with your endless, misplaced expertise.

Let’s face it—we are living in an era where the sheer volume of television is exploding, but honestly? It feels like we’ve reached this weird breaking point where quantity is finally, desperately trying to catch up to quality. I mean, if you look at the trajectory from just a few years ago leading right up to today, there’s this massive shift happening. We’re seeing more shows than ever before, yet that transition from "just another series" to something truly substantive is becoming such a volatile balancing act. I guess you could say we're witnessing a massive influx of content, but whether that actually translates into better storytelling remains to be seen—it's a messy, complicated evolution, for sure.

Look, would you please just stop talking trash? Seriously. P.S.—Twin Peaks is nothing but pretentious garbage.

Quote: shadow dancer

Absolutely.

Go ahead and try. You clearly have an issue, yet I haven't insulted anyone—I'm just correcting facts. Tell me, what part of what I wrote is untrue? You constantly attack everyone for trying to explain things to you.

Carl Hill53 said:Quote: shadow dancer

bluenomad2, I am asking you—one more time—to stop addressing the rest of us on this forum like you’re some kind of omniscient deity who’s seen it all and swallowed every ounce of wisdom on the planet. Seriously, just knock it off. If you keep acting like you have all the answers and talking down to everyone else, I might actually have to step in and look into some sanctions regarding your forum identity. Enough already.

Of course the series are being filmed—and will continue to be filmed—parallel to the movie. It’s just how the production works. Also, if I’m being honest, I highly doubt you’ve even seen one percent of what’s actually been shot, yet here you are, acting like some kind of ultimate authority and trying to lecture everyone else with your endless, misplaced expertise.

Let’s face it—we are living in an era where the sheer volume of television is exploding, but honestly? It feels like we’ve reached this weird breaking point where quantity is finally, desperately trying to catch up to quality. I mean, if you look at the trajectory from just a few years ago leading right up to today, there’s this massive shift happening. We’re seeing more shows than ever before, yet that transition from "just another series" to something truly substantive is becoming such a volatile balancing act. I guess you could say we're witnessing a massive influx of content, but whether that actually translates into better storytelling remains to be seen—it's a messy, complicated evolution, for sure.

Look, would you please just stop talking trash? Seriously. P.S.—Twin Peaks is nothing but pretentious garbage.

Quote: shadow dancer

Absolutely.

Believe me, 👍

Carl Hill53 said:Quote: shadow dancer

bluenomad2, I am asking you—one more time—to stop addressing the rest of us on this forum like you’re some kind of omniscient deity who’s seen it all and swallowed every ounce of wisdom on the planet. Seriously, just knock it off. If you keep acting like you have all the answers and talking down to everyone else, I might actually have to step in and look into some sanctions regarding your forum identity. Enough already.

Of course the series are being filmed—and will continue to be filmed—parallel to the movie. It’s just how the production works. Also, if I’m being honest, I highly doubt you’ve even seen one percent of what’s actually been shot, yet here you are, acting like some kind of ultimate authority and trying to lecture everyone else with your endless, misplaced expertise.

Let’s face it—we are living in an era where the sheer volume of television is exploding, but honestly? It feels like we’ve reached this weird breaking point where quantity is finally, desperately trying to catch up to quality. I mean, if you look at the trajectory from just a few years ago leading right up to today, there’s this massive shift happening. We’re seeing more shows than ever before, yet that transition from "just another series" to something truly substantive is becoming such a volatile balancing act. I guess you could say we're witnessing a massive influx of content, but whether that actually translates into better storytelling remains to be seen—it's a messy, complicated evolution, for sure.

Look, would you please just stop talking trash? Seriously. P.S.—Twin Peaks is nothing but pretentious garbage.

Quote: shadow dancer

Absolutely.

Just as I believe you weren't watching TV series before the 2000s.

Carl Hill53 said:Quote: shadow dancer

bluenomad2, I am asking you—one more time—to stop addressing the rest of us on this forum like you’re some kind of omniscient deity who’s seen it all and swallowed every ounce of wisdom on the planet. Seriously, just knock it off. If you keep acting like you have all the answers and talking down to everyone else, I might actually have to step in and look into some sanctions regarding your forum identity. Enough already.

Of course the series are being filmed—and will continue to be filmed—parallel to the movie. It’s just how the production works. Also, if I’m being honest, I highly doubt you’ve even seen one percent of what’s actually been shot, yet here you are, acting like some kind of ultimate authority and trying to lecture everyone else with your endless, misplaced expertise.

Let’s face it—we are living in an era where the sheer volume of television is exploding, but honestly? It feels like we’ve reached this weird breaking point where quantity is finally, desperately trying to catch up to quality. I mean, if you look at the trajectory from just a few years ago leading right up to today, there’s this massive shift happening. We’re seeing more shows than ever before, yet that transition from "just another series" to something truly substantive is becoming such a volatile balancing act. I guess you could say we're witnessing a massive influx of content, but whether that actually translates into better storytelling remains to be seen—it's a messy, complicated evolution, for sure.

Look, would you please just stop talking trash? Seriously. P.S.—Twin Peaks is nothing but pretentious garbage.

Quote: shadow dancer

Absolutely.

Hehe 😍

@Carl Hill53, @bluenomad2, @hiddenbear4

I think you three are all somewhat right—you just happen to disagree on the specific points where that other half of the group isn't quite sharing the same perspective as one another 😁

bluenomad2 said:Go ahead and try. You clearly have an issue, yet I haven't insulted anyone—I'm just correcting facts. Tell me, what part of what I wrote is untrue? You constantly attack everyone for trying to explain things to you.

Believe me, 👍

Just as I believe you weren't watching TV series before the 2000s.

Hehe 😍

Yeah, I do have a problem. My problem is with the way you talk to people. Honestly, you're just irritating and exhausting.

Just like I believe you didn't watch any TV series before the turn of the millennium.

I'm not even sure I follow you.

No, the issue is that Carl Hill53 has me, ullou, and basically everyone else on his radar. 😍

Then he goes looking for answers. He doesn't even know what he wants. I actually asked him to point out exactly what I wrote that isn't true.

Have these golden ages existed before? Yes.

shadowangler50 wrote "Series have definitely taken over, and rightfully so, the lead from movies. That's why they call this the golden age of television."

By saying that, he implied that a "golden age" automatically means series are better than films. That's why I pointed out that golden ages have been happening for a long time. There have been several; you see them practically every decade. If his logic held up, it would mean series are superior at every single moment in history.

Carl Hill53 said:Yeah, I do have a problem. My problem is with the way you talk to people. Honestly, you're just irritating and exhausting.

Just like I believe you didn't watch any TV series before the turn of the millennium.

I'm not even sure I follow you.

Well, I find myself just as irritating and exhausting. 🙂

In what way?

If there's a problem, use the report button. I already reported myself to the moderator just to see if I offended anyone. I like being helpful.😍