Why is everyone into series more than movies these days?

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.

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.

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.

Someone else already mentioned it on the first page of this thread, I think, because I actually went to Google it just now to see if it was worth my time. Now that you've brought it up, I think I will give it a watch. 👍

For the record, I am female, and when I wrote "ME," I was referring to a fellow forum member. As for YOUR movies, I meant recent films released within the last few years that you personally enjoyed.

Here is a solid list from IMDb for anyone looking for a great new series: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls050327477/

Post a link to some good or great recent movies, or at least list them. 😉

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?🤦

TV shows today offer everything a movie does—plus they have that massive edge where they actually capture real life, character psychology, and how people interact way more authentically since you get to live with them over a much longer stretch.

Think of series as the modern novels, while movies are more like short stories.

Carl Hill53 said: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.

I watched that series a few years back, and it’s a fantastic adaptation of the book. The movie? Nothing special.
Just look at the latest Anna Karenina film; it's a prime example of how catastrophically they handle these stories nowadays.

Kenneth Johnson12 said:Someone else already mentioned it on the first page of this thread, I think, because I actually went to Google it just now to see if it was worth my time. Now that you've brought it up, I think I will give it a watch. 👍

For the record, I am female, and when I wrote "ME," I was referring to a fellow forum member. As for YOUR movies, I meant recent films released within the last few years that you personally enjoyed.

Here is a solid list from IMDb for anyone looking for a great new series: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls050327477/

Post a link to some good or great recent movies, or at least list them. 😉

Rectify, check it out. Two seasons are out and it's great—you'll love it.

Gotta go scrape together a list once I find my notepad.

Kyle Vaughn8 said:TV shows today offer everything a movie does—plus they have that massive edge where they actually capture real life, character psychology, and how people interact way more authentically since you get to live with them over a much longer stretch.

Think of series as the modern novels, while movies are more like short stories.

Not everyone wants dry realism...

shadowangler50 said:I watched that series a few years back, and it’s a fantastic adaptation of the book. The movie? Nothing special.
Just look at the latest Anna Karenina film; it's a prime example of how catastrophically they handle these stories nowadays.

Would a series based on a Tolstoy novel even be worth remembering?

James Garcia50 said:I don't care about comparisons like that.
Checking box office numbers before a movie doesn't change my mind if the lead actor is a jerk. And I don't read reviews either.
My take on movies and shows is mine alone, based strictly on what I watch.

It’s the exact same story with TV series—pandering to kids and the lowest common denominator of an uneducated mass.

Anyone can claim their opinion is unique, but that doesn't make it right. What's the point of this discussion if everyone just sticks to their own subjective views? Without a standard, how would we ever distinguish a great film from a mediocre one?

Name a few modern movies you think outshine today's series and see how many people actually agree with you.
But name some classics—films that actually shaped cinema, things most people have seen and that left a lasting legacy. Series and movies that only a handful of people ever watch don't leave any mark on the industry or the culture.

James Garcia50 said:Rectify, check it out. Two seasons are out and it's great—you'll love it.

Gotta go scrape together a list once I find my notepad.

Not everyone wants dry realism...

Would a series based on a Tolstoy novel even be worth remembering?

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.

shadowangler50 said:Anyone can claim their opinion is unique, but that doesn't make it right. What's the point of this discussion if everyone just sticks to their own subjective views? Without a standard, how would we ever distinguish a great film from a mediocre one?

Name a few modern movies you think outshine today's series and see how many people actually agree with you.
But name some classics—films that actually shaped cinema, things most people have seen and that left a lasting legacy. Series and movies that only a handful of people ever watch don't leave any mark on the industry or the culture.

You're wrong, shadow.
The whole point of a debate is having a stance that's at least somewhat backed by logic.

That bolded part is total nonsense. You can't compare a movie to a series any more than you can compare a heart to a kidney. And honestly? I don't care if people agree with me; I'm not running for Congress, I'm just a film buff.

With the internet, almost everything is available to us now. We all have the chance to watch them; it's just a matter of choice. Popularity isn't quality—I mean, plenty of people saw Titanic, but that doesn't automatically make it a masterpiece.

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.

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.

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).

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?

James Garcia50 said:Rectify, check it out. Two seasons are out and it's great—you'll love it.

Gotta go scrape together a list once I find my notepad.

Not everyone wants dry realism...

Would a series based on a Tolstoy novel even be worth remembering?

Realism and being "realistic" aren't even the same thing—I wasn't talking about the style, just whether the characters actually feel like real people.
Do you even read what anyone else writes, or are you just stuck in your own head? 🤷

Carl Hill53 said:Why are you even trolling?

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

Kyle Vaughn8 said:Realism and being "realistic" aren't even the same thing—I wasn't talking about the style, just whether the characters actually feel like real people.
Do you even read what anyone else writes, or are you just stuck in your own head? 🤷

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.

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.

Carl Hill53 said: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.

The Congressional majority, sure.

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...

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 wrong, shadow.
The whole point of a debate is having a stance that's at least somewhat backed by logic.

That bolded part is total nonsense. You can't compare a movie to a series any more than you can compare a heart to a kidney. And honestly? I don't care if people agree with me; I'm not running for Congress, I'm just a film buff.

With the internet, almost everything is available to us now. We all have the chance to watch them; it's just a matter of choice. Popularity isn't quality—I mean, plenty of people saw Titanic, but that doesn't automatically make it a masterpiece.

We are discussing why series are more watched or, more accurately, more accepted than movies today. Individually, you can't compare a single series to a single film, but generally speaking, one can conclude which medium provides higher quality content.
You talk about argumentation, yet you haven't provided a single actual argument other than your general opinion that series aren't better than movies right now. Some users have cited specific series, but you haven't cited a single film.
An individual's opinion might be irrelevant, but the consensus of a large group of people forms a perspective that actually carries weight regarding the subject at hand. If a huge number of people share an opinion, that opinion holds significance. Otherwise, I could just call The Godfather a bad movie and justify it by saying I personally hated it. Suddenly, I’d be right and everyone else would be wrong.
The problem with movies is that we haven't seen a true masterpiece shake up cinema in over a decade. There have been good films, sure, but nothing legendary. In contrast, we've seen an unprecedented surge in top-tier series.
If everything is available to us, we choose what to watch, and logically, you pick what is better. It's possible for something to be overrated and not deserve its popularity, but that mostly applies to movies because people watch them regardless of whether they like them since they are short. With series, people keep watching only if they actually enjoy them. If a massive audience watches the same series for five years straight—especially given today's endless supply of options—then that series is undeniably high quality.

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).

Anna Karenina isn't exactly tailor-made for the screen, but lately, any modern adaptation of a classic seems worse than the originals. Just compare this latest version of Romeo and Julia to the one starring Leonardo.
Mini-series are clearly the only way to go for stories like this. You can't cram a 500-page novel into a two-hour movie; those films need to be at least four hours long to actually matter.
When I think about what they did to The Last Legion, it makes my stomach turn. They took a 450-page book with massive potential and crushed it into a mindless 90-minute mess. It's pure robbery.