• commentary
  • FRIDAY SEPTEMBER 14 2007 12:00 PM

Chris Gore's Footage Fetishes: Why TV is Better than the Movies

I’ve been a film fan my entire life. For me, the television was always a way for me to view my favorite films on home video. But lately I find myself hooked on a number of amazing television series that not only exceed my expectations, but provide a more satisfying experience than actually going to the movies. Over the last year or so, I’ve seen shows like Heroes and Entourage and Flight of the Conchords and Battlestar Galactica on HD in my makeshift home theater and the odds that I’ll have a good time are much better than taking a risk on the latest multiplex offerings. Sometimes the joy in seeing a bad movie is in picking apart that movie, but films of late have seemed so out of touch, so less-than-spectacular, so meh, that I’d rather just check my Tivo or rent a season of television on DVD, and settle into my couch to continue to make that reverse impression of my behind.

This is not just the Golden Age, we might as well rename this period marked by a plethora of quality television as the "Platinum Age of TV."

This shift in my media consumption has led me to the conclusion that currently the best television programs are much better than the best movies. There, I said it. And it’s a tough thing for me to admit being a lifelong movie guy. I know this will spark much debate, but I’d like to present my case with the following evidence.

The theatrical experience is miserable while home theaters are affordable.
Fact: Rude jackasses talking during movies was only the beginning, now more people are treating the movie theater like their living rooms. Cell phone use has virtually destroyed the enjoyment of experiencing a movie on the big screen. There are only a few movie theaters in Los Angeles that have no tolerance policies toward those bright lights that pop up as people mindlessly take calls or text during films. When one considers the cost of an evening at the movies (ticket prices, refreshments, parking, babysitter if needed), it makes the cost of a home theater system seem within reach. If the average movie night costs about $80, you need to stay home only nine times to save enough to buy a 37” widescreen HD TV for about $700.

The cell phone has practically killed the movie theater experience... while home theaters are more affordable than ever.

TV on DVD currently outsell hit movies on DVD.
Fact: Visiting the shelves of video stores, as a category, the television section has grown beyond one aisle. And you’ll find even the most obscure old series available in boxed sets with tons of extras. And you may even find yourself interested in checking out what’s on the special features for The Beverly Hillbillies Ultimate Collection Volume 1 & 2 which includes unedited episodes, commercial promos, rare behind-the-scenes, and the pilot that never aired. Or not, but that’s just an example of the lengths to which television is being repurposed on DVD. Video business trade publications support this, but one need only check Amazon.com to observe that of the top 10 selling DVDs, eight are television shows and the top four consist of Grey's Anatomy - The Complete Third Season, The Office - Season Three, Heroes - Season One, and Smallville - The Complete Sixth Season.

Which group of heroes would you prefer to watch? The movies' Fantastic Four or televisions' Heroes?

Movies have become formulaic while TV is original.
Fact: The summer movie season is known for its batch of both good and bad films, but all of them consist of either sequels, remakes, TV shows made into movies, comic books or generally films based on previously known properties and/or franchises. So, if it’s not going to be familiar with a wide audience, studios are reluctant to back films that are original. Conversely, television is now the place where originality thrives.

Televisions' Battlestar Galactica proves that science fiction can be intelligent. When was the last time a sci-fi movie was able to explore serious issues?

The movie audience is shrinking.
Fact: Television continues to thrive as consumers either watch TV, Tivo TV, download TV or buy TV on DVD. And while the Nielson ratings support that the pie continues to break down into smaller pieces, when one includes other ways in which viewers get their TV fix, the audience is growing. The reverse is true when it comes to movie-going. George Lucas visited the campus of USC last year for a ribbon-cutting ceremony in which he pointed out that the movie audience is indeed shrinking. While the studios make bold statements regarding bigger and bigger box-office numbers, when one adjusts for inflation, fewer people are going to the movies each year.

Televisions' Jack Bauer from 24 and Jason Bourne from the Bourne film series both deliver compelling action.

Movies are made by committee. While television remains a writers’ medium which leads to better storytelling.
Fact: Film scripts written by screenwriters who toiled for years are bought by studios who quickly fire the original writer and hire a new one to rewrite the script, and this process of rewrites continues with notes coming from all departments of the studio including marketing. And worse, a screenwriter who gets a film made every three years should be considered lucky, some wait as long as seven years or more to see their work on the big screen. Useful feedback from audiences in the form of box-office or reviews, which can contribute toward developing a talented screenwriter, comes too late in the process to be of any value. While television writers are also subjected to studio notes, the original writers are part of a writing staff that oversees the integrity of the script. The goal is that there be consistent storytelling, which is especially important for any episodic series. The writing process for television leads to a healthier development environment resulting in better programming all around. Simply, writers get respect on TV and that means the shows are better.

TV Producers are the new Hollywood movie success stories.
Fact: Because TV writer/producers exercise their writing muscles on a regular basis by producing hundreds of hours of content, they develop into much better writers. By getting constant feedback from regular viewing audiences in the form of ratings and inevitable forum rants, their quality creative output increases. The stories of successful television-to-film crossovers include writer/producers such as J.J. Abrams (Mission Impossible III) to Judd Apatow (40 Year-Old Virgin, Superbad, Knocked Up) to Joss Whedon (Serenity). In fact, they’ve become the most sought after by the studios to deliver the latest summer movie epics such as J.J. Abrams upcoming reinvention of Star Trek.

While most would agree that the movie-going experience has deteriorated, would you pay $10 to watch two hours of Lost?

There remains one big question: Would you pay money to see TV at the movie theater? As an experiment, I’d love to see a special episode of Heroes or Lost open in theaters while still showing on TV. Imagine this scenario: The season finale of Lost will screen unedited in a limited number of movie theaters across the country for one week before that episode actually airs on television. It would be a great way to connect with fellow fans in the audience. For me, knowing the fate of the Lost cast, if only for a week, would be worth the price of admission.

Would you pay to see TV at the movies? If you paid to see The Simpsons Movie, then the answer must be "yes."

Gore gone.

Chris_Gore will return after these messages. And you can watch more of this debate, ironically, on television.

 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3

Next

Comments
wereduck

wereduck

I'm lost
July 2007

SEP 15, 2007 04:54 AM

Cigarette said:

we3_pirate said:
On the other hand: I can't stand to watch television, save for a few shows, for one reason: commercials. Granted, movie theaters are playing the same awful crap, and worse, as 'pre-show entertainment', but at least when the show starts, there's no breaking away to Chuck Norris telling us about the Bo-Flex.

I believe the term here is "catch-22."



DVR. It'll change yr life.



Wow. I completely forgot about that. Thanks.

Mankarlen

Mankarlen

Columbia City, OR
June 2006

SEP 15, 2007 06:59 AM

personally I prefer movies at home on my 52 inch HD tv there the only ones you have to deal with are your kids which you can tell to shut up. unlike the theater. mad The movie experience has been ruined. Something to be said for the drive in movie theaters of old.

Cigarette

Cigarette

Cleveland, OH
April 2004

SEP 15, 2007 08:02 AM

I swear to Bob, a year ago the SG zeitgeist was saying "Movie-watching in a communal experience! Just like going to the record store!"

elysianfielder

elysianfielder

Los Angeles, CA
March 2003

SEP 15, 2007 09:34 AM

"Movies are made by committee. While television remains a writers' medium which leads to better storytelling."

That's a great point. A while back I was watching the commentary track on the Sopranos DVD. David Chase was making your same point, talking about how in the film world, the writer, with very few exceptions, is treated as a non-entity once his or her script is sold, and all the power lies with the director and producers. In TV the writer/series creator is in charge to a much larger degree. Chase also told this old joke about Hollywood movies:

Did you hear about the Polish actress? She fucked the writer.

xazapdmytinu

xazapdmytinu

Fort Collins, CO
July 2007

SEP 15, 2007 10:36 AM

I am one of those crazies who can be absorbed by watching a movie or tv show on my Ipod, look up an hour later and realize I'd been sucked into a screen smaller than the palm of my hand...sure, I'd love to see BSG's Upcoming "Razor" on the big screen, tha'd be sweet as hell, but the current direction of lost makes me wonder if I'm willing to waste space on the DVR for it. whatever

It's not just with TV either, you look at music you can see that many artists are moving more in the direction of creating tracks that are good rather than entire albums, which has been a recording industry standard for years, but for an entirely different reason. Record Companies were trying to sell albums with a few good songs, artists are trying to just sell a few good songs, so instead of 18 bucks for an album with one or two great tracks and three decent ones while the rest make you want to fling the CD against the wall in exasperation, you pay 99 cents or 79 cents a track or 15 bucks a month to download whatever you want and get just what you want.

malkav11

malkav11

Saint Paul, MN
July 2003

SEP 15, 2007 01:06 PM

Meh. I can see a movie for 5 bucks in the theater with an enormous screen, speakers that literally rattle my bones, and a very low percentage of idiots. It's called going to matinee shows.

And yes, of course seasons of TV shows are going to outsell movies on DVD - you're getting a lot more entertainment for your dollar on most of them. Not necessarily because the TV show is *better*, but because there's a lot more of it. I also find myself desirous of rewatching television much more often than movies because there's more to keep in my brain with TV shows (at least, the ones with ongoing plots). With a movie, I see it once or twice and I quite probably know it well enough I don't need to see it again for five or six years at a minimum. Kinda like how I'm a lot more likely to reread the first books in the big long epic series (or series at all, for that matter) than I am to reread completely standalone novels. It doesn't really have much to do with the overall quality, it's just that I need to refresh myself on critical plot points for later books in series.

I do agree that movies have been making a fairly weak showing lately, though. And HBO alone is responsible for a staggering amount of television that blows almost anything I'd previously seen on TV away. Pity the major networks have lost touch and are playing almost nothing but crap. I might actually turn on my TV for something other than videogames.

Roethke

Roethke

SUICIDEGIRL

California, USA

SEP 15, 2007 05:09 PM

Have you seen "Mad Men" on AMC? Every episode is gorgeous and like a small movie.

But seriously, $80 for two people to see a movie? Where the hell do you live?

sgwrit said:
I say this just because I love it whenever I get to cite this movie. You asked, "When was the last time a sci-fi movie was able to explore serious issues?"

Children of Men.

But would I have liked Children of Men even more if it had unfolded over thirteen one-hour episodes? I don't know. Maybe.



Dead on. But still, gems like those are few and far between.

I generally don't see a movie unless I know it's going to be great, and I read reviews in advance so sift through the pablum. And the nearest art house cinema is a city over, so going to see a movie only happens for me if the movie is worth the trek.

When I lived in SLC, I'd see at least a movie a week, but there were two art houses within walking distance of my house. I just don't want to go so a regular movie theatre, because there's never anything on the marquee that I would want to see.

MyLostUlalume

MyLostUlalume

San Diego, CA
April 2007

SEP 16, 2007 03:39 AM

I would definitely have to agree -- I think that movies have taken a turn for the worse, and that the price of going has become exorbitant. Personally, I think I prefer TV (even the broadcast, commercial-laden TV I get -- so there, TiVo snobs). Rarely anymore do I see a preview for a movie that cause me to think, "I have to go see that!" This is excluding, of course, the only recent movie which I got excited about and insisted on going to see in the theatre, which was Ratattouille, and that only because I am obsessed with rats and was happy to finally see them portrayed favorably on the big screen!

As to whether or not I would spend $10 to go to see the season finale of a TV show I loved in the theatre, I would say probably not. This is because I, for one, do not particularly care whether I see something "before everyone else," and generally only insist on seeing a movie in the theatre if (a) it is something I'm so excited about I have to see it immediately (see above comment on Ratattouille) or (b) I feel that the big-screen theatrical experience is essential for a particular film (like when they re-released Star Wars).

P.S. Am I the special lady friend to whom you refer, Chris?

SomethingStupid

SomethingStupid

North Hollywood, CA
March 2004

SEP 16, 2007 05:07 AM

MyLostUlalume said:
This is excluding, of course, the only recent movie which I got excited about and insisted on going to see in the theatre, which was Ratattouille, and that only because I am obsessed with rats and was happy to finally see them portrayed favorably on the big screen!


Plus that movie was fucking outstanding.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3

Next