So we can agree movies are better overall than shows and series right?
The only tv show that has ever been on the same level as real kino is twin peaks
Yes. Movies have higher quality production generally and because of their format, their aim is to be as good as they can whereas shows can have an occasional awful episode but still be consistently good.
>>72122922
Overall, yes. If we were comparing the last 15 years or so though film has been much, much worse.
>>72123034
this. tv isn't good now either though, especially the last 5 years.
Miniseries of 4-8 epidodes is the patrician format
In regards to technical quality, sure. You have a generally large budget used to create a small narrative.However, a television series may be better for adapting something like a book, or a series of books, because, being much longer, they allow for more in depth characterization and plotting.
>>72123034
>>72123057
will the golden era of HBO return?
then: The Sopranos, Band of Brothers, The Wire, Deadwood
now: Game of Plebs
>>72123107
HBO has been riding movies and their old shows too much, it's time they make some more quality series
>>72123107
Don't pretend you didn't think GoT wasn't almost as good as those series when it started. You also forgot Rome and Six Feet Under.
To answer your question though, no. I don't think we'll see a golden era like that again. At least not any time soon. HBO has really lost it.
>>72123146
one can always dream. i fear more adaptations catering to the normie audience tho
>>72122922
Yes
tv shows are (generally) made for ratings and are very artificial because of it. The emphasis is entirely on dragging out the story for as long as people will watch it so other areas of production generally falter (acting from anyone other than the lead, cinematography, soundtrack etc)
The pacing is also often all over the place as they have an episode to set up the entire series. So programs like person of interest and breaking bad have incredibly rushed opening episodes.
>here's a guy
>here's his life but what's happening in the background?
>it's the main plot and the lead is confronted by it
>5 minutes later
>the lead is now actively engaged in the main plot
There are few exceptions to this that I've ever seen. The obvious example is mini-series, they frequently have quality comparable to films as they're essentially just really long films divided into episodes.
The other exception is rectify - which is basically a mini-series that's lasted 3 series so far
Despite this, I still tv shows are betting for adapting books and comics
>>72123034
>>72123057
>I only watch hollywood
>>72123107
Then with Rome and Six Feet Under.
>>72123206
Even if GoT were still as good as it was in S1, it would still be one show among a bunch of Literally Whats and cancelled shit.
It alone does not constitute a golden age, especially when it degenerated so poorly
>>72123107
The Wire is pure shit
>>72123278
I guess you could say it's the your opinion of tv shows.
>>72123264
Not denying that, I even said earlier HBO has lost it. For me it makes it all the mysterious that their development hasn't picked up the slack. Yes, GoT is the biggest hit they've ever had but what other reason is there to get an HBO subscription and what reason is there to not immediately cancel it once GoT finishes?
I do want to watch Night Of but even if it is good it's still a long way from where the output they used to have.
>>72122938
That's not Seinfeld or The Sopranos.
>>72123034
Agree. Even though TV has been sucking too.
