Maybe movies should stop using the same crap-ass digital photography that flattens every image and makes your show/movie look just like the last show/movie.
I want images, not just people sitting in a room talking.
Really interesting read. I agree very much with your points about the different merits of tv vs cinema as a medium. I also think Tarantino/Joel Cohen are viewing television through a very US-centric lens in their critique. Most prestige British drama series are 6 episodes max and I would say the best do/have very successfully managed to combine the cinematic with the episodic…
Great read! I think viewers instinctively know when a series is being stretched to fit the structure rather than serve the needs of the characters or their struggles. What do you make of mini-series that were made before the current-day demands of streaming? Band of Brothers, for instance?
Thanks Krishna! It’s been a LONG time since I watched Band of Brothers - but back in the day I loved it! From memory, it had a strong episodic structure?
Great points. What TV can REALLY do well, when executed just right, is give the audience incredibly well-defined, authentic characters. When I think of Breaking Bad I think about how I loved Walter White in some episodes and hated him in others. Same with a lot of the other characters. They all felt like real human beings
Thank you so much for highlighting Bresson's book. Having read about it in your previous piece, I'm obsessed with his idea about how (to paraphrase your paraphrase) great art maximises the opportunities of its particular medium. I've been floundering around that notion for a while and I'm glad to have his articulation of it, which is so much better than anything I'd managed to spit out. As ever, another great essay from you.
Ah thanks so much, that’s really kind! I’m the same. It’s such a simple idea but it has really impacted how I think about art. If you haven’t already, I would strongly recommend reading the whole book - it’s full of provocative little aphorisms like that one.
You make some great points. There's a reason why film sequels are rarely as good as the first. I enjoy a number of miniseries but most television shows lose me after a second season. Then again, that could be saying more about my attention span and commitment issues than the screenwriting.
Also, film buffs revel in throwback screenings at cinemas and restorations on physical media, whereas TV shows just get binged on loop in the home (or worse, on the mobile phone). That makes the viewing experience of films more memorable than shows, in my opinion. But man, I do love The Simpsons.
Thanks for the shoutout. Great points and examples here. I would add that the best limited series — Watchmen, Ripley, etc. — *also* embrace episodic storytelling. The episode is the basic unit of television, and shows like Disclaimer that don't understand that run into serious problems.
I dunno, I think the reason guys like Quentin don't remember much about TV is because it's a medium that prioritizes content over form. How pictures cut to sound and music make you feel is what you remember first, in either case.
Interesting read! I agree with your analysis that tv's episodic nature is an essential part of its storytelling, that the messy middle is a feature, not a bug. I disagree with you on limited series, though! Sure, a poorly executed miniseries might feel like an overly-long movie. But limited series is a format all its own, with unique strengths. They're particularly well-suited to adapting books, allowing time for worldbuilding and detail. They have the satisfaction of self-contained story that films have, and the space for long character arcs that television has. We've seen some incredible limited series in recent years: Chernobyl, Baby Reindeer, I May Destroy You, to name a few. Much how you argue that tv's charm is distinct from film, I'd argue limited series' charm is distinct from both!
The best thing to happen to TV is the limited series, the best thing to happen to movies was the invention of the epics. Go figure, we all think the grass is greener, even with the entertainment we consume.
These are great points! Nowadays I notice movies - and TV series to some extent - end their stories abruptly to make us wait in anticipation for the sequel or next season. I think it jeopardises its own contained story. Examples I can think of are 'Squid Game 2' and 'Across the Spiderverse' (hold your pitchforks I think it's an amazing movie but I prefer the first, as I feel Miles' character arc is incomplete in the sequel and is set up for completion in the next instalment). I kinda miss the days when movies could just be their own thing, and not designed to become an ongoing franchise.
Maybe movies should stop using the same crap-ass digital photography that flattens every image and makes your show/movie look just like the last show/movie.
I want images, not just people sitting in a room talking.
Fromtheyardtothearthouse.substack.com
Haha, yeah, the 'Netflix Sheen' is real...
Seconded! My favorite TV shows wouldn't work as films, and vice versa.
It's not a competition -- I love both, just like I enjoy both parmesan and hot sauce ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Together? You monster!
Works great in a spaghetti or lasagna! 🍝
Really interesting read. I agree very much with your points about the different merits of tv vs cinema as a medium. I also think Tarantino/Joel Cohen are viewing television through a very US-centric lens in their critique. Most prestige British drama series are 6 episodes max and I would say the best do/have very successfully managed to combine the cinematic with the episodic…
Thanks, Vicki! And yes, great point re British TV
Ouuuft. Contentization is a heavy one. Loved this one, Ed!
Thanks so much Sophie!
Great read! I think viewers instinctively know when a series is being stretched to fit the structure rather than serve the needs of the characters or their struggles. What do you make of mini-series that were made before the current-day demands of streaming? Band of Brothers, for instance?
Thanks Krishna! It’s been a LONG time since I watched Band of Brothers - but back in the day I loved it! From memory, it had a strong episodic structure?
Great points. What TV can REALLY do well, when executed just right, is give the audience incredibly well-defined, authentic characters. When I think of Breaking Bad I think about how I loved Walter White in some episodes and hated him in others. Same with a lot of the other characters. They all felt like real human beings
Thank you! And yes, agreed! Better Call Saul also did this so well. Jimmy and Kim were both so richly drawn.
Thank you so much for highlighting Bresson's book. Having read about it in your previous piece, I'm obsessed with his idea about how (to paraphrase your paraphrase) great art maximises the opportunities of its particular medium. I've been floundering around that notion for a while and I'm glad to have his articulation of it, which is so much better than anything I'd managed to spit out. As ever, another great essay from you.
Ah thanks so much, that’s really kind! I’m the same. It’s such a simple idea but it has really impacted how I think about art. If you haven’t already, I would strongly recommend reading the whole book - it’s full of provocative little aphorisms like that one.
I'll be heading to the bookshop this weekend to find/order a copy. Thanks again!
I love that an aborted series became Mulholland Drive, while Twin Peaks The Return was named film of the decade.
Yes! I've been thinking a lot about the Mulholland Drive example over the last few weeks.
Another stellar post from Ed! Sharp, clear and deeply insightful.
You make some great points. There's a reason why film sequels are rarely as good as the first. I enjoy a number of miniseries but most television shows lose me after a second season. Then again, that could be saying more about my attention span and commitment issues than the screenwriting.
Also, film buffs revel in throwback screenings at cinemas and restorations on physical media, whereas TV shows just get binged on loop in the home (or worse, on the mobile phone). That makes the viewing experience of films more memorable than shows, in my opinion. But man, I do love The Simpsons.
Thanks Dylan!
Re your second point, yep. I’m increasingly beginning to think that unless you’ve seen a film at the cinema, you’ve never really seen it…
Thanks for the shoutout. Great points and examples here. I would add that the best limited series — Watchmen, Ripley, etc. — *also* embrace episodic storytelling. The episode is the basic unit of television, and shows like Disclaimer that don't understand that run into serious problems.
I dunno, I think the reason guys like Quentin don't remember much about TV is because it's a medium that prioritizes content over form. How pictures cut to sound and music make you feel is what you remember first, in either case.
Interesting read! I agree with your analysis that tv's episodic nature is an essential part of its storytelling, that the messy middle is a feature, not a bug. I disagree with you on limited series, though! Sure, a poorly executed miniseries might feel like an overly-long movie. But limited series is a format all its own, with unique strengths. They're particularly well-suited to adapting books, allowing time for worldbuilding and detail. They have the satisfaction of self-contained story that films have, and the space for long character arcs that television has. We've seen some incredible limited series in recent years: Chernobyl, Baby Reindeer, I May Destroy You, to name a few. Much how you argue that tv's charm is distinct from film, I'd argue limited series' charm is distinct from both!
https://playnextepisode.substack.com/p/in-defense-of-limited-series
The best thing to happen to TV is the limited series, the best thing to happen to movies was the invention of the epics. Go figure, we all think the grass is greener, even with the entertainment we consume.
Great read, btw.
These are great points! Nowadays I notice movies - and TV series to some extent - end their stories abruptly to make us wait in anticipation for the sequel or next season. I think it jeopardises its own contained story. Examples I can think of are 'Squid Game 2' and 'Across the Spiderverse' (hold your pitchforks I think it's an amazing movie but I prefer the first, as I feel Miles' character arc is incomplete in the sequel and is set up for completion in the next instalment). I kinda miss the days when movies could just be their own thing, and not designed to become an ongoing franchise.
Thanks so much! Glad you enjoyed it.