tv_talk | How Much Will TV Shows Matter?

Entry tags:

How Much Will TV Shows Matter?

There was a recent article in the Hollywood Reporter about how movies are the lifeblood of streaming services. Though I find this disappointing, I don't find it surprising. Movies are (often) a one-shot sort of story, quick to get through, and usually getting a lot of expensive publicity before their release date, thus raising awareness in a big part of the potential viewing public. And people rewatch a good bit because, again, it's short and doesn't require a big commitment.

The other two reasons are, I think, more recent in nature. One is that movie attendance has been declining for some time, but I never thought this was because people were less interested in them. It's just that it's expensive and inconvenient to go see them away from home. I mean, HBO was created in 1972 primarily as a home movie viewing option, as well as for some sports, which was also entertainment you had to go out for. And people were so interested in being able to watch movies (I won't even say "recent' because the theatrical run used to be pretty long), not even on demand, but on a convenient schedule, that HBO was a viable business for decades even as video rental became common. I'd add that it was common that, whether or not a hotel had cable, HBO was almost expected to be available as well.

But these numbers seem to indicate something besides the eternal popularity of movies and increasing desire to skip the theater and see them at home:

"In 2022, movies represented roughly 27 percent of total streaming revenues — By 2024, that share had climbed to nearly 50 percent."

What's more, movies are worth more after they're out of the theaters than when they're in them, with 2/3 of revenue coming later.

I think it has a lot to do with (a) viewer attention spans, and (b) the uncertainty of TV show runs. There's been plenty of research done on narrowing attention spans in the population, which has also affected books (though as reading ability and interest been declining for nearly 50 years, this is less surprising). But I think that the possibility of a show being cancelled after 1 season (in itself only 6-10 episodes) or just not coming back for a year or more, has a lot to do with people's disinterest in investing time in TV shows.

I find this unfortunate because, however well done a movie, stories and characters will never get the development they could if we spent more time with them. In some ways, I consider movies to be a fleshed out concept whereas TV is a saga.

Mind you, this has a lot to do with how much effort is put into making a TV show a well written and produced one. The very fact that TV shows are open ended often makes them worse, because the pacing is bad or storylines are dragged out to produce more content at a later date. It also depends on what's seen as the market for a show. One that relies mostly on plotting or thrills can be pretty disposable as an overall story because we either literally lose characters who are swapped out like game pieces, or else we just don't get any development for them no matter how long they're around.

As a result I think that what used to be considered a mini-series (and is now called a Limited series) is often the best for storytelling. There is a finite story to be told (which could possibly be expanded on in a sequel, but is self-contained) but there are many hours to do it in. I recently watched Full Circle, a TV show by Steven Soderbergh, that was just such a series. It had a LOT of moving pieces, it would have been impossible as a movie. And it could have been stretched out to a 2 season show (or just a full broadcast season) with us getting more time with all the characters and some more flashbacks into things told but not shown. (For example, the son Jared was just a prop for the story that we never got to know in any way).

But it's the sort of show I think should be made more often -- something viewers can watch in a predictable fashion, that tells the sort of story they can't get in movies, and that provides a story that can take place over a longer span of time. Especially with book reading on the decline, I think that adaptations are (usually) best suited to TV series, and in a way that can have a determined ending and steady movement towards it. And that's something that will help both books and shows.

On the flip side of things, I've found it interesting how Marvel has recently been doing the opposite -- taking stories that could have been movies and breaking them down into short TV episodes. The recent Eyes of Wakanda makes more sense, because it's more of a stealth anthology series. But What If...? began as something similar yet developed into a story with a more cohesive throughline. And now Marvel Zombies is a spinoff of a S1 episode of What If...? and along with that episode could have been released as its own film.

The fact that it wasn't no doubt had to do with a combination of budget, potential confusion of Marvel theatrical releases, and the limited audience for animation in many markets. (Personally I find Zombies to be anything but kid fare, but this prejudice persists in the U.S.) But there is definitely a move towards more bite-size entertainment and I am not sure this is for the better in terms of the stories we'll get.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

> It's just that it's expensive and inconvenient to go see them away from home.

Where I am, for two people, its AU$6 to rent a new movie online vs AU$46 to see a new movie in a cinema. And thats before you even factor in transport costs, snacks, and travel time (up to 2hrs each way). With the travel time, one movie at the cinema becomes an all day event. So of course, we stay home and stream something.

> But these numbers seem to indicate something besides the eternal popularity of movies and increasing desire to skip the theater and see them at home:
> "In 2022, movies represented roughly 27 percent of total streaming revenues — By 2024, that share had climbed to nearly 50 percent."

that could also be the Covid effect. Lots of people stopped going to the movies during and after Covid, which officially ended (WHO declared) in early 2023. I can't speak for everyone of course, but I know being in a large room full of people is something some people still want to avoid. I still see people wearing masks occasionally, so I don't think we as a society are entirely past the effects of Covid yet.

I'm definitely among them, though really it has more to do with costs and inconvenience. Before I got into the MCU I rarely went to the movies. After that I went regularly. Then since Covid I've only been once. And I just wasn't interested in going back, particularly since we don't have any theaters nearby with anything other than IMAX screens as an incentive.

I do mask anytime I'm indoors somewhere so that also adds to the inconvenience of theaters. As it happens, I've just been to the first event I've gone to post-2020 and while I didn't mind masking, it was because the whole point of it was to be at a live performance. In watching a movie, all I thought about was how much nicer it would be to watch at home. Frankly, I'd like to watch a lot of theater from home too.

However I don't think this accounts for the increase in movie viewing. If anything, there should have been much higher movie viewing in 2022. A whole bunch of movies delayed by the pandemic were being released and it was the first year a lot of people discontinued precautions. Instead the viewing percentage has almost doubled since.

The economic pinch is part of it, but if people are already paying for streaming, TV show viewing provides many more hours of available entertainment (and in a great variety for all ages) than movies do. So why are people watching less when there's so much to see?

Can I ask what it is about the MCU? Is it because they're all connected? I also feel like I went to the movies more because of MCU films.

So why are people watching less when there's so much to see?
I will say that sometimes the sheer amount of available things is overwhelming. In the past, I'd just tune in to the CW during prime time and see what's available, but now there's no way to filter TV like that - except by actor, I suppose.

My personal opinion is that the MCU became so successful in part is because it's TV made into films 😏 The very seriality and interconnectedness came from comics, of course, but there are far fewer readers of comics than there are TV viewers. From the start we got both direct sequels (Iron Man 2, IM 3) as well as connected stories (Avengers, Winter Soldier, etc.). So the whole thing is a big tapestry. You don't have to have seen all the parts or even most of them to get a single film, but it does make a difference.

In fact, the biggest turnoff I've seen in complaints about the MCU is that there's become too much to keep up with and people don't want to feel like they have to see all the parts. And I've heard some of the same in terms of the increasing seriality of TV shows.

As you mention, there's also the idea of too much choice in TV programming. I personally prefer more to less but equally there are many people who prefer the reverse. I think that's especially true depending on the habits one brought to the streaming era. I always watched specific things and tended to watch them all the way through. But I think that viewers like me are a very small part of the overall viewing public.

Yeah, the interconnectedness really does work in their favor a lot of the time. Even though I'm struggling to keep up at this point. The theory that it's TV in film format really holds water - it's interesting to see other franchises try to follow in their footsteps b/c of their success with that.

It's too much IMO, unnecessarily so. I read that James Gunn felt that trying to keep to a set schedule was hurting the productions and that he would only release movies for DC when they were ready, not when the studio wanted them to go out. A smarter decision!

At least for Star Wars they stopped movie production entirely for a while. They could have delayed a number of their TV productions until they had better scripts though.

but I know being in a large room full of people is something some people still want to avoid. I still see people wearing masks occasionally, so I don't think we as a society are entirely past the effects of Covid yet.

Yep, I'm one of these people and I never go anywhere without a mask, even when most around me are unmasked I always wear one.

I used to go see movies in the theaters all the time before COVID, although that lessened even before 2020 since theaters became a bit more expensive. Now, I cannot fathom going into a movie theater due to the enclosed space, let alone it being crowded with many people. Also, while this is more of a case-by-case situation, there have been anecdotes and reports on the lack of proper movie theater etiquette, which always existed let's be honest but since COVID has increased. With that, plus the increased prices and the fact that movies in theaters are often quickly released digitally, the desire of attending the theater is nowhere near as it once was before.

I do miss the movie theater experience, but I miss it in a way that it was before the current economic struggles.

I haven't missed seeing movies in the theater but I do miss a number of things from a decade or more ago re: entertainment. The shorter movie window is definitely an improvement though.

I have a reason for not going to movies that hasn't been mentioned. From what I've seen and heard from others, it's almost impossible now to walk into a theater, pay for a ticket, and grab whatever vacant seat you want. You have to reserve a specific seat. Even though I'd like to go once in a while, I'll give it a pass if I can't choose my seat after I walk in, and have the option of moving to another if need be.

I've never gotten into a fandom for a movie. Of 410 fics I've written, 3 of them are for movies. I think that's pretty telling, although being older, I haven't suffered as much from modern social media training attention spans to be short, unlike young people who've never known the world when it was slower.

Our local cineplex ripped out all the auditorium seating and put in recliner seating, which I find extremely uncomfortable. I always come out of a movie with a headache or backache. In addition to the annoyance of not being able to pick a seat after I get there.

Our nearby theaters both went through a remodel just before Covid, which must have been a really hard hit given the debt being carried and almost no business for a year. I'm surprised they both are still around.

Your comment about the seating reminded me of driving by and seeing hundreds of seat rows in the parking lot.

That stinks. I guess the fancy chairs, reserved seating, and dinner options are them trying to entice people in, but for me, they work the opposite and keep me away!

I didn't much like reserved seating for rock concerts either (back when I used to go to them). I always preferred general admission, where I could pick whatever empty chair I wanted.

Yes, I'm not fond of reserved seating either. Of course, I dealt with it very little as I've not been to the movies in the last 3 years, and even though it was an option before I could bypass that by buying a seat as a walk-in.

As it happens, I remember once getting a reserved seat because I had bought the ticket online (in which case you had to reserve it) and when I got to the theater found that my seat was visibly broken! Fortunately the people around me were helpful in all shifting down a seat.

Generally though, while I could see it being helpful for a packed opening or something, 95% of the time I went there weren't more than a dozen people in the audience so a reserved seat was pretty pointless.

Yeah, I've never tried it but I suppose that once I got there and after the movie started, if the place was pretty empty I could move wherever I wanted. I mean, do they ever actually sell out? I can't imagine it, but then I usually went to early matinees (because the tickets were cheaper).

I almost always went to matinees as well, for various reasons. One of the few times it was near if not at capacity was when Marvel's Infinity Wars and Endgame came out. There may have possibly been something else, but those were the only 2 I remember. And even then when I went to see Endgame again a week later there were just 6 people in the matinee show.

On one hand, I do like the convenience of reserved seating and some of the recliner seats they installed in our movie theaters are quite comfortable. I understand the tactic of wanting to attract more people to attend the theaters by making it more about the comfort and convenience. On the other hand, however, part of the movie theater going experience has been about picking and choosing your own seats. The recliners are fine, from the few times I experienced them, but it does kind of change the atmosphere just a bit.

Movies are (often) a one-shot sort of story, quick to get through, and usually getting a lot of expensive publicity before their release date, thus raising awareness in a big part of the potential viewing public. And people rewatch a good bit because, again, it's short and doesn't require a big commitment.

See, for me, it's the opposite. I rarely watch movies because they're NOT short and it's a major time commitment. I even have trouble sometimes with BBC drama episodes that are the full 58-59 minutes long -- I need to be in a really specific place mentally and physically to be able to commit to a full hour of watching. It's that much more difficult for me to commit to something with a 2-hour plus runtime. I have a few films that I'd theoretically like to see -- I just can't find the headspace to be able to do that.

I rarely went to the cinema pre-COVID, and haven't been since. The only films I would go see at the cinema were things that sort of required a big screen -- mostly big sci-fi productions that just look better the bigger the screen they're shown on.

I think another issue re: "TV" viewing (or should we just start saying, non-film viewing?) is the ever growing number of streaming services. People can't afford (most people anyway) to subscribe to everything. It was one thing when it was mostly just Netflix, but now -- I don't want to subscribe to something just to see one single show that maybe sounds interesting, and few, if any streaming services have a ton of shows that will appeal to me. I also don't have the patience to do what a lot of people do and subscribe for free trial, then cancel and try something else, etc. And I've never really seen these free trials anyway -- maybe it's more of an American thing. That's why torrenting will never die (and is becoming more popular again) -- people ARE watching shows, it's just the numbers aren't counted because they're not through legit means.

"According to London‑based piracy monitoring and content‑protection firm MUSO, unlicensed streaming is the predominant source of TV and film piracy, accounting for 96% in 2023. Piracy reached a low in 2020, with 130bn website visits. But by 2024 that number had risen to 216bn. In Sweden, 25% of people surveyed reported pirating in 2024, a trend mostly driven by those aged 15 to 24. Piracy is back, just sailing under a different flag.

“Piracy is not a pricing issue,” Gabe Newell, the co-founder of Valve, the company behind the world’s largest PC gaming platform, Steam, observed in 2011. “It’s a service issue.” Today, the crisis in streaming makes this clearer than ever. With titles scattered, prices on the rise, and bitrates throttled depending on your browser, it is little wonder some viewers are raising the jolly roger again. Studios carve out fiefdoms, build walls and levy tolls for those who wish to visit. The result is artificial scarcity in a digital world that promised abundance."

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2025/aug/14/cant-pay-wont-pay-impoverished-streaming-services-are-driving-viewers-back-to-piracy

I can see that would be true about a single viewing, particularly compared to episodic shows. But I thought of it as a commitment to a serialized story, so 2 hours vs 8, etc. By comparison, films tend to be a "one and done", especially compared to multiseason shows.

That's interesting about piracy reaching a low in 2020, when you'd think it would be surging then. But perhaps that was a carryover from continued decline from 2019? Which suggests that some people picked up the TV watching habit during 2020 and 2021?

Yeah, I really think TV numbers are suffering because of the amount of streaming services that are available - I don't subscribe just to watch one show, even though it seems like something I'd really like (unless I'm already invested).

I think the service itself may also make a difference. For example, every streaming service I've used has rotating banners up top advertising newer shows. They also generally have a "recommended for you" row and sometimes "top 10 this week" or some other sort of popularity rating list.

I definitely see more TV shows than movies pushed at me. However I think the focus on newness and recent popularity probably hides the deep library they have of older works, which is mostly TV programming, and is more likely to favor recent movies just added to the service.

Also, I do a lot of surveys, and there's one that's been pushed on me multiple times that involves entertainment content. Among other things, it asks if I prefer original content or reboots, and also asks if I've ever watched stuff that's really bad just to mock it. It's not like I didn't realize people do this, but the fact that it's a question in this otherwise short survey seems significant. For people who like to hate watch or mock watch, I suspect older movies are more likely to get this treatment than older TV shows, exactly because of the commitment time. I don't know how many people want to watch 22 episodes of something just to mock it, but would they waste 2 hours on it? I think it's much more likely.

I've never been given a survey on my streaming platforms, so that's so interesting. I do think it's much more likely that people hate-watch a film vs. TV. I have done the former, usually with a group of friends when we want to see exactly how bad a movie was.

Oh the survey wasn't from the streamer (though goodness knows, it seems every business sends customers surveys these days). I was actually asked to do a survey by Britbox, so it's possible other services do it too!

There are survey companies you can sign up to and they'll match you with surveys for demographic reasons. Do enough of them and you can get cash, gift cards, etc.

Edited 2025-10-25 17:20 (UTC)

Oh, gotcha!

The fact that movies went up that much in the statistics was new to me, very interesting.

It makes senses to me that movies could be seen as pilots for tv shows, but that also means that only things that have been movies first can ever be made into a longer serial format.

I find that sad, because I love the serial format (but of course this comm here will preselect for this target audience :) ).

Haha, yes it probably does!

I don't know that movies are specifically seen as potential TV show content, however well before the "sequelitis" and spinoff era came into being this existed. There were TV shows based on books or movies, or particularly, other TV shows. (And we've also seen TV shows turned into movies etc.) So it's always a possibility. I think it's rather more likely that a successful movie will prompt bandwagon jumping projects (much like Star Wars begat Battlestar Galactica) both as TV shows and other movies.

Of course, another difference now is that there's such a concentration of studios which have gobbled up all sorts of IP sources, so there are literally people in charge of trying to cross develop shows from books or books from shows or movies to shows, etc.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

How Much Will TV Shows Matter?

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject