If I were to analyse what I watched over the past 12 months, it would probably breakdown into 80% TV and 20% movies. If the breakdown was 'hours-watched' the mo

If I were to analyse what I watched over the past 12 months, it would probably breakdown into 80% TV and 20% movies. If the breakdown was 'hours-watched' the movies percentage would be WAY lower. For me, the reason for this is simple: You can't tell a good story in 90-ish minutes. The best time frame for a screen story, is as the author of the piece said, the 8-10 hour/part mini-series. It's the TV equivalent of a mid sized book, and has enough room to breathe without the pace being too slow, or the content too shallow. Movies on the other hand, rush through their 'stories' via 3 main set pieces, and offer little new that viewer hasn't already seen many times before, all lit against an amber and teal backdrop. World cinema is better than the typical Hollywood junk, and there really are some good gems out there (which is why I've not abandoned movies all together), but are still restricted in their story telling due to running time.