Is the idea that tv is a step down from film still common?

[FFJamie94]

TV has been on a steady increase for the past 10 years, and I'll argue a lot of TV from the 90's helped pave the way for that.
For me, it starts and ends with Twin Peaks (and I'll forever talk about this show, so allow me to explain and justify it here).
It was basically the brain child of Lynch and Frost, Lynch who had made his name in Cinema and Frost who had a number of successful TV episodes under his belt. It was seen as the first time someone from Cinema took a "Step down" and worked on TV (Although I don't know how true this is, this might have been the first time it was successful). This started the trend of which I call "Cinematic TV", simply where TV itself took a form more notable to it's Cinematic counterpart, stories were larger and the cinematography was much more experimental in nature.
Shows like Star Trek were already doing this on the Sci-Fi end of things, and this helped pave the way for shows like Babylon 5 and Farescape, to eventually shows that are on Netflix and Amazon (I'll get back to this in a minute).

I think X-Files, while t takes a lot from the DNA of Twin Peaks, also took a lot from the Sci-Fi boom of the 90's, in many regards, it was at the start of it.
However, I think the true successor to Twin Peaks was HBO, in a more direct and confusing way, it was Oz that helped bring in a lot of the ideas that Twin Peaks started in terms of production and effectively pave the way for HBO to experiment with new ideas.

In many regards, British TV has also always been a big influence, taking shorter seasons and making them more compact. Eventually Utopia would be released, which feels in many ways as a bridge from Twin Peaks to Mr Robot, a show which effectively feels like one long movie.
Finally, we come back to Twin Peaks, at least with Season 3, which in on itself is one long movie. To me, with the conclusion of this show ended the first step for Cinematic TV, the bridge between both has finally been complete.

The second step, in my opinion, started with Wandavision, now we're getting Cinema level budgets on streaming services, something which is seen as being ridiculously expensive but never the less pays off.
I think it helps that these seasons are shorter, giving you the best of British TV where seasons would usually last around 6 episodes.
Even if the Disney Marvel shows aren't your thing, compare it to any of the CW shows and you can tell there's a lot of budget and work that was put into this show.

Going back to Twin Peaks for a minute, David Lynch has said there is more room for ideas and experimentation in TV than in movies. In movies you are confined to a 90 minute to 3 hour run time, and while the budgets are bigger, you don't get any time to really express your ideas. TV can last anywhere between 6-20 episodes and so you can have an episode which is just a nuclear explosion for ten minutes.

So I think TV has certainly become more respected now, it helps that we'e in the age of streaming services where shows can get away with a lot more violence and swearing.

We'll still have shows like NCIS, a show which is incredibly formulaic and very bland looking, and while I'm not a huge fan of the Colour grading in the Disney shows (in the MCU in general, be more colourful, you're comic book movies, not Saving Private Ryan), I can certainly appreciate that a show like Loki has a better hand at sets and costume and making things look big.

[CliffHanger2]

I dunno when I was lil tyke it seemed like there were a few TV stars that seemed like movie stars. Like Lee Majors or Don Johnson. Definitely don't see that now.

[Kieran_Frost]

I still occasionally see this sentiment being expressed and was wondering how often people here see this opinion, if they see it at all.

It used to be that way a lot, TV actors never did film. Mary Tyler Moore being Oscar nominated for "Ordinary People" (1980) was seen as a huge revolution at the time, crossing TV into film. But today... nah, it's nothing. Meryly Streep, Glen Glose, Nicole Kidman, Reese Witherspoon, Chris Evans, Michael Douglas, Jane Fonda... TV is where it's at!

[DrNewGod]

It used to be that way a lot, TV actors never did film. Mary Tyler Moore being Oscar nominated for "Ordinary People" (1980) was seen as a huge revolution at the time, crossing TV into film. But today... nah, it's nothing. Meryly Streep, Glen Glose, Nicole Kidman, Reese Witherspoon, Chris Evans, Michael Douglas, Jane Fonda... TV is where it's at!

There had been more than a few TV actors that went on to the big screen: James Garner, Steve McQueen, Burt Reynolds, Michael Douglas (that one's probably unfair, having the father that he did), Sally Fields, Kurt Russell, Goldie Hawn, most of the Not Ready For Primetime Players. Most of them did not return to the small screen, and for those who broke into the big screen, going back to TV was seen as a step down.

[Kieran_Frost]

There had been more than a few TV actors that went on to the big screen: James Garner, Steve McQueen, Burt Reynolds, Michael Douglas (that one's probably unfair, having the father that he did), Sally Fields, Kurt Russell, Goldie Hawn, most of the Not Ready For Primetime Players. Most of them did not return to the small screen, and for those who broke into the big screen, going back to TV was seen as a step down.

Were any of them Mary Tyler Moore famous when they transitioned to film??? I didn't know most of them did TV first. Huh. #themoreyouknow

[j9ac9k]

Were any of them Mary Tyler Moore famous when they transitioned to film??? I didn't know most of them did TV first. Huh. #themoreyouknow

Sally Field was pretty famous from tv back in the day before she went into film. I could be wrong, but I think it was easier for comic actors in the say, 60's - partly because those films weren't really the highest quality anyway. Field was notable because she went on from the "Gidget" persona in forgettable fluff movies to dramas and prestigious films.

[Kirby101]

Lots of TV Stars transitioned to film. The difference now is they come back to TV for a series or mini-series. Especially on premium and streaming services.

[AndrewCrossett]

Sally Field was pretty famous from tv back in the day before she went into film. I could be wrong, but I think it was easier for comic actors in the say, 60's - partly because those films weren't really the highest quality anyway. Field was notable because she went on from the "Gidget" persona in forgettable fluff movies to dramas and prestigious films.

Sally Field had the advantage of a "halfway house" on the way to cinematic respect... a prestige television movie. She blew everyone away with her performance in "Sybil" and that led to her being offered serious roles.

[Scott Taylor]

Yes, but I would phrase it that movies are a step up from TV, rather than the other way. Look at the Friends cast - all of them went on to make movies right after the show was over and none of them went on instead to make another TV show, not right afterwards. Obviously the perception was that movies were the next step in their careers. Some of them pretty much failed at movies and went back to TV or not.

Once you succeed in movies, though, I think its not a step down to do TV appearances. Its more of just another thing to do. Look at a guy like Henry Winkler, who has gone back and forth between movies and TV for his entire career.

[Cyke]

I dunno when I was lil tyke it seemed like there were a few TV stars that seemed like movie stars. Like Lee Majors or Don Johnson. Definitely don't see that now.

I wanna send a shout out to Don Johnson, who seems to be consistently hitting it out of the park with the right projects lately. Knives Out and Watchmen are stand outs.

(ok, so he's got a run-of-the-mill sitcom with Kenan now, but at least he's visible and prominent again).

[DrNewGod]

Were any of them Mary Tyler Moore famous when they transitioned to film??? I didn't know most of them did TV first. Huh. #themoreyouknow

Maverick, Gunsmoke, and Laugh-In were all really popular shows in their time. Burt Reynold's role was certainly less prominent on Gunsmoke than either Garner's or Hawn's were on their shows, but I'd say those latter two were very well known in the day.

[CliffHanger2]

I wanna send a shout out to Don Johnson, who seems to be consistently hitting it out of the park with the right projects lately. Knives Out and Watchmen are stand outs.

(ok, so he's got a run-of-the-mill sitcom with Kenan now, but at least he's visible and prominent again).

Yeah he's aged better than many from that era.

[Holt]

It seems to mostly be a generational thing, from what I've noticed. Most of the time I encounter someone arguing that TV or streaming are inherently bargain bin mediums of storytelling, they're usually older.

[GOLGO 13]

I still occasionally see this sentiment being expressed and was wondering how often people here see this opinion, if they see it at all.

Dancing with the Stars & other reality/Judge shows is where washed up C-level "stars" go to keep their name or resurrect a flat-lining career. The plan is to somehow get on a red-hot TV show & then jump to films. This is the classic way to power-up an actors career if they don't start in film.

If that fails, then "releasing" a porn tape can make even a Z-level personality into an empowered, well compensated celebrity, but only if your pretty. Bonus if your hypergamous nature leads you to marry up to a genuine celebrity/professional athlete or both!

When the inevitable celebrity-divorce happens we'll have the series finale.

[Vakanai]

I still occasionally see this sentiment being expressed and was wondering how often people here see this opinion, if they see it at all.

No, the exact opposite in fact ~ film is seen as the step down next to streaming series and a few cable TV shows.