In his article Story or Spectacle? Why Television Is Better Than the Movies, David Charpentier claims that contemporary television shows are superior to contemporary films. He supports his claim by comparing television shows and movies in terms of characters and the plot. I agree with Charpentier’s thesis.At the beginning of his article Charpentier says “Steven Spielberg and George Lucas put out doomsday-esque statements about the end of movies as we know them” (Charpentier 308). Both Spielberg and Lucas are directors of credible movies. The fact that he uses movie directors as an example makes it easier to agree with his argument. All of the examples he uses in his article provide evidence that supports his claim and make his claim stronger. A character is a person in either a novel, film, or television show. Characters in television shows and in films are very different. Charpentier says “committing to a series involves watching dozens of …show more content…
There have been so many cliffhangers in The Walking Dead that make viewers keep coming back to watch more. There is no line between good and evil characters, they all do bad things and they all do good things that can complicate the plot even more. No viewer knows what way the plot is going to go. There is always time for unexpected turns. With The Boondock Saints, there is a clear line between good and evil characters. You can always expect the good characters to come out on top of the evil characters. It is easy to predict what the outcome of the film will be. The difference between the plot of television shows and films is very clear. The creators of films have to take time into consideration when thinking about a complex plot. They have to make a clean ending that their viewers can understand. Television shows have the ability to create a very complex plot because they have the time to make a clean and neat