I LOVE the movies. They will ALWAYS be magical for me, and staying at home as opposed to seeing it with a bunch of strangers in theatre is no-brainer for me; I'd to the movies each and every time. My point: there is something about seeing something with a group of people. I actually like see what makes people react the way they do.

Think TV is vastly superior to the movies? Okay, let me present to you the new series, "Hole in the Wall." What a joke. TV gets it wrong just like some movies. Best of TV: "Chuck" (NBC), "How I Met Your Mother" (CBS), "The Office" (NBC), or any NFL game.

To answer your question, Scott; yes, I do have different expectations when watching a TV show v.s. a movie. Most TV shows tend to DRAG the drama out. Like the Ross-Rachel relationship in "Friends" or Chuck and Miss "Wienerliscous" in "Chuck." I absolutely HATE that about TV, and movies tend to cut to the quick on stuff like that, which I appreciate.

- E.C. Henry from Bonney Lake, WA

Scott, Indy *does* change - take RAIDERS as an example: he's sucked into the hunt in the first place by his need to know, to explore and discover history's hidden truths... then gives up that need at the end to save his and Marion's lives.

I adore serial television with season-long arcs (hence my general apathy toward older series). but when it comes to earth-shattering emotional change, movies have that down cold.

Well, at least when they're not afraid to be smart, like TDK.

Nostalgic old boob. He complains about film for all the wrong reasons.

Yes, there is a difference between movies and TV. It is one of expectation.

Movies are the central conflict in the protagonist's life. What we are watching is the defining point of this entire person's existence.

Television, on the other hand, tends to be something that puts the protagonist into a very crucial bind that may get worse or better. It is definitely impactful on the character, but this may or may not be the event of the character's life that defines who this character is.

In movies, it is.

The only reason movies are in disrepair is because there is money in it. INDY IV is an awful movie and made a ton of money. As soon as the money dries up, movies will go back to the "purer" storytelling form.

But as Wolcott pointed out -- there has ALWAYS been a glut of fluff be it Elvis films clogging the Drive-Ins or Blockbuster BS.

Why he chooses now to point it out, is to simply live in a nostalgic past that never really existed in the first place.

Though it's nice to be home on the couch, sometimes nothing beats a good old campfire.