TV shows always worse than the movie

grape

>>91186513

money.

spinoffs are created to generate maximum profit with minimal effort.

>>91187886
That's stupid. They could make a huge load more money if they simply allowed quality which is already in arm's reach.

>>91188180
Quality takes effort takes time

>>91186513
Your best bet is a movie created to follow a show, and not the reverse. And what >>91187886 said

>>91188180
>Quality means more money
lol

Also, TV pays way, WAY less than movies.

>ITT: retarded autists grasping at straws
The obvious-as-fuck reason is that movies have standalone stories to tell, while individual TV show episodes often don't, and can even be unwatchable on their own sometimes. You generally have to integrate the plot of the preexisting movie into whatever TV concept you're making, and do it so well that you can use it for the much longer runtime of the average TV series.

This is also why the reverse works much better.

Different goals. Whatever comes second is typically a cash grab rather than being lead with any kind of vision. Even best case it just can't compare to movie quality and the structure is too different. Add all the sexy panther goddesses and Teddy Roosevelts you want. You can't afford to recreate a second of that tree surfing animation.

>>91189637
Unless you're ATLA and you get a movie-level budget for your finale, that is.

Tron Uprising was better than both Tron movies