In the argument of television versus film I’ve always been on the side of film.  I’ve never thought to myself that TV could ever defeat the wonder that comes from what you see displayed on the big screen.  When I enter the theatre and the lights dim before a feature begins I know I’m in for a special treat – most of the time at least – and I feel like it’s something that we always will try to replicate on our miniature versions at home (i.e. the television).  However, it just never seems to come close to the experience of watching a movie in a packed theatre.

However, with comedy do you really need the big screen?  This year my favourite comedy, so far, this year has been Funny People and a close second goes to The Hangover, but how different is seeing a guy doing silly things on the big screen to seeing him do silly things on my television?  They even give me a laugh track on the television (which most people hate but I think is still somewhat effective in most sitcoms) to make it feel like there are a group of people watching it with me who I can laugh at the producers/directors for thinking lame jokes are funny.  Funny is funny whether it comes out of some huge surround sound speakers or some tinny speakers in a cheap plastic frame on your twelve inch screen at home.

So why do I have this feeling that I still call TV shows smaller things?  With films you get two hours of entertainment, but with television you get thirteen to twenty-two thirty-minute long episodes of funny which equals at least six and a half hours of hilarity and with television shows like 30 Rock, How I Met Your Mother, Scrubs and It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia showing me that TV can be really funny.  With movies after the first two hours of joyous laughter we have to wait a year or more before we get another film featuring the same characters, which tends to be bad usually since sequels never seem to measure up to their predecessor.  While with TV shows you get another thirty minutes of fun with your favourite characters each week, and the quality tends to be evened out from episode to episode (with the odd exception to the rule).  So doesn’t that make TV shows a better source of comedy than the multiplex?

But does this mean that television can match up to the likes of some of the best of best comedy that we see at the theatre? Does getting movies like a Dr. Stangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb once in a lifetime make it better than being able to sit through all nine seasons of Seinfeld?   Are these shows another medium for the creative mind to give us what we’ve always wanted (comedy so funny it makes us poop our pants) or is it just a bastardization of what we already have and love?  I used to call it lesser mainly because there are things you can do and say in a film that you can’t on TV since all you have to do is slap an R rating and move on, but then came HBO with its brilliance (i.e. Flight of the Conchords, Entourage, Curb Your Enthusiasm, Eastbound & Down, Bored to Death, etc) hence taking out the four-letter-word factor of the argument.

So in the end I guess the truth is I don’t know anymore.  Both seem like really good sources of the funny and they have both good and bad to pick from to support any side of the argument you want to take.  I guess the best thing is to ask which do you prefer, film or television comedy?