Book to TV

Book to TV has several combination suggestions, including book-to-TV-series and book to tv show. The problem is book to TV includes things like How the Grinch Stole Christmas!, which didn't have a TV series or show; it had a TV movie.

Right. And even if there are multiple "shows" these needn't be "serial" - think Sesame Street for example.

I think tv show and tv movie are pretty close. Maybe show is more generic so I wouldn't combine those two. But seeing as show is generic I don't see a problem combining Book to TV and book to tv show. How do you see them as different?

Slightly uncomfortable here because I happen to work in that industry. Maybe my use is too narrowly.

But to me:

a TV movie is a stand alone thing (essentially at least, sure there might be a follow up)

a TV series has multiple episodes that need to be seen in the right order (because they have some continuous story to tell)

a TV show is a thing in multiple episodes, but the episodes are not serial (Oprah, Sesame Street)

I would see the distinction between TV series and TV show as a bit pedantic, but a TV show is not a TV movie; a TV show repeats, to me.

For me, it is the series that doesn't translate. A book can be made into a TV movie or other one-time show; that isn't a series.

> 5: The difference being that in a series there is continuation (plot, character development, etc) from one episode to another, while in a TV show there need be no such thing - in fact it's usually avoided because episodes may get aired in a different order at other occasions / stations.

> 6: Anything one-time is certainly not a series.

#3

Not really. A book could be made into a TV show which isn't a movie. For example one episode of an anthology series (UK informal use) of book readings.

#7

It is interesting that a TV series has to have continuation whereas that is not quite true of book series. I am thinking of series like the Alexandria Quartet in which the various books give different perspectives -- is it necessary to read Justine first? The Raj Quartet by Paul Scott was made into a TV series (The Jewel in the Crown), which was far far more sequential than the tetralogy, where most chapters zero in on a signrificant character and follow his or her story with considerable overlap with other chapters (but the zig-zag does move forward).

#9: I find the whole distinction interesting, and I'm not sure I buy it. For BarkingMatt, there was a big day in Sesame Street when everyone besides Big Bird got to meet Snuffleupigus (I know because my mother found it much more exciting than I.) Law and Order episodes have virtually no interconnection, besides the occasional character death, but is considered a series nonetheless. It's about as serial as Mythbusters, with the same occasional rearrangement of personnel not getting in the way of the show. But L&O is just one step away from CSI, which does more overstretching arcs, which is just a few steps away from something like Buffy or Firefly, where half the episodes are serial and the other half aren't, and a few more steps in that direction is something where each episode strongly depends on the last.

> 9 / 10: Like I said, I'm slightly uncomfortable advocating my views on this because I happen to work in that industry. So it's really "trade jargon" (and even for that there may be other interpretations around), while "normal" usage may be quite different.

#11

Also usage is different in different countries. For example in the UK we use series in much the same way as the Americans use season. For example Tales Of The Unexpected (an anthology show) is released in DVDs for each individual series.

The BFI's screenonline website, and the blog for The Stage, for example mention anthology series - which are not series by BarkingMatt's definition above.