The evolution of television series to feature-length films is nothing new. In 1991, “The Addams Family,” originally a 1960s television show, made the jump to a theatrical movie. In 1995, fans of the 1970s series “The Brady Bunch” were met with “The Brady Bunch Movie” in theaters. In 2008, the “Sex and the City” movie brought Carrie Bradshaw and her girls to the big screen.
Today, television-to-movie adaptations are having a resurgence in popularity. On April 22, on the third anniversary of the show’s premiere, “Heartstopper” that it would be ending the series with a feature-length film in place of a fourth season. Similarly, on Sept. 17, after airing its season three finale, “The Summer I Turned Pretty” that it would be concluding with a film adaptation. While these adaptations are set to air on their respective streaming platforms, , at their D23 convention, that their show “The Mandalorian” would conclude with a theatrical release as opposed to a release on the Disney+ platform. “The Mandalorian & Grogu” is set to premiere on May 22, 2026.
In the past, theatrical film adaptations of television shows have been successful because they were not continuations of the story. “The Addams Family” movie, an adaptation of the show, did not require audiences to have seen the entirety of the 1964 sitcom, instead reimagining that show and its characters for a new audience. “The Brady Bunch Movie” takes on a satirical spin and places the beloved 1970s sitcom characters into the more contemporary 1990s, parodying the tropes of the original show, presenting audiences with a new spin on the story that ultimately acts separately from its source material.
This is not the case with the recently announced continuations. For example, for general audiences to grasp the context of “The Mandalorian & Grogu,” which aims to serve as the final chapter of the story, audiences will need to log into Disney+ and watch the first three seasons of the show, which in turn, includes characters that audiences will not understand unless they watch multiple series including “Star Wars: The Clone Wars,” “Star Wars Rebels,” “Ahsoka,” “The Book of Boba Fett” and most of the nine mainstream Star Wars films.
Another difference in this film continuation trend is that in the past, a film adaptation would consist of a higher budget, which would give audiences a higher production value, thus departing from what the audience was used to seeing on the show. This is true of the 2008 “Sex and the City” film that had a budget of , while on average, the episodes of the 1998 show likely spent $6 million and $10 million. This boost in funds allowed the movie to explore multiple filming sets and locations, including luxury penthouses, destination weddings in Mexico, and Vogue’s offices, as opposed to the limited locations of the show.
This is also true of the 1991 film “The Addams Family”, which had a budget of , as opposed to the 1960s series that likely budgeted between $35,000 and $50,000 per episode, based on television standards of the time. This allowed the film a more cinematic visual tone as opposed to the 1960s series’ flat, sitcom-style aesthetic and included elaborate macabre sets that would have been impossible on the 1960s budget.
However, with the streaming platform model, series are produced to the standard of a feature-length film. “The Summer I Turned Pretty” shot on location in France for its third season, a change from their usual North Carolina locations. “The Mandalorian” spearheaded the use of the “volume,” a massive LED stage that reimagines virtual location filming. These aspects of production are not likely to change with the film continuations of these series, as it would cause the films to feel disjointed from their original programs. These shows were never produced like the standard, lower-budget, episodic series and have always embraced the technical qualities of a feature film. To not continue this with the film adaptation would not only undermine the fabric of these shows, but would not make sense monetarily, as it would ignore the already in place production infrastructure.
This leaves audiences wondering: what is the point of these feature-length adaptations? Most likely, it’s monetary. The production costs of a film are more streamlined as opposed to the drawn-out costs of a full season. This allows these franchises to still cash in on their pop-culture relevancy while spending half of their usual costs. As with the case of “The Mandalorian & Grogu,” a theatrical release allows Disney to streamline revenue through box office sales and eventual streaming exclusivity, ending in more profit than previously generated through “The Mandalorian.” With a theatrical release, they also open themselves up to nominations for the Oscars and other film awards.
This boils down the art of episodic storytelling into just numbers and dilutes the art of the different mediums. When a series concludes with a movie, the shift compromises the artistic integrity of both formats. Episodic storytelling thrives on rhythm, intimacy, and slow-burning character development, which are often flattened in a film’s condensed runtime. The move from exploration to resolution can feel emotionally unearned, abandoning the structure that made the series compelling. At the same time, the film risks becoming a narrative patchwork, leaning too heavily on series knowledge rather than crafting a self-contained cinematic experience. Instead of honoring the expressive art of film, it may default to TV-style pacing and dialogue, diluting its artistic potential. What results is a finale that pleases everyone but fulfills neither medium, trading narrative depth for commercial spectacle.
The Student Movement is the official student newspaper of 51勛圖厙 University. Opinions expressed in the Student Movement are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editors, 51勛圖厙 University or the Seventh-day Adventist church.