In this essay, the author intends to review some of the leading proposals concerning the putative ontological differences between TV and film. The author attempts to undermine these alleged distinctions, generally arguing that they are based on too narrow a conception of TV (and sometimes of film). Specifically, the recurring problem is that these supposed distinctions are most frequently extrapolated by focusing on too small a sample of TV--by focusing exclusively on TV of a certain vintage (both in terms of dated technological possibilities and presentational formats) or by taking certain TV genres to stand for the whole of TV. Once one takes a broader view of the possibilities of TV, the author maintains, the philosophical difference between film and TV, construed as a matter of contrasting essential characteristics, disappears. Conceding that there are differences between TV of a certain vintage and level of technological development, and comparable films, the author nonetheless denies that these historical differences amount to ontological or essential distinctions. This essay concludes on a positive note, proposing that the history of film and TV is best understood as single process, the evolution of the "moving image," a mode of communication and expression that can be implemented cinematically, videographically, digitally, or in ways of which people have still to conceive. (Contains 8 notes.)