I don't get why everyone's so down on this idea (no offense to either of you). The overwhelming reaction to this has been negative. I feel like I'm the only person who actually thinks this is a good idea (besides Cranston and Gilligan...ha).

Here's my thing- yeah, there's nothing they could do in a movie that they couldn't do on TV. But my thought is, look, if this were someone else (even Mitch Hurwitz...though I'm cautiously optimistic about the supposed Arrested Development movie) I might be a bit worried. But I trust Vince Gilligan. The show has only gotten better with every season, and he seems to know what he's doing. He's earned my trust. So if he says he wants to extend the story- whether it's in movie form or on TV- I'm all for it.

It would be different if I thought he was artificially trying to extend the show beyond where it should stop. But Cranston was saying in that interview that Gilligan actually found, organically, through the process of writing the last season, that he had more story than the 16 episodes could fit. If it came naturally like that then it wasn't forced, and to me it just seems like, hey, I'm happy to have more BB. And if he decides a movie is the best medium for that story, I'm all for it. Think about it this way- what if he had instead come out and said, hey, you know, I was writing the final season and realized that the story really could- and should- extend into one more season after that...I just can't wrap it up in one season after all. Would people be so upset? Extending the show beyond when it should run is certainly to be avoided, but not extending it and trying to cram everything into 16 episodes when it could really use another season/a movie/a TV movie/a couple extra episodes or whatever to do the ending justice would be just as bad.

tl;dr- Cranston is God and if he says a movie is the way to go then THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO, GOD DAMMIT.