I watch a lot of nature documentaries. I’m not very choosy about the animals covered, whether whales, moles, lions, ants, chameleons, blowfish, or mosquitoes. I’m even fascinated by footage of bacteria under a microscope.

I’m usually immersed as I sit in front of my large-screen television, so long as I learn something about the intricacies of the species filmed in vibrant colors. What do they eat and how do they avoid being eaten? What are their life expectancies, mating routines, and group dynamics? I’m amazed that blue whales and monarch butterflies can detect the Earth’s weak geomagnetic field and navigate intercontinental distances.

My selected nature shows usually follow the classic movie format, divided into three acts:

• Act 1: the setup for a developing conflict between opposing forces (good versus evil),
• Act 2: the build towards a crisis with the resolution pending, and
• Act 3: the payoff, with the conflict resolved, often with an unexpected twist.

Any conflict exposed in the film must, generally, be easily understood. Movie plots don’t usually involve obscure philosophical dilemmas, because they can dampen ticket sales.

...read more at econlib.org