Hey
Answer to second question, definitely yes. However, the extent of how much you would enjoy these points depends on circumstances that you didn't explain, such as source material, and distance from display, for example.
Now if my quick google wasn't mistakenly made, your display cannot playback 24p at a native rate. It still applies 3:2 pulldown just like the TVs of old. We've had 24p capability for well over half a decade, I wonder even how close to a decade we even might be getting (not sure). Yours can't.
But if you watch mostly TV, and/or play video games, who cares. If you watch mostly movies like I do, it makes a big, I'd even say huge difference with the large viewing angle I watch with my PJ. 3:2 on my system looks "gross", that is the best word I can come up with.
But if my viewing angle was say reduced all the way down to about 1/3 of what it currently is, let's say a 50" from 15', then it wouldn't look nearly as gross to me.
Outside of that feature, I do typically vote for size over quality, just because of what most people watch in the conditions they watch them in, whereas resolution really makes a huge difference in most any circumstance. Black levels for example, if you don't watch with all the lights killed (you can't see your own hand in front of your face when the TV isn't turned on yet), then you might be paying extra for performance that won't be appreciated.
I believe a 65" should be about a 69% increase in display size over your 50", and that is a pretty huge increase.
Once you get past only the modest distance of approximately 6' from your 50" display, you can no longer resolve the full 1080p anymore (outside of having vision that exceeds 20/20).