|
All book discussion in this thread is now allowed. |
i feel like you're underestimating the costs tbh, this isn't a blockbuster movie with a couple hundred million dollar budget. but they produce it like it is, and so here we are. sooner or later someone's balancing the book. i would find it super hard to believe that their budget for the show amounts to peanuts, personally.
also i feel like perspective bias comes into play in re: biggest cable hit. is it? i'd imagine it's viewership is on par with TWD, and id bet it's budget is multiples higher.
i'd be interested in knowing the reality, but not enough to do the research. sorry.
|
On July 26 2017 23:39 brian wrote: i feel like you're underestimating the costs tbh, this isn't a blockbuster movie with a couple hundred million dollar budget. but they produce it like it is, and so here we are. sooner or later someone's balancing the book. i would find it super hard to believe that their budget for the show amounts to peanuts, personally.
also i feel like perspective bias comes into play in re: biggest cable hit. is it? i'd imagine it's viewership is on par with TWD, and id bet it's budget is multiples higher.
i'd be interested in knowing the reality, but not enough to do the research. sorry.
Well its HBO's biggest hit for sure, they are making 5 spin off shows for a reason. But i agree with you, they still have a budget despite how sucessfull the show is and i doubt it amounts to peanuts either.
6th season had 10million dollars per episode on average increased from 6-8 million. $100 million for one season is kind of a lot i imagine.
|
According to wiki, HBO's annual revenue is 5.6 billion dollars, so $100 million is still just less than 2 percent of that. The viewer numbers are pretty tricky, because you can't directly compare it with TWD due to the different business model. I am not really familiar with the US situation, but from what I was able to gather, it's much cheaper to get access to AMC than to HBO. Then, in its own playing field - the "premium cable", GoT seems to be actually the most watched. Anyway, there are several analyses about how it is the most talked about (it's also likely the most pirated) so on top of the money that it makes directly it also makes a pretty good advertisement for HBO (I honestly had no idea that HBO is even still relevant before GoT came around).
|
On July 26 2017 23:59 opisska wrote: According to wiki, HBO's annual revenue is 5.6 billion dollars, so $100 million is still just less than 2 percent of that. The viewer numbers are pretty tricky, because you can't directly compare it with TWD due to the different business model. I am not really familiar with the US situation, but from what I was able to gather, it's much cheaper to get access to AMC than to HBO. Then, in its own playing field - the "premium cable", GoT seems to be actually the most watched. Anyway, there are several analyses about how it is the most talked about (it's also likely the most pirated) so on top of the money that it makes directly it also makes a pretty good advertisement for HBO (I honestly had no idea that HBO is even still relevant before GoT came around). That's not how any of this works 0.0
|
On July 27 2017 00:09 killerdog wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2017 23:59 opisska wrote: According to wiki, HBO's annual revenue is 5.6 billion dollars, so $100 million is still just less than 2 percent of that. The viewer numbers are pretty tricky, because you can't directly compare it with TWD due to the different business model. I am not really familiar with the US situation, but from what I was able to gather, it's much cheaper to get access to AMC than to HBO. Then, in its own playing field - the "premium cable", GoT seems to be actually the most watched. Anyway, there are several analyses about how it is the most talked about (it's also likely the most pirated) so on top of the money that it makes directly it also makes a pretty good advertisement for HBO (I honestly had no idea that HBO is even still relevant before GoT came around). That's not how any of this works 0.0 It's not a very helpful criticism if you don't explain what you think is wrong with his post. Seems like a reasonable analysis to me. TWD has higher official viewership, but GOT has massively higher unofficial viewership and I think it's invaluable as an advertisement. People who like GOT are very likely to also like Westworld, Rome, Deadwood, The Wire, etc. If you're just talking about the 2% of revenue point then sure, it's not a particularly informative measure.
|
The funding of specific shows is based on their specific ROI, not the entire gross income of HBO. HBO tracks the viewers, the number of people who sign up for HBO for the couple months GoT is on and all other revenue from the series. And that is not 2% of their entire earnings for a year.
GoT is a amazing show, but it is a TV show. The battle of the Bastards is one of the most impressive feats for a television show in history. That was full blown blockbuster quality action. But there are limitations to what they can do. There are not unlimited CGI and special effects experts in the world. And none of them are just sitting around waiting for a job. They work on movies for Marvel or other studios. HBO can’t just throw money at the problem.
|
What happened to Bronn? His wisecracks have always garnered a chuckle from me.
|
On July 27 2017 01:24 Plansix wrote: The funding of specific shows is based on their specific ROI, not the entire gross income of HBO. HBO tracks the viewers, the number of people who sign up for HBO for the couple months GoT is on and all other revenue from the series. And that is not 2% of their entire earnings for a year.
GoT is a amazing show, but it is a TV show. The battle of the Bastards is one of the most impressive feats for a television show in history. That was full blown blockbuster quality action. But there are limitations to what they can do. There are not unlimited CGI and special effects experts in the world. And none of them are just sitting around waiting for a job. They work on movies for Marvel or other studios. HBO can’t just throw money at the problem.
The funding of specific shows is based on exactly what the hell HBO wants. It's a single company so they can distribute their money in any way they want among projects, as long as it is beneficial to HBO as a whole. It's surely up to them to decide whether the insane popularity of the show is worth the investment or not, but there is no hard set rule that the budget can't surpass direct revenue if there are intangible benefits from it. I was merely pointing out that the budget for the show is two orders of magnitude smaller than the entire budget of HBO, so they wouldn't bleed out from it.
The second point is completely nonsensical though. There are plenty of CGI movies being produced every year and GoT is just one of those. Why do you think it gets less priority from the special effects studios than any other movie? Paying customer is a paying customer. You could make the same argument for any other movie that requires CGI and I just don't see a shortage of those lately. And again, I also don't really see anyone even advocating for more CGI scenes in the first place, just for more time for plot development, which can be mostly accomplished by people talking to each other and similar stuff.
|
On July 27 2017 01:00 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2017 00:09 killerdog wrote:On July 26 2017 23:59 opisska wrote: According to wiki, HBO's annual revenue is 5.6 billion dollars, so $100 million is still just less than 2 percent of that. The viewer numbers are pretty tricky, because you can't directly compare it with TWD due to the different business model. I am not really familiar with the US situation, but from what I was able to gather, it's much cheaper to get access to AMC than to HBO. Then, in its own playing field - the "premium cable", GoT seems to be actually the most watched. Anyway, there are several analyses about how it is the most talked about (it's also likely the most pirated) so on top of the money that it makes directly it also makes a pretty good advertisement for HBO (I honestly had no idea that HBO is even still relevant before GoT came around). That's not how any of this works 0.0 It's not a very helpful criticism if you don't explain what you think is wrong with his post. Seems like a reasonable analysis to me. TWD has higher official viewership, but GOT has massively higher unofficial viewership and I think it's invaluable as an advertisement. People who like GOT are very likely to also like Westworld, Rome, Deadwood, The Wire, etc. If you're just talking about the 2% of revenue point then sure, it's not a particularly informative measure. Yeah I mean the idea you can justify something as "it only costs less than 2% of their revenue."
That's not how companies work
revenue =/= budget flat episode production cost =/= how much GoT actually costs etc
|
On July 27 2017 03:16 opisska wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2017 01:24 Plansix wrote: The funding of specific shows is based on their specific ROI, not the entire gross income of HBO. HBO tracks the viewers, the number of people who sign up for HBO for the couple months GoT is on and all other revenue from the series. And that is not 2% of their entire earnings for a year.
GoT is a amazing show, but it is a TV show. The battle of the Bastards is one of the most impressive feats for a television show in history. That was full blown blockbuster quality action. But there are limitations to what they can do. There are not unlimited CGI and special effects experts in the world. And none of them are just sitting around waiting for a job. They work on movies for Marvel or other studios. HBO can’t just throw money at the problem.
The funding of specific shows is based on exactly what the hell HBO wants. It's a single company so they can distribute their money in any way they want among projects, as long as it is beneficial to HBO as a whole. It's surely up to them to decide whether the insane popularity of the show is worth the investment or not, but there is no hard set rule that the budget can't surpass direct revenue if there are intangible benefits from it. I was merely pointing out that the budget for the show is two orders of magnitude smaller than the entire budget of HBO, so they wouldn't bleed out from it. The second point is completely nonsensical though. There are plenty of CGI movies being produced every year and GoT is just one of those. Why do you think it gets less priority from the special effects studios than any other movie? Paying customer is a paying customer. You could make the same argument for any other movie that requires CGI and I just don't see a shortage of those lately. And again, I also don't really see anyone even advocating for more CGI scenes in the first place, just for more time for plot development, which can be mostly accomplished by people talking to each other and similar stuff. They are a publicly owned company, that is the opposite of things work. They can’t just throw money at things because its would look awesome. They have bosses to answer to and justify what they are doing.
And there are not unlimited special effects houses with unlimited experience in all fields that are just chilling, waiting for work. As someone who a big TV and movie production nerd, it isn’t something you just throw money at.
|
And there are not unlimited special effects houses with unlimited experience in all fields that are just chilling, waiting for work. As someone who a big TV and movie production nerd, it isn’t something you just throw money at.
Tho it still have nothing to do with what he said, which basically was : "More show time (more episode) does not have to be directly correlated with more cgi."
Which is totally true. Apart from that, as some people said, the show quality is falling quite a lot lately, so to speak. It still is enternaining, but it went from "amazing, nearly perfect" in season 1-2 to "really bad but somehow entertaining".
You really feel the fact that There are no books to rely on anymore. They introduced some of mMartins character cause they felt compelled to, and now that no one is writing behind, they Just have no clue what to do with them. It's actually amazing to see characters like euron, sand snakes, ... Beeing introduced in the previous season and beeing either killed with no screen time coz you've got no clue why someone introduced them, or go from nobody during 6seasons, having literally no one even mentioning your existence to some key character with actually the biggest fleet ever seen in westeros, thus a power to rival kings and queens.
I really feel sad, because I feel like a handfull of dedicated fans with a good knowledge of Asoiaf could have wrote better scenarii than what they did...
|
Considering season 1 and 2 follow pretty closely to the two best books in the series, I am not surprised. It was around 2005 and a feast of crows when me and my friends all decided that Martin has no idea where he was going with the series. Seeing where the series has gone, I can’t even understand how Martin would wrap that up in 2 books, considering how the simple act of going from A to B is an entire book most of the time.
I understand that people want two full seasons, with build up to every fight. But there is only so long they can lock down these actors for. There is only so long the creators want to be making the series. It is going to be 8 years when this all wraps up. And frankly, I’m still in awe they finished it. I through the series would just implode under production costs, like Rome or Deadwood.
|
I have never heard someone state that the two first books are the best ones tbh Most people think the third is the best one. But this isn't the book thread so i will stop here. (i disagree about AFFC and ADWD though :D) It's not so much that i need 12 seasons of GoT, but rather that i want them to develop everything naturally with just as much depth as there was in early seasons. Would you need more time for that? Sure! But you can also question their priorities here and there and wonder if some scenes simply should really be in the show. Then you would have more time while still finishing the series in under 10 seasons.
|
Book 1 and 2 have the best development and pacing. Book 3 is not far behind. After book three is when the editor lost control.
No one wants to go full Super Natural with their series. As much as everyone here thinks things are rush, the re-cap podcast on NPR talks about how there might not be enough plot to stretch over the last episodes. That is also my concern, because it is basically two big fights Winter has been coming for 7 years. We knew what winter was after season 5 and that is was a whole bunch of undead. It is time for the Night King and his army of heavy metal album cover extras to blow up that wall and ruin some shit.
|
If they really have a hard time to come up with plot for 13 episodes when half of that isn't even about the white walker invasion then i am kinda questioning if cutting all the subplots was a good idea Like it depends on what they wanna do with the white walkers and how to exactly resolve that, but imo you could easily make all 13 episodes only about the "long night", if not more.
|
The show writers just aren't very good at coming up with original material. When they decide to change things it's usually for the worse and leads to the sloppy leaps in logic and unrealistic logistics. Some of the changes are warranted due to budget, casting size limits and a desire not over whelm viewers with too many additional plot lines and characters. Generally when something completely illogical happens it's because the show writers changed things and then are forcing things back to the high light events from the book regardless of how little sense it makes in the context of their changes.
Their focus is on hitting the big high light events which is understandable to a point, but it's the journey, character development and story lines that has the potential to make a show great or lacking in the end. It's sad to have major character plot lines rushed and sloppily done and spend as much time as they did on eunuch romance for example.
|
At the Television Critics Association’s summer press tour, HBO programming head Casey Bloys said that all six scripts for the final season of “Game of Thrones” are now in, but that it still hasn’t been decided whether it will air in 2018 or 2019. Bloys says that the network is currently determining the logistics of shooting the final episodes and what the production schedule will be.
“It’s a big season,” Bloys said, “So they’re trying to get a sense of how long they’re going to take to film this.”
The current season of “Game of Thrones” was pushed from a start date in April, when previous seasons of the show have started, to July in order to film scenes in winter. At this year’s SXSW, showrunners David Benioff and D.B. Weiss announced that they will write the final four episodes of the series, with Dave Hill writing the season premiere and Bryan Cogman — who wrote this past Sunday’s episode — penning episode 2.
Sound designer Paula Fairfield also revealed at the fan convention Con of Thrones earlier this month that the final episodes could potentially be feature-length, though that won’t be determined until production begins. The season 7 finale, airing August 27, will have a runtime of 82 minutes.
“I imagine they’ll be longer but … I’m not sure [how long],” Bloys said on Wednesday. “We haven’t had that discussion yet because I don’t know how long the episodes are going to be. Two hours per episode seems like it would be excessive, but it’s a great show, so who knows?”
Source
|
On July 27 2017 09:32 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +At the Television Critics Association’s summer press tour, HBO programming head Casey Bloys said that all six scripts for the final season of “Game of Thrones” are now in, but that it still hasn’t been decided whether it will air in 2018 or 2019. Bloys says that the network is currently determining the logistics of shooting the final episodes and what the production schedule will be.
“It’s a big season,” Bloys said, “So they’re trying to get a sense of how long they’re going to take to film this.”
The current season of “Game of Thrones” was pushed from a start date in April, when previous seasons of the show have started, to July in order to film scenes in winter. At this year’s SXSW, showrunners David Benioff and D.B. Weiss announced that they will write the final four episodes of the series, with Dave Hill writing the season premiere and Bryan Cogman — who wrote this past Sunday’s episode — penning episode 2.
Sound designer Paula Fairfield also revealed at the fan convention Con of Thrones earlier this month that the final episodes could potentially be feature-length, though that won’t be determined until production begins. The season 7 finale, airing August 27, will have a runtime of 82 minutes.
“I imagine they’ll be longer but … I’m not sure [how long],” Bloys said on Wednesday. “We haven’t had that discussion yet because I don’t know how long the episodes are going to be. Two hours per episode seems like it would be excessive, but it’s a great show, so who knows?” Source Damn that sounds like fun
|
I enjoy the "I'm amazed we even got this far. We are really going to get to finish this. Why not make them all 2 hours and take 2 years shooting them? Fuck it, who cares? This is the pro-wresting of prestige television!"
|
On July 27 2017 11:04 Plansix wrote: I enjoy the "I'm amazed we even got this far. We are really going to get to finish this. Why not make them all 2 hours and take 2 years shooting them? Fuck it, who cares? This is the pro-wresting of prestige television!" Weren't you arguing 5 posts up that they didn't have enough material to fill all 13 episodes? And now they need 2-hour episodes. It just seems dumb. 6 2-hour episodes would've made 12 regular length episodes, and thus completed a "normal" season 7 and 8 of 10 1-hour episodes.
All the success in the first seasons has led to some ridiculous decisions for the last few. And episode length is only a small part of it. The main problem is the writers thinking we are watching this for (1) big battles, (2) gratuitous shock moments and (3) boobs.
While (1) and (2) make the big episodes, the staying power of the show has been the character development (just as in the books). The show often actually did the development better than the books, because with less characters and a different medium it could focus more on specific characters. They have thrown that out the window, and if something doesn't make narrative sense, they just hurl flaming boulders at it, Michael Bay style. Boobs... well, Missandei sure is pretty, but eunuch sex was still just awkward.
|
|
|
|