CharlesPhipps wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2025 1:20 pm
The Acolyte is actually worth examining from multiple angles failure wise. The toxic "we hate people of color and women" fandom is unfortunately there with any major property but there's also people who commented that the show forwarded people of color and women joining the Space Nazi Wizards as its central premise.
Which...honestly, is something you can argue is not something you need to forward.
Imagine if, instead, the show had abandoned its dark premise at the last minute and, The protagonist had forgiven Sol and worked to rescue her sister.
Basically, the Acolyte could be argued to be the Star Trek that ended with peace and diplomacy and science failing versus brute force.
In practical terms, Acolyte being cancelled was also like the Marvel films in showing the limitations of streaming and big budget prestige television. The show costs as much as a theatrical release but streaming never makes as much money even with the diminishment of theaters. Plus, Disney of all people hasn't seemingly realized that streaming doesn't have nearly as much merch opportunity.
Game of Thrones is about the only exception and that was also on regular television.
Game of Thrones was on HBO. The streaming service before there was streaming. I know people who would only have HBO for Game of Thrones and then cancel it until the next season.
Game of Thrones also initially had a fairly tight budget. Season 1 famously skipped a battle and went with Tyrion getting knocked out before the battle as a budget cutting measure.
At one point Friends cost as much per episode to make as an episode of Game of Thrones. They were able to afford this due to commercials and the easy access everyone had to see Friends. Seinfeld turned down a ton of money per episode for another season. And these two shows weren't exactly expensive intseld but the salaries. Also they were only a thirty minute show with 8 minutes of commercials.
Such was the popularity of Game of Thrones. If they just did a better job of ending the series, it could have ended as one of the best if not the best shows ever produced. Now it's just one big disappointment.
McAvoy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2025 1:31 am
Game of Thrones was on HBO. The streaming service before there was streaming. I know people who would only have HBO for Game of Thrones and then cancel it until the next season.
Game of Thrones also initially had a fairly tight budget. Season 1 famously skipped a battle and went with Tyrion getting knocked out before the battle as a budget cutting measure.
At one point Friends cost as much per episode to make as an episode of Game of Thrones. They were able to afford this due to commercials and the easy access everyone had to see Friends. Seinfeld turned down a ton of money per episode for another season. And these two shows weren't exactly expensive intseld but the salaries. Also they were only a thirty minute show with 8 minutes of commercials.
Such was the popularity of Game of Thrones. If they just did a better job of ending the series, it could have ended as one of the best if not the best shows ever produced. Now it's just one big disappointment.
When GOT was on the air, HBO had a cable channel.
It still does.
But it did then.
Mind you, I don't know any Game of Thrones fans who have watched the new stuff like House of the Dragon that are still calling the original series a failure because of Season 8. The failures of it don't invalidate the previous 7.
McAvoy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2025 1:31 am
Game of Thrones was on HBO. The streaming service before there was streaming. I know people who would only have HBO for Game of Thrones and then cancel it until the next season.
Game of Thrones also initially had a fairly tight budget. Season 1 famously skipped a battle and went with Tyrion getting knocked out before the battle as a budget cutting measure.
At one point Friends cost as much per episode to make as an episode of Game of Thrones. They were able to afford this due to commercials and the easy access everyone had to see Friends. Seinfeld turned down a ton of money per episode for another season. And these two shows weren't exactly expensive intseld but the salaries. Also they were only a thirty minute show with 8 minutes of commercials.
Such was the popularity of Game of Thrones. If they just did a better job of ending the series, it could have ended as one of the best if not the best shows ever produced. Now it's just one big disappointment.
When GOT was on the air, HBO had a cable channel.
It still does.
But it did then.
Mind you, I don't know any Game of Thrones fans who have watched the new stuff like House of the Dragon that are still calling the original series a failure because of Season 8. The failures of it don't invalidate the previous 7.
You have to pay to have HBO. Nowadays you can have it part of a cable package but you HBO was always a pay to view channel. This isn't where you can pick up your local Fox channel to view The Simpsons.
Season 8 was the worse but previous seasons starting at Season 5 was when there was noticeable dip in writing quality. This was known back then when these seasons were airing.
No one is using House of the Dragon to validate the later seasons of Game of Thrones. In fact, viewers of House of the Dragon notice a difference in quality versus early Game of Thrones seasons and is more in line with the Season 5-6 seasons of Game of Thrones.
Some don't even like House of the Dragon series. For whatever reason.
McAvoy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2025 1:31 am
Game of Thrones was on HBO. The streaming service before there was streaming. I know people who would only have HBO for Game of Thrones and then cancel it until the next season.
Game of Thrones also initially had a fairly tight budget. Season 1 famously skipped a battle and went with Tyrion getting knocked out before the battle as a budget cutting measure.
At one point Friends cost as much per episode to make as an episode of Game of Thrones. They were able to afford this due to commercials and the easy access everyone had to see Friends. Seinfeld turned down a ton of money per episode for another season. And these two shows weren't exactly expensive intseld but the salaries. Also they were only a thirty minute show with 8 minutes of commercials.
Such was the popularity of Game of Thrones. If they just did a better job of ending the series, it could have ended as one of the best if not the best shows ever produced. Now it's just one big disappointment.
When GOT was on the air, HBO had a cable channel.
It still does.
But it did then.
Mind you, I don't know any Game of Thrones fans who have watched the new stuff like House of the Dragon that are still calling the original series a failure because of Season 8. The failures of it don't invalidate the previous 7.
You have to pay to have HBO. Nowadays you can have it part of a cable package but you HBO was always a pay to view channel. This isn't where you can pick up your local Fox channel to view The Simpsons.
Season 8 was the worse but previous seasons starting at Season 5 was when there was noticeable dip in writing quality. This was known back then when these seasons were airing.
No one is using House of the Dragon to validate the later seasons of Game of Thrones. In fact, viewers of House of the Dragon notice a difference in quality versus early Game of Thrones seasons and is more in line with the Season 5-6 seasons of Game of Thrones.
Some don't even like House of the Dragon series. For whatever reason.
Right. It's not like we had seven seasons of amazing TV followed by one season of dross.
You can nitpick the hell out of this show as you can with any show, but there is no question that the deeply woven plots of the original seasons at some point gave away to mindless action, contrivance and character assassination.
As of House of Dragon - it is leagues above Rings of Power. Notice my word of the week on RoP? ''Apathy''. Season 1 set the internet on fire. Season 2 went off like a firecracker in an a-bomb factory. But I definitely agree that HoD is mid-GoT quality.
McAvoy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2025 1:31 am
Game of Thrones was on HBO. The streaming service before there was streaming. I know people who would only have HBO for Game of Thrones and then cancel it until the next season.
Game of Thrones also initially had a fairly tight budget. Season 1 famously skipped a battle and went with Tyrion getting knocked out before the battle as a budget cutting measure.
At one point Friends cost as much per episode to make as an episode of Game of Thrones. They were able to afford this due to commercials and the easy access everyone had to see Friends. Seinfeld turned down a ton of money per episode for another season. And these two shows weren't exactly expensive intseld but the salaries. Also they were only a thirty minute show with 8 minutes of commercials.
Such was the popularity of Game of Thrones. If they just did a better job of ending the series, it could have ended as one of the best if not the best shows ever produced. Now it's just one big disappointment.
When GOT was on the air, HBO had a cable channel.
It still does.
But it did then.
Mind you, I don't know any Game of Thrones fans who have watched the new stuff like House of the Dragon that are still calling the original series a failure because of Season 8. The failures of it don't invalidate the previous 7.
You have to pay to have HBO. Nowadays you can have it part of a cable package but you HBO was always a pay to view channel. This isn't where you can pick up your local Fox channel to view The Simpsons.
Season 8 was the worse but previous seasons starting at Season 5 was when there was noticeable dip in writing quality. This was known back then when these seasons were airing.
No one is using House of the Dragon to validate the later seasons of Game of Thrones. In fact, viewers of House of the Dragon notice a difference in quality versus early Game of Thrones seasons and is more in line with the Season 5-6 seasons of Game of Thrones.
Some don't even like House of the Dragon series. For whatever reason.
Right. It's not like we had seven seasons of amazing TV followed by one season of dross.
You can nitpick the hell out of this show as you can with any show, but there is no question that the deeply woven plots of the original seasons at some point gave away to mindless action, contrivance and character assassination.
As of House of Dragon - it is leagues above Rings of Power. Notice my word of the week on RoP? ''Apathy''. Season 1 set the internet on fire. Season 2 went off like a firecracker in an a-bomb factory. But I definitely agree that HoD is mid-GoT quality.
Exactly. First four seasons of GoT was prime TV. Then it just dipped not too much but noticeably that by Season 7 it was getting obvious the show was a shell of it's former self
McAvoy wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2025 1:52 amExactly. First four seasons of GoT was prime TV. Then it just dipped not too much but noticeably that by Season 7 it was getting obvious the show was a shell of it's former self
It makes a lot more sense when you find out that D&D signed up purely to adapt the Red Wedding, and it shows.
If their egos hadn't got the better of them, and I'm sure the vast amount of money they were making, they should have stepped down as show runners after that now that the bit that they were most interested in was done. Of course, they also weren't helped that they signed up to adapt books, and the books just stopped being written leaving them with two books next that basically go nowhere, and didn't really involve their stars all that much so they were pretty much screwed at that point.
Hey if you want to look at it silver lining style that there was some legit good stuff to be found in the later seasons is actually more impressive as their heart wasn't in it, and they had nothing but vague ideas to work off. Even s8 had that one episode before the Long (one) Night which had some decent stuff in there.
