Chances of the Series actually getting Greenlighted?

[trio]

First, HBO's partner, the BBC screwed up completely by re-cutting the first several episodes of the first season so that they played essentially as a bad soap opera focusing mainly on sex. The show died in the ratings in the UK and the BBC pulled out of the show. Second, HBO didn't take into account the potential for DVD sales, which was still a pretty new thing. They decided to end the show before the DVDs started selling - it turned out it was a huge hit on DVD, more than enough to have paid for continued production of the show, but by then people were committing to other gigs, the second season was written (and I think in production), etc.

So with GoT, there is a better understanding of how DVDs and download sales will help pay future production costs and also the BBC has learned its lesson not to screw with a good thing and re-cut the series

My fear is precisely that all these mistakes will be replicated. I think your notion that lessons have been learnt is a bit optimistic, particularly at the BBC, which is an organisation which has shown itself time and again to be slow to even acknowledge mistakes, let alone learn from them! The BBC treated Rome like a red-headed stepchild - and they may very well do the same for GoT.

And I doubt that even counting in future DVD sales can really save a series from the chop if the ratings aren't great and the day-to-day costs are so high that they have HBO execs freaking out.

I think that in GoTs favour is the fact that its very fast paced. Something big and dramatic should happen in every episode. And it's dramatic from the pilot - it's not a slow burner and it's gory enough and sexy enough and people swear, so it's very adult.

On the negative side, it may be the most expensive production that HBO have, with all the Morocco filming and the CGI, so it'll be the first that'll be looked at if cuts need to be made. And story-wise it's not going to be the sort of show that you can just pop into a year down the road and get up to speed on quickly - there are far too many big families and locations (even I still get confused) the inter-relationships are complicated and so is the intrigue.

[Padraig]

As people have said. HBO has a good idea about the budget already. If they were that worried about the expense, they wouldn't bother at all.

I'm not sure what else BBC did wrong wrt Rome. I imagine re-cutting a show is not something they are likely to do again anyhow. Besides, HBO is going to drive aSoIaF, so I can't see how BBC could mess things up. And BBC do produce a lot of quality TV. So i'm not sure I would be concerned either way.

[red snow]

How strong is the current HBO line-up? I get the impression it is relatively weak compared to when Sopranos, deadwood, Rome etc were all airing together. I'm not up to date on when shows are going to come out but if they can have "the pacific", "treme", "boardwalk empire" and "AGOT" showing within a year of each other ( the last 3 are "open-ended" so could be in 2nd season) then it would be a pretty mighty line-up. I'd be buying HBO if it existed over here. I'll have to make do with saving up for the, usually pricey, box sets.

What I mean is it could be a very strong brand that could win over a lot of new subscribers evwn if people don't watch all of the shows.

[Eyelesbarrow]

HBO should be happy that there's a healthy buzz surrounding the series and some bloggers and critics are interested in the project.

It's HBO - they pretty have much critical cache so positive word of mouth or reviews would not be much of a problem. If there's anything I'm worried about, it's the cost. (I'm traumatized by the cancellation of Arrested Development, damn.)

I'm more interested in how HBO would market this to attract as many viewers as possible. Would they highlight the fantasy aspect akin to the HP movies? Will they focus on the family vs family storyline? Will they go with the whodunnit question?

[Werthead]

And I doubt that even counting in future DVD sales can really save a series from the chop if the ratings aren't great and the day-to-day costs are so high that they have HBO execs freaking out.

DVD sales can actually bring you back from the dead. Family Guy and Futurama were both resurrected because of huge sales on DVD. Dollhouse was apparently renewed purely because Fox want to see how well the Season 1 boxset does. If it does as well as Firefly's did, that could keep the series on-air. If that does happen, I believe that will be the first time it's happened on US live-action TV.

In the UK, it's already happened with live-action. The massive success of Red Dwarf on DVD (which either just has or will in the near future overtake The Office to become the biggest-selling DVD TV series in the BBC's history) saw the show come back for a (really bad but that's another thread) three-part special earlier this year after ten years off the air, and a new series is apparently now in the planning.

On the negative side, it may be the most expensive production that HBO have, with all the Morocco filming and the CGI, so it'll be the first that'll be looked at if cuts need to be made.

Compared with the likes of The Pacific, John Adams, Rome and Band of Brothers, Game of Thrones should be 'relatively' cheap to film, although I suspect it will cost a bit more than say Treme and probably True Blood. However, I can see it costing about the same as Boardwalk Empire, which requires a lot of location filming and applying period detail to streets and locations. GoT should be a matter of just being in the studio, on greenscreen or in fields or forests, which isn't quite so involved as making a street look like it did 80 years earlier.

I'm not sure what else BBC did wrong wrt Rome. I imagine re-cutting a show is not something they are likely to do again anyhow. Besides, HBO is going to drive aSoIaF, so I can't see how BBC could mess things up. And BBC do produce a lot of quality TV. So i'm not sure I would be concerned either way.

They also put Rome on in a really, really shit timeslot, especially Season 2 (which was like 11pm on BBC-2 on a Friday night, when half the people who watched it had gone out).

I'm hoping they get the rights to put GoT on the iPlayer. This may be critical to the show's success in the UK, actually. If they don't, and some other HBO series they've screened have not been allowed to go on there like The Wire, that could be problematic for the ratings.

As for the re-cutting thing, you'd hope that the BBC wouldn't repeat that mistake again, but then a lot of the things that have been said about GoT were also said about Rome. It was a HBO/BBC co-production, HBO was in charge but the BBC still cut the first three episodes badly etc.

[switters]

I wonder how much (if any) the DVD sales for Legend of the Seeker will influence HBO's decision making process. It comes out on Oct. 13, which will be long before the GOT pilot is completed. And sure, there will be several differences between the delivered products of LOS and GOT, but considering they are based on similar source material, I would think HBO will at least be paying some attention.

[Frank Stark]

Wow, I hope not. Not only should they be expecting better quality from their own product, I'm not even sure it's a valid study in "how likely are book series fans likely to buy the DVD sets" as the LOS tv show was a major departure from the SoT books.

[shewolf85]

I wasn't into ROME at all. . . I will buy the ASOIAF dvds, almost 98% positive on that.

[switters]

Frank Stark, sorry, I should clarify: Disregarding product quality and adaptive faithfulness, I believe there is a valid study in "generally, what kind of DVD sales volume can we expect from a tv show based on an epic fantasy series." And have no fear, this could potentially be a win/win scenario for ASOIAF fans eager for a greenlight. If LOS tanks, HBO could explain its failure for exactly the reasons you specify. If it's successful, well that's just extra gravy.

[John_Galt]

I was a big fan of Goodkind's books, and couldn't wait for the adaptation. The moment I found out the rights went to a broadcast network (instead of a cable company with no censorship), I knew the series was doomed. I watched the pilot - the first minute or two were great, after that it all went downhill. It basically turned into Xena like story for kids. I couldn't stomach watching another episode, and am seriously hoping the series gets canned.

Hopefully HBO will do it right - they certainly didn't disappoint with Rome, Deadwood etc.

[The Pita]

I actually thought Legend of the Seeker was an improvement.

I've been watching The Tudors recently, and I have to say that it's very similar to AGOT in feel, with the whole political conniving in medieval times thing.

Does anyone know how successful the Tudors is? I know it's had 3 seasons, but not much more. I think that would be an indicator as to how long, if at all, AGOT will last.

[Ran]

Game of Thrones is going to be more expensive than The Tudors, I think (which means more than $40 million a season -- perhaps substantially more). And the source material, if well-adapted, is going to be much more engaging. The Tudors is a tawdry historical soap opera.

I believe it pulled good ratings by Showtime standards, but we're talking about a million viewers, as opposed to HBO's spectacular True Blood pulling in 5 million. That said, the show has a fourth season approved with the third season pretty much unseen, so Showtime is confident that it'll hold pretty steady... but at the same time, it's not making sense for them to take it past a fourth season.

Completely different ball game, really, in the end, so it's hard to draw a comparison. Obviously, if Game of Thrones is as popular by HBO standards as The Tudors is by Showtime standards, there won't be too much to worry about ... if we get the season order, of course.

[red snow]

I'm hoping they get the rights to put GoT on the iPlayer. This may be critical to the show's success in the UK, actually. If they don't, and some other HBO series they've screened have not been allowed to go on there like The Wire, that could be problematic for the ratings.

As for the re-cutting thing, you'd hope that the BBC wouldn't repeat that mistake again, but then a lot of the things that have been said about GoT were also said about Rome. It was a HBO/BBC co-production, HBO was in charge but the BBC still cut the first three episodes badly etc.

Maybe they can only put HBO shows on iplayer if they co-fund them? I can't remember if iplayer was around for Rome but that would have been a good test to that theory. They do show tudors (which they may put money into?) so it's not a widespread ban of subscription shows).

I wonder what determines satisfactory viewer levels to keep a show alive on HBO? I'd suspect there was some cost per viewer calcualtion where a cheap show can survive on fewer viewers than an expensive one. HBO may do it completely differently though as people pay for the entire service.

I'm looking forward to prudish middle-aged license payers screaming "Ban this filth!" at the sight of incest when the show comes out on BBC.

[Brude]

I wonder how much (if any) the DVD sales for Legend of the Seeker will influence HBO's decision making process.

No, they are on completely different planes of existence as far as that sort of thing. I'm pretty certain it will have zero impact on the GoT decision.

I've been watching The Tudors recently, and I have to say that it's very similar to AGOT in feel, with the whole political conniving in medieval times thing.

Does anyone know how successful the Tudors is? I know it's had 3 seasons, but not much more. I think that would be an indicator as to how long, if at all, AGOT will last.

Tudors success probably has more of an affect on their estimations for this show than any other, which is probably a good thing cause it's done well for Showtime.

The plan for Tudors is to end it after Season 4, I believe. At that point the Henry VIII story will be done, I think.

[red snow]

The plan for Tudors is to end it after Season 4, I believe. At that point the Henry VIII story will be done, I think.

Hopefully thrones can steal some of the tudors audience. This should be easier for the BBC as they can market it without helping the competition (Tudors is shown on BBC too). I guess it will have to be more indirect in the US via reviews etc.

I think it will be a real shame if the Tudors doesn't at least have a season (or a few episodes) covering the Tudors who were on the throbe before Elizabeth. It's never really been covered much in TV or film and has the makings of a lot of political intrigue and turmoil. The showrunners said they'd like to do that as they've already covered Elizabeth in the film but I think they are worried that ratings would drop off without Rhy-meyers.

Fingers crossed they'll give it a try or launch it as a spin-off mini.

[Werthead]

The Tudors finishes at the end of Season 4 and I believe that's it. I believe they've said that going much past the end of Henry VIII puts you into Elizabeth I territory, which has been more than amply covered by recent movies and TV series. So The Tudors finishes then (they're shooting it at the moment, actually; I wouldn't be surprised if Tamzin Merchant was going straight from Dublin to Belfast for GoT) and then the show's makers will apparently be developing an adult-oriented King Arthur series, possibly in conjunction with the BBC.

As far as I can tell, the BBC does not contribute to The Tudors' funding beyond buying the reshow rights.

I'm looking forward to prudish middle-aged license payers screaming "Ban this filth!" at the sight of incest when the show comes out on BBC.

I'm pretty sure this never happens these days. The Borgias and I, Claudius in the 1970s enraged the British viewing public, but since then those sort of things haven't really raised eyebrows. Rome's incest storyline passed without comment in the UK.

[About Yea High]

I wouldn't be surprised if Tamzin Merchant was going straight from Dublin to Belfast for GoT)

Is it confirmed she will be filming in Ireland instead of Morocco? Or both places, perhaps?

GRRM confirmed in his clues for the casting of Ser Jorah Mormont that Iain Glenn would be returning to Morocco.

Does anyone know if they've set Morocco shooting dates?

[williamjm]

Maybe they can only put HBO shows on iplayer if they co-fund them? I can't remember if iplayer was around for Rome but that would have been a good test to that theory. They do show tudors (which they may put money into?) so it's not a widespread ban of subscription shows).

I think Rome was pre-iPlayer. We might get a hint from Channel 4's showing of True Blood which starts this week, if it shows up on Channel 4's iPlayer clone then that would imply HBO are happy to have their shows shown on the Internet.

[Werthead]

Is it confirmed she will be filming in Ireland instead of Morocco? Or both places, perhaps?

GRRM confirmed in his clues for the casting of Ser Jorah Mormont that Iain Glenn would be returning to Morocco.

Does anyone know if they've set Morocco shooting dates?

Good point, although it is likely that the costume fitting and script readings will be done with all the cast in Belfast.

[JungianQueen]

I'll go ahead and add my two cents.

I'm cautiously optimistic. I think with names like Sean Bean, it has some weight with the LOTR crowd. I also think it has draw to folks who aren't into the whole high-fantasy / Legend of the Seeker deal and who also might be looking for something comparable to the Tudors (from Showtime) on a bigger channel like HBO.

I think a solid fanbase can really help jumpstart a new series like this. But, I think it has the potential to draw in new fans. For example, I had no idea what the Sookie Stackhouse book series was. I watched True Blood w/o any prior knowledge of the book narrative, and I thoroughly enjoy myself with that series.

It's not really a big-budget series, if you think about it. There are a few battles, but most of the meat of the stories take place within castle walls, on the road, with the characters themselves.