Most of the series that seem like obvious attempts to follow GoT are from streamers that were willing to throw money at such demanding productions. And they haven't come anywhere close to replicating that success.
Most of the series that seem like obvious attempts to follow GoT are from streamers that were willing to throw money at such demanding productions. And they haven't come anywhere close to replicating that success.
Which makes me wonder if, given the sheer scale and cost of GoT, if traditional networks are daunted by the sheer cost and risk involved.
I think anything with a large cast or set pieces is going to be daunting for anyone's spreadsheet. But the real trick is to adapt entertaining books, of which there are many which look nothing like that, imo.
Yeah, I mean, visibly King & Conqueror is trying to follow that model. It looks a lot more like Westeros than 1066!
There are plenty of fantasy novels/series that are much shorter than GoT too!
Also, to be blunt, plenty that are very long if your series is a hit and can run for a decade, but don't leave you with an unfinished story that nobody will want to revisit in your back catalogue if it isn't a big enough hit to justify the cost
Indeed. And I think if one *really* feels a need to pander to the 'I don't like fantasy, other than a bunch of fantasy I am kidding myself is not fantasy', isn't that what King Arthur is for?
Vikings sort of did that with mythical Ragnar inserted into historical events.
Yeah, I think that was a v intelligent way around 'what do you do about the vikings' issue, in that basically, what we know to be true about them and what most of us collectively believe is in different galaxies.
Bernard Cornwell's Last Kingdom was excellent and, I believe, successful...
Jim, you’ve reminded me of what I loved most about the first series of “Vikings”: the sense that, through glimpses of mysticism and the presence of gods, we were experiencing an alien culture with a very different way of seeing the world. Not quite “Arrival” (the movie) but close. Great stuff.
Yeah, some fantastic stuff in there, and i think the Christian/Pagan process/struggle throughout all the series remains interesting.
Robin Hood too!
I'm wondering how the "historical, not fantasy" crowd react to things like Jonathan Strange And Mr Norrell, which is at once obviously a fantasy book/show and also sumptuously realised as a 19th century period piece.
My hobby horse on this is that it wouldn't have won anywhere near as many TV awards had people clocked it was fantasy and part of why it didn't make it out of the group stage for the Booker was that people clued into the fact it was.
Which might go a small way to explaining why Clarke went so hard on the "categorise *this*, motherfuckers" with Piranesi.
I also think about shows like Bridgerton.
So we're saying that the answer is for all of these people to watch A Court Of Fey And Flowers.
There's lots of historical novels also. At least 2 Bernard Cornwall ones that haven't been turned into telly yet.
I really enjoyed Shardlake, but it was criminally under-promoted and cancelled after one season.
I'm up to episode 5. No dragons so far. Also minimal... fraternisation.
And other stuff being adapted in Fantasy works is way more expensive per episode and GoT episodes if anything really cut down a lot of the cooler stuff for budget + filming schedules + Beinoff & Weiss wanting to go and direct Star Wars.
I mean sure can be shorter but there's like Wheel of Time which is yeah (haven't read it tho) like obviously way more ambitious and expensive to do long run even if the cast is smaller to an extent?