A Game of Thrones - TV Show Discussion Thread

[Guynemer]

BTW earlier in this thread we were discussing downloading of content so I thought I'd put this here.

http://torrentfreak.com/police-plans-to-raid-the-pirate-bay-120309/

Apparently, The Pirate Bay is claiming that Swedish authorities are once again getting ready to raid their servers. I wonder if they'll be able to keep the website off line for more than one hour this time?

Christ, I hope so. **** The Pirate Bay, and every website like it.

Culture of entitled whiner *******s.

[Guynemer]

Yep. It's an overwhelming victory for style over substance.

True. But, as a counter argument, a knockout redhead with giant knockers.

[Dinner]

Wrong thread.

[Main_Brain]

True. But, as a counter argument, a knockout redhead with giant knockers.

Ah, the One from Firefly?

[Dinner]

Yeah.

[Guynemer]

Ah, the One from Firefly?

She is, indeed, The One.

[Wezil]

Wait... you cite VIOLENCE as a reason Breaking Bad is popular? And secondly, have you not seen Grimm or, heck, CSI who has gore levels off the charts.

And Californication is crap. Also there is nothing, aside from advertisers, preventing broadcast shows from having drugs displayed.

This is the weakest argument ever. Are you trying to argue that Entourage is better then Seinfeld because it had nudity and cursing?

No, the violence in Breaking Bad is (among others) one reason why you would never see it on broadcast tv.

As to the others I mentioned, I was countering your selective examples from ONE cable network (which admittedly is less extreme than the others) as evidence of popular shows on cable that simple COULD NOT air on broadcast. As I said, the list is very long (you didn't respond to Sopranos...)

As to your strawman - I never said Entourage is better than Seinfeld, you did. Is it possible to have a great show on broadcast TV? Absolutely, but the system favours cable.

Look at the evidence. The cable networks have been eating broadcast TV's lunch for years now.

[DaShi]

Christ, I hope so. **** The Pirate Bay, and every website like it.

Culture of entitled whiner *******s.

Turns out eBook publishers are screwing us!

Apple in antitrust crosshairs over e-book pricing
By Casey Johnston | Published a day ago

Left, a book from the publisher Hachette Digital, one of the publishers that may be colluding with Apple on e-book prices; right, the same book on Amazon, for the same price.
The Department of Justice has plans to sue Apple for allegedly colluding to fix the prices of e-books, the Wall Street Journal reported Thursday.

Until fairly recently, publishers sold books to retailers for around half the suggested cover price, and then retailers were free to set their own prices. In recent years, Apple has turned its e-books business in the iBookstore over to an "agency model," where publishers decide how much the book will sell for at a given retailer, but must take into account the fact that Apple gets a 30 percent cut of each sale. On top of that, Apple stipulated that the publishers could not sell their e-books for lower prices anywhere else.

According to quotes pulled from Steve Jobs by Walter Isaacson, Jobs said that publishers then took the agency model to other e-book retailers and told the retailers they had to agree to the minimum retail price set by Apple's pricing strictures, preventing other e-book sellers like Amazon from undercutting the competition. The five publishers under scrutiny for working with Apple in this way include Simon and Schuster, Hachette Book Group, the Penguin Group, Macmillan, and HarperCollins.

The DoJ believes these actions constitute a violation of antitrust law, and are attempting to settle the case with the relevant companies. If a settlement is not reached, according to the WSJ, the DoJ will sue Apple and the five publishers.

Torrent books!!!!

[Dinner]

Most ebooks actually are on torrents. Also Apple is definitely guilty of price fixing.

[Imran Siddiqui]

No, the violence in Breaking Bad is (among others) one reason why you would never see it on broadcast tv.

The violence in Breaking Bad wouldn't be out of place on the broadcast networks these days.

popular shows on cable that simple COULD NOT air on broadcast. As I said, the list is very long (you didn't respond to Sopranos...)

You do realize The Sopranos was first offered to Fox, right?

Look at the evidence. The cable networks have been eating broadcast TV's lunch for years now.

Look at the ratings - broadcast TV kills cable TV. A show like Mad Men with its 0.9 rating would never survive half a season on broadcast. The issue isn't the FCC banning violence or sex, its that those shows don't get the ratings broadcast is used to.

[MikeH]

That's "nice". Some people do enjoy turning to piracy, but I wonder if they'll be pleased if enough people do it so HBO doesn't have the funds to make shows like this in the future? GoT is VERY expensive from all reports. HBO gets no money from cable fees. The vast majority of their money comes from subscriber fees. They make some on DVD and Blu-ray sales but not nearly enough to fund their shows since they don't get cable fees. In order to afford high quality productions they need to get as many subscriber fees as possible. That means delaying the DVDs.

HBO (and Showtime) are in a different league than other cable programing (that and their shows cost far more than other cable programming). But, if you'd like to accelerate the day when HBO just can't afford to make shows like this anymore, go ahead...

I don't have the option of subscribing to HBO.

I can watch whatever HBO shows are picked up (pretty much all by Sky Atlantic now, as part of a Sky subscription) but I also can't watch all of those seasons on demand like a US HBO subscriber.

[Wezil]

The violence in Breaking Bad wouldn't be out of place on the broadcast networks these days.

Strange they don't run shows like that then. Odd choice.

You do realize The Sopranos was first offered to Fox, right?

And how did Sopranos on Fox turn out? Reruns of Sopranos on A&E has been edited into a farce by all accounts (I haven't seen it).

Look at the ratings - broadcast TV kills cable TV. A show like Mad Men with its 0.9 rating would never survive half a season on broadcast. The issue isn't the FCC banning violence or sex, its that those shows don't get the ratings broadcast is used to.

Great. The TV programs that can be picked up for virtually no cost have more viewers than the channels you must specifically subscribe to. What a shocker.

[Lorizael]

Way to kill Apolyton, Wezil.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I don't have the option of subscribing to HBO.

I can watch whatever HBO shows are picked up (pretty much all by Sky Atlantic now, as part of a Sky subscription) but I also can't watch all of those seasons on demand like a US HBO subscriber.

So you wait for when the DVDs get release. Why are you entitled to get something for free?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Strange they don't run shows like that then. Odd choice.

*sigh* As I've pointed out, CSI has just as much violence and gore as Breaking Bad (I continue to watch Breaking Bad as I've stopped watching CSI a long time ago because it was too gory). They don't run shows like Breaking Bad because it isn't going to get the same ratings.

And how did Sopranos on Fox turn out? Reruns of Sopranos on A&E has been edited into a farce by all accounts (I haven't seen it).

And Mad Men was first offered to HBO. How would it turn out? The same with Mad Men on A&E. Mad Men on HBO would have more sex & cursing, but be for all other purposes the same.

Great. The TV programs that can be picked up for virtually no cost have more viewers than the channels you must specifically subscribe to. What a shocker.

Thought experiment - if Firefly was on SyFy do you think it would have been canceled? No, because it likely would have gotten good enough ratings to continue its existence. However, was a dismal ratings failure on FOX.

Same thing goes for a show like Arrested Development. Though, of course they likely were a bit more expensive for your normal cable channel.

After all, the new Battlestar Galactica, by all accounts, lost SyFy a TON of money. Though it was considered a "loss leader" - kind of like what Mad Men is to AMC - bring more shows and eventually more viewers. Though for SyFy that hasn't happened.