The Walking Drama season 3

[OMNI]

Don't you miss good TV?

miss? so wait are you claiming it was bettr in the past? fuuuuuck that personally i Think TV is finally starting to shake off that shit and try some new things like the shows both you and me enjoy...
--- merged: Apr 8, 2013 2:15 AM ---
[

So far, nothing even remotely holds a candle to Darabont's first season.

ude the first season was still cringeworthy in places as in the acting and cinematics felt.. weird yeah weird sure the story was atleast heading somewhere but it was still missing something.. im thinking more budget or perhaps TIME to polish the edeting etc but yeah it was def weird in places tho i have NEVER thought that the cast fits...

 

[Bluce Ree]

miss? so wait are you claiming it was bettr in the past? fuuuuuck that personally i Think TV is finally starting to shake off that shit and try some new things like the shows both you and me enjoy...

Yeah, but you're misunderstanding the time reference. There's no good TV on right now because the good shows are all on hiatus.

ude the first season was still cringeworthy in places as in the acting and cinematics felt.. weird yeah weird sure the story was atleast heading somewhere but it was still missing something.. im thinking more budget or perhaps TIME to polish the edeting etc but yeah it was def weird in places tho i have NEVER thought that the cast fits...

The first season felt a little rushed, crammed into 6 episodes and AMC was doing their best to f'k it all up but I think Darabont pulled it off within the sandbox he was confined. They didn't like Darabont's cinematic style because it was expensive. Rather than opt for a short seasonal format, spending a little more but creating a good quality show, they opted for cheap fillers that they can hope to exploit for at least 1/2 the year and sell more advertising. If AMC were smart, they'd run a bigger variety of high quality short seasonal format shows (6-8 episodes) all year around instead of these long, drawn out shitty fillers.

Speaking of which, did you catch the season finale of Banshee? That show rocks!

 

[OMNI]

Yeah, but you're misunderstanding the time reference. There's no good TV on right now because the good shows are all on hiatus.



The first season felt a little rushed, crammed into 6 episodes and AMC was doing their best to f'k it all up but I think Darabont pulled it off within the sandbox he was confined. They didn't like Darabont's cinematic style because it was expensive. Rather than opt for a short seasonal format, spending a little more but creating a good quality show, they opted for cheap fillers that they can hope to exploit for at least 1/2 the year and sell more advertising. If AMC were smart, they'd run a bigger variety of high quality short seasonal format shows (6-8 episodes) all year around instead of these long, drawn out shitty fillers.

Speaking of which, did you catch the season finale of Banshee? That show rocks!

agreed!

tho those filler episodes are abnorm cash cows so i doubt they will ever do that.

 

[Bluce Ree]

agreed!

tho those filler episodes are abnorm cash cows so i doubt they will ever do that.

I find that confusing, though. Does it cost less to make one shitty show filled with 16 shitty episodes or two high-quality shows of 8 episodes each, played consecutively so as to fill the same amount of calendar time? If it costs the same or less then they can make 3 or 4 of them and have original programming virtually all year around.

Suppose AMC makes four back-to-back shows throughout the year of the same quality (or better) as Breaking Bad. I might be wrong but my impression is that it would bring in more viewers, keep them around most of the year, and more revenue if the ratings rock and it should cost about the same as making two shitty shows with fillers.

AMC cut $250k out of the Walking Dreck per-episode budget. In the end, though, they end up paying more to film 16 toilet floaters that will eventually sink the show rather than continue on with Darabont's vision with 6-8 episodes.

 

[Overmind One]

I find that confusing, though. Does it cost less to make one shitty show filled with 16 shitty episodes or two high-quality shows of 8 episodes each, played consecutively so as to fill the same amount of calendar time? If it costs the same or less then they can make 3 or 4 of them and have original programming virtually all year around.

Suppose AMC makes four back-to-back shows throughout the year of the same quality (or better) as Breaking Bad. I might be wrong but my impression is that it would bring in more viewers, keep them around most of the year, and more revenue if the ratings rock and it should cost about the same as making two shitty shows with fillers.

AMC cut $250k out of the Walking Dreck per-episode budget. In the end, though, they end up paying more to film 16 toilet floaters that will eventually sink the show rather than continue on with Darabont's vision with 6-8 episodes.

Seems to me they could cut a lot more and still be able to make the stupid show. I mean, how much does it really cost to buy wardrobe from Walmart/Target? The zombie makeup is no better than what is available from Halloween stores (plus they hardly are seen much anyway).

 

[OMNI]

I find that confusing, though. Does it cost less to make one shitty show filled with 16 shitty episodes or two high-quality shows of 8 episodes each, played consecutively so as to fill the same amount of calendar time? If it costs the same or less then they can make 3 or 4 of them and have original programming virtually all year around.

Suppose AMC makes four back-to-back shows throughout the year of the same quality (or better) as Breaking Bad. I might be wrong but my impression is that it would bring in more viewers, keep them around most of the year, and more revenue if the ratings rock and it should cost about the same as making two shitty shows with fillers.

AMC cut $250k out of the Walking Dreck per-episode budget. In the end, though, they end up paying more to film 16 toilet floaters that will eventually sink the show rather than continue on with Darabont's vision with 6-8 episodes.

ok so lemme give you an exmple on how add revenue works.

ill use a youtube guy as an example he had/has a show he does 3-5 times a week each episode is around 10min or more and as he gets 100-300k views per episode he has a really good monthly salary now a few months back or maybe a year ago he launched a new channel were he hired people to basicly tell the news of the day in a moderatly funny way this is a 10 minute episode released every day with like 5 news stories all around the 2-3 min mark but here is the kicker he DOESNT release it in a single 1 10 min episode format instead he releases each 2-3min news story as a separate video which means he gets 5 times the views 5 times the ad revenue,

now push this mentality over to TV also add 500% cost to buy the add slots on tv for such a well watched show (basicly tv Movie and Music industri has overinflated costs beyond belief for this shit), see how it works is you do not get blabla amount of Money to put in each episode when making a tv show NO you get a total budget for the season which in itelf isnt that much when you compare it to the add revenue they get i would gander a guess that the cost of making a season of tv compared to the add revenue is something like 25% of expected add revenue so they would be making a stupid amount of money in return just selling the add slots 75%, so those 25% you get to play with to make your season can be played and stretched anyway you like and of course the further you stretch it and the more episodes you can make the more the add revenue will be... see the buisness idea here? and why they do what they do?
--- merged: Apr 8, 2013 at 12:27 PM ---
its really basic economics and aslong as they make more Money stretching shit out the way they do they keep doing it.

 

[Bluce Ree]

ok so lemme give you an exmple on how add revenue works.

ill use a youtube guy as an example he had/has a show he does 3-5 times a week each episode is around 10min or more and as he gets 100-300k views per episode he has a really good monthly salary now a few months back or maybe a year ago he launched a new channel were he hired people to basicly tell the news of the day in a moderatly funny way this is a 10 minute episode released every day with like 5 news stories all around the 2-3 min mark but here is the kicker he DOESNT release it in a single 1 10 min episode format instead he releases each 2-3min news story as a separate video which means he gets 5 times the views 5 times the ad revenue,

now push this mentality over to TV also add 500% cost to buy the add slots on tv for such a well watched show (basicly tv Movie and Music industri has overinflated costs beyond belief for this shit), see how it works is you do not get blabla amount of Money to put in each episode when making a tv show NO you get a total budget for the season which in itelf isnt that much when you compare it to the add revenue they get i would gander a guess that the cost of making a season of tv compared to the add revenue is something like 25% of expected add revenue so they would be making a stupid amount of money in return just selling the add slots 75%, so those 25% you get to play with to make your season can be played and stretched anyway you like and of course the further you stretch it and the more episodes you can make the more the add revenue will be... see the buisness idea here? and why they do what they do?
--- merged: Apr 8, 2013 at 12:27 PM ---
its really basic economics and aslong as they make more Money stretching shit out the way they do they keep doing it.

Got it. But isn't it also true that an ad slot in an episode of a show with more viewers would have more value than the one with fewer viewers?

Anyway, at the current ratings Walking Dreck is enjoying (12.4 million for the S3 finale), my point is moot.

 

[Bluce Ree]

ok so lemme give you an exmple on how add revenue works.

ill use a youtube guy as an example he had/has a show he does 3-5 times a week each episode is around 10min or more and as he gets 100-300k views per episode he has a really good monthly salary now a few months back or maybe a year ago he launched a new channel were he hired people to basicly tell the news of the day in a moderatly funny way this is a 10 minute episode released every day with like 5 news stories all around the 2-3 min mark but here is the kicker he DOESNT release it in a single 1 10 min episode format instead he releases each 2-3min news story as a separate video which means he gets 5 times the views 5 times the ad revenue,

now push this mentality over to TV also add 500% cost to buy the add slots on tv for such a well watched show (basicly tv Movie and Music industri has overinflated costs beyond belief for this shit), see how it works is you do not get blabla amount of Money to put in each episode when making a tv show NO you get a total budget for the season which in itelf isnt that much when you compare it to the add revenue they get i would gander a guess that the cost of making a season of tv compared to the add revenue is something like 25% of expected add revenue so they would be making a stupid amount of money in return just selling the add slots 75%, so those 25% you get to play with to make your season can be played and stretched anyway you like and of course the further you stretch it and the more episodes you can make the more the add revenue will be... see the buisness idea here? and why they do what they do?
--- merged: Apr 8, 2013 at 12:27 PM ---
its really basic economics and aslong as they make more Money stretching shit out the way they do they keep doing it.

Got it. But isn't it also true that an ad slot in an episode of a show with more viewers would have more value than the one with fewer viewers?

Anyway, at the current ratings Walking Dreck is enjoying (12.4 million for the S3 finale), my point is moot.

 

[OMNI]

Got it. But isn't it also true that an ad slot in an episode of a show with more viewers would have more value than the one with fewer viewers?

Anyway, at the current ratings Walking Dreck is enjoying (12.4 million for the S3 finale), my point is moot.

no really no seeing as they pay for the air slot in advance even if there was some clause in the contract that forced them to pay some Money back if said episode didnt perform as expected its barly worth noting, but yeah no overall it amkes more sence to procue longer drawn out shite then it does say 6 episodes that would get 50million Viewers each, first and formemost it is a buisness not an artform as people like you and me would prefer helle even shit you and i do enjoy is still a buisness first however sometimes the people running the buisness also want to make art and manage to do it with the limitations of the buisness model but yeah there are not many of those around at all...
--- merged: Apr 8, 2013 at 1:06 PM ---
anyway understanding this part of the entertainment industry you will then start to see why they do what they do and make you able to critique a show in a real way.

knowing this still doesnt explain why the fuck people turn out in such droves to watch it tho as imo they are just being played by TPTB exploited for their Money then they also worship TPTB that rape them... its really astonashing to me that people are so blind and unbeliveably fucking STUPID!

 

[mzzz]

 

[Backstep]

The Broadway bit at the end priceless

 

[YJ02]

I found this 'gem' to be just as good as TWD:

 

[heisenberg]

I posted that in FH :p but yeah, that is amazing.

Anyway, I got around watching the season finale for this show and OMG, did they go back to the beginning of this season? I mean,nothing really happened other than well, a whole lot of nothing.

This means that we are going to get whole bunch of nonsense again. Pick another antagonist for pete's sake.

 

[mzzz]

I didn't realize you posted until after I posted already, sorry man. Where'd you find it? I found it over at screenrant.

Yeah, that's usually what seems to happens with a series that has little direction or overall plot. They just tend to meander around in circles, mini-reset buttons with inflated melodrama cause they don't really have much of a story to tell.

 

[mzzz]

 

[heisenberg]

 

[YJ02]

at least the walkers are getting skinnier....

 

[Joelist]

Still looks dumb. Also looks like we'll lose another Token S Token Esq (the III or IV I think?)

 

[Overmind One]

Meh....Ill watch it. That premiere, that is. It could be a bunch of edited scenes out of order.

 

[ParagonPie]

Whelp no need to watch the entire season because they've just showed all the action scenes.

 

[Bluce Ree]

Meh....Ill watch it. That premiere, that is. It could be a bunch of edited scenes out of order.

That clip embodies clips from about half the season's episodes. If you think they cram that much into a single episode then you're either dreaming or haven't watched a single episode of that show.

By the way, did we see token as a zombie near the end of the clip?

Farewell, Token S. Preston Esq. III. We saw the possible new Token briefly early in the clip.


Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2