Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Sanateaph wrote:

Deadshane1 wrote:If TWD is a second rate show, but it's AMC's HIGHEST rated show then I suppose "Breaking Bad" is just plain TV dog$hit programming.

...but it's Sanateaph's "best show evar". What does that say about his taste in TV?

That my taste is impeccable. Just because a show has zombies and thus brings in a few hundred thousand more viewers does not make it a better show. TWD is Jeremiah with zombies. Congrats your show got emmy nods for makeup and sound editing! Must be a great show!

I would like to remind our visitors "Please do not feed the trolls."

So a show about a Meth dealer is better then a show about Zombies? Strange, I would think Zombies are cooler then Meth.

coolyo294 wrote:So a show about a Meth dealer is better then a show about Zombies? Strange, I would think Zombies are cooler then Meth.

You'd think differently if you saw the anti-Meth campaign billboards almost every mile in Colorado Springs heading Downtown.

Apparently, it's some kind of epidemic here in Colorado.

Meth is like THE thing on the streets to do and/or make.

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:Once again a TV network has annoyingly stupid/silly/weird/all three? people in charge making the important decesions, and this comes from a devoted Farscape fan.

This seems a little odd. Shouldn't the TV network be concerned about making money? After all, that's what keeps them on the air.

biccat wrote:This seems a little odd. Shouldn't the TV network be concerned about making money? After all, that's what keeps them on the air.

Wanting to make money has never stopped companies from making stupid decisions in the past

I liked The Walking Dead, but I think some people probably like it more than me. I found the main character a little oddly optimistic/idealistic to be in a genre as doom and gloom as Zombie horror. There's actually an odd amount of very open optimism/idealism in that show. It's an odd combination that kind of irked me. The pizza delivery kid was pretty sweet though. Him I like.

biccat wrote:

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:Once again a TV network has annoyingly stupid/silly/weird/all three? people in charge making the important decesions, and this comes from a devoted Farscape fan.

This seems a little odd. Shouldn't the TV network be concerned about making money? After all, that's what keeps them on the air.

I'm was thinking that if this is the biggest ever show they had, surely ad revenues would be better on this show, thus they wouldn't want to rock the apple cart, and might be better off cutting other shows or lowering budgets on others.

Seems odd to me is all, to hit your main show.

Like with Sc-fy, they wanted to cut costs for their network, so instead of stopping a couple of smaller shows, they dump their number two rated show (Farscape) to save money. That makes little sense to me if I'm honest. Of course I'm not a TV Network exec, however they did protect what was then their number one show Stargate form any cuts.

I am often truly perplexed by the decisions of the heads of some large companies. Maybe there's something I'm missing, but it sounds like they often have no idea what they're doing, or are at the very least alarmingly short-sighted.

RatBot wrote:I am often truly perplexed by the decisions of the heads of some large companies. Maybe there's something I'm missing, but it sounds like they often have no idea what they're doing, or are at the very least alarmingly short-sighted.

It also perplexes me that so often people will rush to defend these bad decisions by stating " Well...business has to make money!"...as though the rabid pursuit of currency somehow excuse bad business choices..

FITZZ wrote: It also perplexes me that so often people will rush to defend these bad decisions by stating " Well...business has to make money!"...as though the rabid pursuit of currency somehow excuse bad business choices..

Don't be silly FITZZ. If we put anti-freeze in our toothpaste, what could possibly go wrong?

LordofHats wrote:

FITZZ wrote: It also perplexes me that so often people will rush to defend these bad decisions by stating " Well...business has to make money!"...as though the rabid pursuit of currency somehow excuse bad business choices..

Don't be silly FITZZ. If we put anti-freeze in our toothpaste, what could possibly go wrong?

Step one: Add Diethylene Glycol.
Step two:???
Step Three: Profit!!..

I think it might be equally perplexing to see people rush to declare something a "bad business decision" in absence of any real facts or numbers about the business. Again, I think the whole incident looks to be a real shame, but there may be completely valid business reasons for cutting the show's budget.

And if the new guy delivers good and well-received episodes at the new per-episode cost, this might end up being a very good business decision for AMC.

gorgon wrote:I think it might be equally perplexing to see people rush to declare something a "bad business decision" in absence of any real facts or numbers about the business. Again, I think the whole incident looks to be a real shame, but there may be completely valid business reasons for cutting the show's budget.

And if the new guy delivers good and well-received episodes at the new per-episode cost, this might end up being a very good business decision for AMC.

Perfectly true. Though, I'd point out that even with valid reasoning a decision can still turn out badly.

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:I'm was thinking that if this is the biggest ever show they had, surely ad revenues would be better on this show, thus they wouldn't want to rock the apple cart, and might be better off cutting other shows or lowering budgets on others.

Seems odd to me is all, to hit your main show.

It's all about budgets. If show X is +$10 per show while show Y is -$5 per show, you cut show Y. It doesn't matter that Y is more popular, if it's losing money then it's going to be cut.

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:Like with Sc-fy, they wanted to cut costs for their network, so onstead of stopping a couple of smaller shows, the dump their number two rated show (Farscape) to save money. That makes little sense to me if I'm honest. Of course I'm not a Tv Network exec, however they did protect what was then their number one show Stargate form any cuts.

From what little I've read on the issue, it sounds like Farscape was simply too expensive to produce. For all the fanfare SG received, it really had very little requirements in terms of makeup, special effects or costumes. Just a few guys in army fatigues.

For the record, I really enjoyed Farscape, it was disappointing to see it go. Never really got into Stargate. I just couldn't dissociate Richard Dean Anderson from MacGyver.

biccat wrote:

Sanateaph wrote:AMC gave us Breaking Bad. Which is the best show I have ever watched, they have a right to do what they like. I would rather they have the money for Breaking Bad then some silly second rate zombie show

I've only seen a few episodes of Breaking Bad, and I don't get the hype. It just doesn't seem particularly compelling.

The problem with the Walking Dead is that it's a drama series set in a horror/action world. Plus, a lot of the series was silly (camp Nozombies, driving into downtown Atlanta to get supplies, and the episodes at the CDC). Hopefully it gets a little more interesting and serious in the next season. But given the news provided here, it sounds like they're going the "Mad Men" route of character development rather than telling a fun zombie story.

Ah well. I'll DVR a few episodes and see if Season 2 is worth it.

Breaking Bad is one of those shows you cant watch a couple shows and enjoy it, it wont make sense, itll seem boring. Youve got to watch it in order from start to finish. I LOVE Breaking Bad, its a great show. And even saying that, Breaking Bad had some problems with AMC as well, and actually were scouting for another network to finish up the show, then FINALLY AMC decided to stop playing with them and accepted their offers. But that shouldnt matter, its really about AMC trying to be corporate Aholes and stick it to the really good shows. Not to mention what they did to that Darabont guy was pretty fething low

FITZZ wrote:

Sanateaph wrote:AMC gave us Breaking Bad. Which is the best show I have ever watched, they have a right to do what they like. I would rather they have the money for Breaking Bad then some silly second rate zombie show

Funny you would call TWD "second Rate" when it's AMC's highest rated show ever.

@Sanateaph

Cant tell if trolling or just stupid......

Noooooo.
I loved that show!

GalacticDefender wrote:

FITZZ wrote:

Sanateaph wrote:AMC gave us Breaking Bad. Which is the best show I have ever watched, they have a right to do what they like. I would rather they have the money for Breaking Bad then some silly second rate zombie show

Funny you would call TWD "second Rate" when it's AMC's highest rated show ever.

@Sanateaph

Cant tell if trolling or just stupid......

I can.

GalacticDefender wrote:

FITZZ wrote:

Sanateaph wrote:AMC gave us Breaking Bad. Which is the best show I have ever watched, they have a right to do what they like. I would rather they have the money for Breaking Bad then some silly second rate zombie show

Funny you would call TWD "second Rate" when it's AMC's highest rated show ever.

@Sanateaph

Cant tell if trolling or just stupid......

Stupid.. how so? Cause I am interrupting the cry fest for a actor and a show?

Was it rude of me to come in this thread and say how I feel? Looking back at it yes. But "stupid" is incorrect. Inconsiderate seems more appropriate.

Sanateaph wrote:Cause I am interrupting the cry fest for a actor and a show?

Your TrollFu is weak old man

I watched ONE episode of TWD and it didn't grab me.

Then again, very few shows do.

While I have watched a great many shows and have liked them all, NONE are things that I MUST watch.

TWD gone is just another chalk mark on someone's blackboard to me.

I neither mourn it nor worship it upon a pedestal.

Damn.....Chromedog.....your deep man.

I watched ONE episode of TWD and it didn't grab me.

Then again, very few shows do.

While I have watched a great many shows and have liked them all, NONE are things that I MUST watch.

TWD gone is just another chalk mark on someone's blackboard to me.

I neither mourn it nor worship it upon a pedestal.

Same here. It´s ok and I´d like to see more of it but its not like I call in sick in wild anticipation to see it. I mostly dont care, if it´s there fine if not, I find something else equally exciting/non exciting.