The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

by **Juan Cena** » Sat May 11, 2013 1:06 pm

nietoperz wrote:
I semi-agree, but let's wait and see how the situation changes after Johnny Depp's Lone Ranger movie comes out.

Since there wasn't a rush of pirate-themed TV shows after Pirates of the Caribbean come out, I'm not holding my breath.

by **Juan Cena** » Sat May 11, 2013 1:20 pm

Rockman wrote:Hatfields and McCoy's was the last attempt at a prime-time western and it was a huge success.

Hatfields and McCoy's doesn't quite count as a Western, since it happened in Kentucky and West Virginia.

Deadwood on HBO was fairly successful too, not as much as say Game of Thrones but still pretty solid.

Justified is a modern western and is a huge success for FX.

I think if you had a well-made western it would draw an audience naturally, add in the supernatural stuff even more so.

Those were also cable shows, which grants them a little more freedom to experiment. That is something that isn't quite so on traditional (Big Three) network TV.

by **habitual** » Sat May 11, 2013 2:20 pm

Juan Cena wrote:
Since there wasn't a rush of pirate-themed TV shows after Pirates of the Caribbean come out, I'm not holding my breath.

That's because doing a show in a water/ocean theme setting are expensive and the stuff production crew nightmares are made of.

Westerns are much easier and cheaper to produce, it's practically Studio City's backyard.

Hab

by **Juan Cena** » Sun May 12, 2013 3:08 am

habitual wrote:
That's because doing a show in a water/ocean theme setting are expensive and the stuff production crew nightmares are made of.

Westerns are much easier and cheaper to produce, it's practically Studio City's backyard.

Hab

If westerns were really more cheaper to produce, there'd be more westerns on TV.

The fact that there are few Westerns made these days tell you that studios and networks probably think that the amount of return they would get on a western project would probably not be large enough to justify the investment in producing them en masse.

by **habitual** » Sun May 12, 2013 9:27 am

Juan Cena wrote:

If westerns were really more cheaper to produce, there'd be more westerns on TV.

The fact that there are few Westerns made these days tell you that studios and networks probably think that the amount of return they would get on a western project would probably not be large enough to justify the investment in producing them en masse.

They are cheaper, it's common sense. :roll:

Hab

by **Rockman** » Sun May 12, 2013 9:59 am

habitual wrote:
They are cheaper, it's common sense.

Hab

No it's not.

Rock

by **Zero** » Sun May 12, 2013 11:29 am

Victorian Squid wrote:I disagree entirely, I think a Western with supernatural themes has a much better chance making it to network TV these days than a straight genre oater.

Didn't Fox have a sci-fi western a few years ago? I seem to recall that being a massive success.

by **Rockman** » Sun May 12, 2013 11:37 am

Doesn't sci-fi have a science fiction show out right now called Defiance, that has a western theme? And they just renewed it for a second season after only 4 episodes. Also provided the highest ratings for the network since 2006.

Firefly is not the end and be all of science fiction.

by **nietoperz** » Sun May 12, 2013 11:39 am

Rockman wrote:Doesn't sci-fi have a science fiction show out right now called Defiance, that has a western theme? And they just renewed it for a second season after only 4 episodes. Also provided the highest ratings for the network since 2006.

Firefly is not the end and be all of science fiction.

It's not exactly a Western, though it does have a vaguely frontierish vibe to it. It's also great, if you haven't had a chance to catch it yet.

by **Rockman** » Sun May 12, 2013 11:42 am

nietoperz wrote:
It's not exactly a Western, though it does have a vaguely frontierish vibe to it. It's also great, if you haven't had a chance to catch it yet.

Neither was firefly though

and I agree the show is very good so far. A lot of interesting characters, and Julie Benz is still as gorgeous as she was the last time I saw her on Angel.

by **habitual** » Sun May 12, 2013 11:49 am

Firefly was much more of a western than Defiance, which has been pretty good so far.

Hab

by **Lord Simian** » Sun May 12, 2013 12:37 pm

Juan Cena wrote:The fact that there are few Westerns made these days tell you that studios and networks probably think that the amount of return they would get on a western project would probably not be large enough to justify the investment in producing them en masse.

That's pretty much the exact same argument I am making about Target and FCBD in the other thread, you know.

by **Victorian Squid** » Sun May 12, 2013 12:42 pm

Zero wrote:
Didn't Fox have a sci-fi western a few years ago? I seem to recall that being a massive success.

Are you trying to be coy or something? Gross. :smt078

If you mean Firefly, and also mean by "a few years" 11 years ago, then yes, I agree that inspiring an enduring cult following after this long despite the network's complete blundering with the show and being spun off into other media is a successful property.

Why would you pretend over a decade ago is what's trending currently?

by **Rockman** » Sun May 12, 2013 3:09 pm

honestly the only thing the network did wrong was air episodes out of order.

by **Victorian Squid** » Sun May 12, 2013 3:11 pm

I thought it had some terrible time-slots, but it's been over 10 years so maybe I don't remember that right. But given the fanbase and cult status, cancelling it too soon also amounts to a bad decision IMO. I liked the show well enough, but I run into hardcore fans of it all the time.