laughland

laughland t1_jea3m1v wrote

I’m not saying Lost is the primary influence on the content of GoT, I’m saying Lost proved that it was feasible to make a big budget genre show on TV. Yes, Rome existed, but it also got cancelled for being way too expensive. Lost actually ran for multiple seasons and kept a pretty huge following. That’s the difference. LOTR isn’t a TV show so not sure what to say there

1

laughland t1_je7h7yv wrote

Band of Brothers and Chernobyl are both mini-series…Succession is better than Deadwood and Game of Thrones simply because both those shows didn’t end well (Deadwood cancelled and GoT is GoT). You could definitely argue the other shows you listed are better though I wouldn’t say “considerably”, they’re all in the same ballpark

1

laughland t1_jdvmj8m wrote

Lost is one of the 3 most influential TV shows along with The Sopranos and The Office so I’m not sure what you’re talking about. I don’t think The Sopranos has a much stronger foothold in actual pop culture than Lost, I don’t see significantly more Sopranos discussion than Lost, and depending on what you watch, I would say Lost is even MORE discussed. Does any reviewer talk about Yellowjackets without referencing Lost?

11

laughland t1_j5tyncf wrote

Yes but HOW expensive was 1899 to make? It’s all relative, maybe 1899 necessitated an even bigger audience draw than other “top performers” because it cost that much more. Also as others have mentioned, hours watched isn’t necessarily the best metric because you could have a ton of people watching the first episode and only a few people watching the last; what does that mean for the viability of a Season 2? There’s been reports that Netflix values completion rates almost just as much if not more than hours viewed

3