Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The $55M saga of a Netflix series nobody will ever see

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 366 posts

Re: The $55M saga of a Netflix series nobody will ever see

#141

Post by WalterBright »

Krasnol wrote: post #136
WalterBright wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand all the love for Dune. I read it, it was ok, and that was it. 3 underwhelming film adaptations is more than enough. Special effects don't make a movie anymore. What matters is plot (and music). For example, "Colossus the Forbin Project" is very good. Some other very good scifi movies: . Invaders from Mars . Flash Gordon (1980) . Terminator . Star Wars IV . Alien

If you've read only the first book, you've only read the prelude to what people love. However, considering what you recommend, I doubt it would be something you'd enjoy.

I do have all the books, but never started reading the sequels.

Re: The $55M saga of a Netflix series nobody will ever see

#143

Post by alisonatwork »

rightbyte wrote: post #23
livinginfear wrote: post #15

Since we're discussing the economics of film/TV studios, and their weird decisions. I'd like to understand why the studios are still making Star Trek shows. Each one seems to be more poorly received than the last. That's costing studios far more than $55M. Picard alone cost ~$9M per episode according to Wikipedia.

It is strange they can fail so bad, since Star Trek is essentially a setup to make any story at all each episode. I mean, McFarlains comedy-as-an-excuse Not-Star Trek Star Trek is so much more Star Trek than the new series ... at a way lower budget. Imagine if they gave him the job instead.

I know, right? To me the essential Star Trek formula - at least of TOS, TNG and Voyager - is simply to have a team of competent professionals encounter all kinds of weird and wacky creatures and anomalies, and then to resolve those encounters in a peaceful way. It's a sci-fi anthology show that emphasizes the experience of scientists, engineers and diplomats over warriors, outlaws and extremists. One of the reasons I think new Trek fails is because even when they try to make it more episodic (SNW), the characters lack the idealism that makes the show different. The Orville, on the other hand, gets it exactly right.

That said, there is a case to be made that Star Trek is now more than just TOS/TNG/Voyager, and it already was that after DS9. So I don't begrudge fans of the dark, morally gray, against-a-backdrop-of-war stories getting to see more of that in new Trek. At least the animated shows (Lower Decks and Prodigy) keep the optimistic spirit of Starfleet alive, so there's something for everyone.

Re: The $55M saga of a Netflix series nobody will ever see

#144

Post by Krasnol »

gverrilla wrote: post #102

Still waiting for Neuromancer movie.

I'm afraid it won't happen because there has been so many movies out there which were inspired by it. It could never live up to its visual and mood simulacra.

Also, after they've killed The Peripheral before it actually got interesting, I don't think there is even interest in the plot out there.

Re: The $55M saga of a Netflix series nobody will ever see

#145

Post by Krasnol »

WalterBright wrote: post #141
Krasnol wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you've read only the first book, you've only read the prelude to what people love. However, considering what you recommend, I doubt it would be something you'd enjoy.

I do have all the books, but never started reading the sequels.

I wouldn't consider them just "sequels" of the first one. As I said, the first book introduces the world. The story itself spans over an immense time.

I was only talking about the books written by Frank Herbert btw.

Re: The $55M saga of a Netflix series nobody will ever see

#146

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

no_wizard wrote: post #126
dylan604 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like Jodorwsky's Dune[0] where it's famous for not getting made. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jodorowsky%27s_Dune

IMO Dune needs to be a tv show that likely runs several seasons so all the world and backstory can be explored properly so the audience can get a full experience. Think The Wire in terms of plot discovery and forwarding (leaves out bogus exposition, means you have to pay attention to get things etc that moves along at a good pace and has forward development each episode. It would be expensive, but it’s the only way I…

SciFi did a fairly good job, with two 3-part miniseries.

They show their age, but the acting was great, and they did a fairly decent job of honoring the spirit of the books.

Swapping Alice Kriege for Saskia Reeves (as Jessica) was a bit jarring, but, at least, they both looked old enough to be Paul's mother (as opposed to his sister).

James McAvoy did a great job. It was probably one of his earlier leading roles.

Re: The $55M saga of a Netflix series nobody will ever see

#147

Post by fastball »

pbj1968 wrote: post #128

[flagged]

Because the money is gone without anything to show for it, after (allegedly) spending lots of it on... not TV show stuff. You don't see a problem with that? Did we read the same article?

I don't know about you, but if someone gave me $55m to make a TV show, I'd like to think I wouldn't blow $6m of that betting on the stock market. If even one of these allegations are true (and honestly I don't really see a reason to doubt them), this is a hilariously brazen misappropriation of funds.

Obviously we haven't seen the contract/deal he signed with Netflix, but I highly doubt it has language like "you can spend this money we're giving you on literally anything you want, including /r/WallStreetBets behavior".

Re: The $55M saga of a Netflix series nobody will ever see

#149

Post by burningChrome »

RajT88 wrote: post #10

I love these stories of sci-fi movie diasasters. There are just as many insane stories of "amazing this classic ever got made". On the topic of disasters, I recommend reading about The Starlost: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Starlost

Reminds me of the outrage over the $100M budget of Water World and how it barely got made. Today, a $100M budget is nothing. We've already had several $300M budget films this year.

Hollywood can be so crazy sometimes.

Re: The $55M saga of a Netflix series nobody will ever see

#150

Post by rightbyte »

alisonatwork wrote: post #143
rightbyte wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is strange they can fail so bad, since Star Trek is essentially a setup to make any story at all each episode. I mean, McFarlains comedy-as-an-excuse Not-Star Trek Star Trek is so much more Star Trek than the new series ... at a way lower budget. Imagine if they gave him the job instead.

I know, right? To me the essential Star Trek formula - at least of TOS, TNG and Voyager - is simply to have a team of competent professionals encounter all kinds of weird and wacky creatures and anomalies, and then to resolve those encounters in a peaceful way. It's a sci-fi anthology show that emphasizes the experience of scientists, engineers and diplomats over warriors, outlaws and extremists. One of the reasons I…

I would say Enterprise fits into the good guy optimism spirit? I was quite young when I saw it so dunno really. Saw it first for some reason, 10 years before half TOS, TNG and Voyager.

DS9 ... was odd in the spirit regard.

Post reply on HN