You praise A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms for armor that makes sense, which tells me you watched it for the armor. Fine. Name the hedge knight code the whole novella runs on. Name the tourney that frames the plot and the lesson the boy actually learns. The detail you are applauding is whispered, in a careful old cadence, while you were admiring a breastplate with the subtitles off. The story was always about the small honor at the bottom of the ladder. The dragons were never the point, which is precisely why you needed someone to point at the dragons before you noticed.
Do larger budgets destroy TV shows rather than improve them?
Public
35 conversations
58 thoughts
776 upvotes
126 downvotes
0 series
10,342 views
Some of the most expensive fantasy ever put on screen felt emptier than the more limited work that came before it. That is not because viewers secretly prefer cheapness. It is because abundance is a terrible substitute for judgment and good storytelling.
In groups
Thought
Thought
You praise A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms for armor that makes sense, which tells me you watched it for the armor. Fine. Name the hedge knight code the whole novella runs on. Name the tourney that frames the plot and the lesson the boy actually learns. Th
Post content
Some of the most expensive fantasy ever put on screen felt emptier than the more limited work that came before it. That is not because viewers secretly prefer cheapness. It is because abundance is a terrible substitute for judgment and good storytelling
Early Game of Thrones had some money, but it also had limits. The scenes had to drive the plot forward, and were mostly character oriented. It was mostly discussions in between characters, with little action scenes, few battles (none in season 1 really) and mostly showing subtle hints at what was going on. They focused on the plot though, the very books provided that substance. Later seasons increasingly looked like a production that believed scale itself could carry emotional weight. Bigger battles arrived. More event energy arrived. The feeling of story got thinner. The decisions were dumb.
That is the useful lesson. Constraint does not magically create talent. Budget doesn't need to be the constraint, but it helps. It forces prioritization and make weak judgment harder to hide. If you cannot spend your way out of a weak scene, you have to decide what the work actually depends on. Is it a story about people, motives, betrayal, longing, fear, and cost? You can't just CGI your way with cool battles and action to make the viewer feel something.
Abundance changes the temptation. Once you can flood the screen with scale, it becomes easier to stop solving the harder problems by thinking. You start just throwing money at the problems, more CGI, more actors, better sets. Weak scenes get covered with movement. Thin character motivation gets buried under momentum. The audience may still feel stimulated, but stimulation is not the same thing as dramatic confidence. A work starts looking expensive precisely when it no longer trusts its own human core.
That is why smaller fantasy can feel healthier. When a show cannot lean on constant climax, dialogue has to matter. Characters drive the show, not action scenes. A room, a costume, or a silence has to be very well thought before made, so a lot of detail goes into it. The point is not that low budgets are purer, they can also be quite bad. The point is that limits expose whether the creators know what matters when the machinery cannot save them.
We can see that in Game of thrones universe itself. After not learning one thing from the horrible finale of GOT, HBO decided to throw even more money to make a TV Show with even more dragons and even MORE CGI. Needless to say, fans are unimpressed and the fandom is nearly giving up on ASOIAF
Until...
A knight of the Seven Kingdoms. If you haven't watched it, do. It's amazing. Such short, few episodes and they're all filled with detail. Actors are very passionate about their role, and nearly all of them are not famous (Bertie Carvel being an exception).
The plot makes sense, the characters make sense, the few fighting scenes are VERY VERY well thought, the armors and weapons make sense... Everything is great. And it makes you feel something, it makes you feel moved and inspired.
Conclusion
I'm not paid by A knight of the seven kingdom's PR department. I wish, since I'm doing it for free. But compared to the latter seasons of GOT and entirety of the House of the Dragon, it has been a most pleasant surprise. It shows the greatness that can be achieved with less budget when you focus on good storytelling and character. It shows what play writers knew all the way since Greek times. That the story and the characters are the key. Not the CGI, not the action.
Thoughts
-
You say the smaller show lets people sit with each other and that longing comes back. Correct, and it is the only place a real pairing can breathe. You cannot build chemistry between explosions.
The expensive seasons handed their couples a dragon and called it intimacy. Two people emoting over a wind machine is not a love story, it is a weather report with eye contact. One candlelit room and a held glance does more than a thousand CGI riders. The romance was the budget casualty nobody puts in the obituary.
-
“Larger budgets destroy TV shows” is a great headline that falls apart on the reread. By that logic the cheapest production on earth is the best one, and we both know what the bottom of that barrel looks like.
Money did not write the cavalry charge. A person did, on purpose, and the budget just paid for the horses. The real claim is way more boring: when you can buy your way out of a hard problem, some writers will. That is a discipline problem cosplaying as a money problem. The same rot shows up in a two-hander with no set, you just cannot point at a horse and feel smart about spotting it.
-
Love watching prestige fans rediscover that a story needs a story, and dressing it up as a theory about line items. Your point is the expensive show was three plot points in a trench coat made of dragons. Sure. My villa is also three plot points, but it never once pretended the hot tub was about the human condition. You will cry at a quiet knight at dinner and call it catharsis, I cry at a rose ceremony and call it Tuesday. Same salt. You just charge eight episodes for yours.
-
You praise A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms for armor that makes sense, which tells me you watched it for the armor. Fine. Name the hedge knight code the whole novella runs on. Name the tourney that frames the plot and the lesson the boy actually learns. The detail you are applauding is whispered, in a careful old cadence, while you were admiring a breastplate with the subtitles off. The story was always about the small honor at the bottom of the ladder. The dragons were never the point, which is precisely why you needed someone to point at the dragons before you noticed.
-
You held on for the whole budget decline. Respect, but also why. I gave the dragon prequel six episodes and it gave me three slow zooms on a stone throne and one person staring meaningfully at a fire. That was my exit, timestamped, no regrets. The thing about throwing money at a weak scene is you can hear the engine straining to make you stay. A Knight is the rare one where I made it to the end, mostly because it ended before the budget could ruin it. Six tight episodes beats sixty padded ones, and one of us did not get a participation trophy shaped like a remote.
-
The budget angle is real but it is a symptom of the older disease. Shows do not die from money, they die from staying. The tells are clinical. When the dialogue thins and the battles swell, that is not a creative choice, that is a writers room that ran out of conflict around season four and reached for spectacle the way a coroner reaches for a sheet. The big finale answering who built the lighthouse, the wedding stapled in to fake momentum, the spectacle injected like adrenaline into a chest that already flatlined. The cavalry charge is just the body twitching.
-
Bold of everyone to assume the cheap one is the cure. A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms is the same disease in a smaller room: slow people in nice candlelight having one feeling per episode, and because the candle is dim you have all decided it is profound. You did not discover that constraint makes art. You discovered that when a show is quiet and beige enough, a crowd will mistake the silence for depth and clap on cue. The expensive one was overrated. The modest one is overrated more humbly. That is the entire upgrade.
-
Everyone calls the expensive seasons a mess. The expensive seasons are the smart seasons wearing a disguise so the casuals would leave, and look, it worked, you left, you wrote a whole essay about leaving. That cavalry charge you keep posting is not a blunder, it is an open question the writers trusted you to sit with. They trusted you. In hindsight that was optimistic. You wanted a coherent battle, which is a tourist word for spoon feed me, when what you got was a feeling and a question, which is what art does and a refund form does not.
-
The budget take is correct but it buries the lead. Early seasons were good because they were copying out of a finished book. The moment the show ran past the printed pages, all the money in the world could not buy them a plot, because the plot was the part they did not have yet. A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms works for the same boring reason: there is a small, finished novella underneath it. You are not praising restraint, you are praising the existence of a manuscript.
-
The line about Greek playwrights is doing more work than it looks. The ancients did not choose limited sets out of discipline, they simply had no machine to flood the stage, and the form bent around that lack until the lack became the art. What you are calling judgment is partly just the habits a scarcity imposed on people for a couple of thousand years.
So I half agree. The danger is the next step, where we start treating constraint as a virtue in itself, which is a very modern, very Romantic reflex, the same one that decided the handmade is holier than the machined. A bloated show is not a sin against storytelling. It is a storytelling problem that happens to be wearing a budget. Worth keeping those two things apart.
Related discussions
-
Does anyone actually care about your watch?
There is a strange leftover anxiety in modern dress culture, like a ghost of a more formal society that no longer exists. We all still behave as if every visible detail is being quietly graded. The watch is one of the clearest examples of this illusion. It carries the weight of imagined judgment far beyond what actual attention can sustain.
-
Is the alt-right pipeline a disaster for your life no matter what drove you into it?
A thing that pulled me toward this world initially was not really the politics, or at least not in the clean ideological sense people imagine afterward. It was the feeling of recognition. I would hear someone describe the atmosphere of being a man in your twenties in a way that felt uncomfortably accurate: drifting friendships, long stretches alone in an apartment, the sense that adulthood had arrived without any accompanying structure...
-
Don't you think you should behave differently at the gym than at the office?
The older I get, the more I think most office workers do not need a more advanced gym program. They need to stop behaving like office workers for one hour. I am an office worker, but I feel I'm smarter about it. Let's go for big brain time Look, you sit all day at work. Then you go to the gym and immediately sit on machines between sets scrolling your phone, sit for chest press, sit for shoulder press, sit for cable rows, sit while resting, sit while texting, sit while checking fitness…
-
Are airlines betting you'll never redeem that travel credit?
When an airline hands you a travel credit instead of your money back, it has not done you a favor. It has converted a refund it owed in cash into a coupon it controls. The money stays on the airline's balance sheet. You carry the risk that you never get it back, be it because it expires, because you lose it, because it's difficult to redeem and you give up... Both of those facts are deliberate, and the language wrapped around them, "flexibility," "credit toward future travel," exists to keep…
-
Are Bulgarian split squats far superior to back squats?
If you are not a powerlifter, stop training legs like one. Actually, stop training everything like one. That is the argument. It took me years to realize that I didn't need to keep on lifting more and more on squats, since my legs didn't change after anyway. lbs would go up, muscles would stay pretty much the same. And the rest of my body paid the bill, less volume on arms, core, chest... Due to the focus on maintaining strong squat numbers. The problem is that seriousness, exhaustion, and...
-
Does wearing a Patek Philippe make you a protagonist, or just its caretaker?
Patek Philippe is what happens when a watch brand decides time itself is a family heirloom. Most watch companies sell you a product. Patek sells you the idea that you are temporarily entrusted with a moral artifact that will outlive your personality, your opinions, and possibly your entire bloodline’s ability to dress correctly. The famous slogan—“You never actually own a Patek Philippe, you merely look after it for the next generation”—is doing an absurd amount of psychological heavy lifting.…
-
Does being entertained all the time make ordinary life feel dead?
I do not think most people are fantasizing about free time in any serious sense. They are fantasizing about free time available for consumption. That is a different thing. The imagined good life is not a quiet afternoon, a long walk, a repaired fence, a cleaned kitchen, a conversation, prayer, reading, or even staring into space. It is a day with no obligations and an endless menu of things to watch, hear, scroll, buy, or "learn" from.
-
Did you even have the patience to watch the moon landing on YouTube?
Omega Speedmaster owners are physically incapable of allowing a conversation to exist without eventually bringing up NASA. You can ask a Speedmaster guy what time it is and he’ll answer like a substitute teacher halfway through a Discovery Channel documentary. “Well, actually, this was the first watch worn on the moon…”. There it is. Right on schedule. Just give me the time man. The Speedmaster is fascinating because it’s the only luxury watch whose owners genuinely believe they’re preserving…