HBO will start its 10-episode "House of the Dragon" on August 21st and has released the trailer. I'm wondering how many "Game of Thrones" fans here plan to at least start the new series? I'm also wondering if they would be up for buying cards, should it be successful enough to be renewed and for someone like RA to get the license?

I myself will not be starting the show at any point. I had enough after the last one, but I think I would be interested in autograph cards if stars emerge, and I really have no titles I'm chasing anymore, just certain individuals.

As for my impression of the trailer, everything seems familiar. It's supposed to be the ancestral "GoT" families centuries before, but they all look and dress like the same era to me. You can also see where certain characters may be a match up to counterparts from the previous/future show. And there will be more dragons. "GoT" was something new, but this looks like something copied.

The other thing is that, except for Matt Smith, I don't seem to know these actors by name. Even with the large international cast of "GoT", it had several well-known actors in major roles from the first episode. That other actors became famous because of the show and that others were added in as it went along made for lots of stars. I don't see where we have people equal to Bean, Headey and Dinklage in this one yet.

Any thoughts about the show or possible cards?

Well, seeing as RA has it as 2023 on their release calendar, I'm going out on a limb and say there will be cards.

Always subject to change I would guess, should the show crash and burn out of the gate.

Ed

Yes Ed you're right, "House of the Dragon" is on the NSU upcoming card list along with 6 other RA titles marked for 2023, including another Season 1 for "Strange New Worlds".

But before that, RA has "Game of Thrones Archives" marked for Fall 2022 too.

I don't think "House of the Dragon" is a guaranteed hit. I've soured on watching it from my dissatisfaction with "Game of Thrones" and I'm not unique, so I can see where many people may shrug and pass.

Having said that, I'm also sure that lots of people will tune in to see at least the first episode and decide to stay or go. Hit or not, RA always has the option of rolling any cards into a GoT release so long as they retain the license, so it shouldn't be a wasted investment for them in any case.

I'm actually excited about it (as excited as I get nowadays with shows being cancelled all the time without notice). I wasn't disappointed with the GOT ending, it wasn't great, the last season wasn't great, way too dark so that you couldn't see that big battle with the whitewalkers. But I thought it was ok to be honest. I am looking forward to more of GOTesque shows.

So, I'm down for watching it. Not really down on buying the cards because I know I will be priced out before they even are printed. But that is a whole other issue.

I will definitely watch it. Looking over the cast it would be a ton of fresh signatures into the card market.

Olivia Cooke did sign a few cards for Bates Motel and Graham McTavish has had some. Not sure if Matt Smith ever did any Dr Who cards. It would be a double win for RA if they could get him to cooperate.

I would have interest in collecting at least the first release.

I'm looking forward to the show and the prospect of cards

I am with Hammer on this one. I am looking forward to watching this next week. A new card license would be a welcome treat too.

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
I will definitely watch it. Looking over the cast it would be a ton of fresh signatures into the card market.

Olivia Cooke did sign a few cards for Bates Motel and Graham McTavish has had some. Not sure if Matt Smith ever did any Dr Who cards. It would be a double win for RA if they could get him to cooperate.

I would have interest in collecting at least the first release.

I think a Doctor Who set with Matt Smith autographs was solicited, but I'm not sure if that set ended up with his autograph in it, or if it was even issued. Smith does have a signed card from 258West from back when Marco made card-sized autograph pieces.

I picked up an Olivia Cooke as I liked her in "Ready Player One" and I have a McTavish Hobbit auto because I wanted him for my "Preacher" (AMC TV series) auto set. He was the Saint of Killers on that show.

Really enjoyed the first episode, I thought Milly Alcock was excellent. Hopefully more dragons and some battles in future episodes.

quote:

Originally posted by Neilsy:
Really enjoyed the first episode, I thought Milly Alcock was excellent. Hopefully more dragons and some battles in future episodes.

Yeah it didn't waste any time getting into it...that's for sure!

Getting a bit pumped up for this card set. Might be my first case buy in a really long time.

So what happened with the discussion about this show. I haven't watched any of it and I was expecting that viewers would be talking about Season 1 like we did about GoT. But the thread is dead.

When the card set appears, who are the stars and the sleepers we should be buying?

I really liked this, and am looking forward to the card set.

My issue with the card set is that, not watching the show, I don't know who the potential breakout actors will be.

With Game of Thrones, we got a bunch of younger, fairly unknown actors who became the stars over time, as they matured. However, GoT had several established and even well-known actors that already had a following prior to the show. It was because of those people that I bought Season 1 autograph cards.

Looking at the credits for House of the Dragon, I can't recognize more than a couple of names. Perhaps they are better known internationally than in the US but, except for Matt Smith, there is no one I need as a signer based on previous work. I think that includes what must be guest stars or temporary characters.

That was certainly not the case with GoT. Stars were made, but it also arrived with known actors as stars and guests. I notice that HotD has not used any actors previously associated with GoT yet. I don't mean in the same roles obviously, since this is a different time period, but they could play other parts or even ancestors in the families.

So when that first season of cards comes out, besides looking for the Kings and Queens, which other HotD actors are likely to make the whole run? Who are likely to be the next Clarke, Harington, Williams, and Turner of this series? Who are the ones we don't know well now, but will be on magazine covers by Season 3?

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
I notice that HotD has not used any actors previously associated with GoT yet. I don't mean in the same roles obviously, since this is a different time period, but they could play other parts or even ancestors in the families.

I think if they did that it would be incredibly confusing for the general watchers of the show. The conspiracy theories would abound LOL! It would be a very bad idea to do that.

BTW, has the full season been released yet? I am waiting to get HBO Plus until I can binge watch it. I can't wait to see it.

Yes, the whole first season is up now, and you've got plenty of time to watch it. While Season 2 is being worked on now, there's no chance of it premiering until 2024.

As for autograph cards, the lead female characters will be the most popular as usual, especially the pair who played Rhaenyra (Emma D'Arcy and Milly Alcock).

Matt Smith as Daemon has some love already from having played Doctor Who and he's a cool character on this.

Beyond that, the young Targaryen actors' cards (that's multiple actors for each character in season 1) could have some heat. One of them is a son of another Doctor Who, David Tennant.

Paddy Considine as the King was spectacular. I have a set of all of the signers from the original series, but don't intend to collect House of the Dragon cards. That said, Paddy was so great, I might get his card. I hope they remember him come Emmy time, but this show happened very early in the nominating period, so the individual performances will likely be forgotten by then. (I suspect the show will still be nomintated for Best Series.)

quote:

Originally posted by chesspieceface:
Yes, the whole first season is up now, and you've got plenty of time to watch it. While Season 2 is being worked on now, there's no chance of it premiering until 2024.

These streaming shows are taking too long between seasons. They are new and hot, and then they disappear for 18 months or longer.

By the time this year's "Stranger Things" showed up, not only did I forget where it left off, all the younger actors had outgrown their parts. All the older actors already playing younger characters looked like the cast of "Grease".

If Season 2 of HotD is mid 2024, the cards for Season 2 can't come out until 2025. How can RA do 2 sets a year, which is their ideal, when the show is doing 2 seasons every 4 years?

I'm inclined to agree. I think they should try to whip up 12 episodes a year for these kinds of shows and then drop them one episode each month, so that the show is pretty much always on and current, albeit no longer close to weekly. Maybe every once and a while they could do an extra long episode and that could serve as a sort of season finale for each year, a breaking point in the action as people like.

quote:

Originally posted by chesspieceface:
I'm inclined to agree. I think they should try to whip up 12 episodes a year for these kinds of shows and then drop them one episode each month,

People seem to forget just how long it takes to produce shows like 'Stranger Things' and HotD. The CG effects take a huge amount of time to produce, if you want them to look good. With shows like HotD, the bulk of what you see on screen has been created by a large team of highly skilled CG artists and animators. The most recent series of 'Stranger Things' was the same. The actors are finished in a few weeks, the SFX teams then have to work for months and months to get everything else right. Increasingly, they are being given insufficient time and being forced to work ridiculous hours to make the deadlines.

You can't just 'whip up 12 episodes' in less than a year and hope that they will still look good. This is increasingly true now that most homes have 4K UHD TV sets on their walls. While computers have become faster and more powerful, it still takes horrendous amounts of time to render out the final products. Then there is the amount of time it takes to create everything, work out and implement the animations involved and then you have to combine everything to produce the finished product. This takes months and months....if you want it to look good.

I have an active interest in 3D computer graphics and still sit at my PC and create models and animations. I even got to do a bit of contract work for the CG animated reboot of Gerry Andersons' 'Captain Scarlet' a few years ago. So I know what is involved in producing this sort of thing at high quality.

I do sometiimes wonder if people realise just how much CG is used in TV shows these days. Not just the superhero and scifi shows but even historical dramas like 'Bridgerton' make extensive use of CG effects to produce what is seen on screen.

The simple truth is, if you want multi-episode TV series that have cinema quality on-screen production, then you are going to have to allow for longer times between seasons. Anything less will result in increasingly poor quality.

*** Rant over ***

I agree entirely with your point Kevin, I just find it unimportant for my own enjoyment of TV or cinema entertainment. I need a good story with a good script and good actors. 3D graphics, extensive CG, museum quality recreations, cinema quality in my bedroom, not so much.

Some of the greatest movies ever made are over 50 years old and perhaps in black and white. The remakes, if even attempted, are almost always inferior. No, I'm not suggesting going backwards to B/W films and monsters in rubber suits. I'm talking about overkill. I'm talking about being more concerned with a green screen and a computer and a costume design than the live performances and the story being told.

Not everyone needs CG effects or graphicly detailed scenes to be entertained. Some things are actually better left to the imagination. And how much of this terrific, expensive CG doesn't work when you see it?

Also consider this in this age, how many people are watching this cinematic experience on their 6-inch phones? Kind of defeats the whole purpose, doesn't it?

There is a balance between the minimum and perfection. You can put out a quality movie or show without spending millions on the special effects and taking years to do it. You can make a solid 10-episode season in less than a year, pandemic years excluded.

People don't want poor quality, but they are quite happy with good enough quality. I never got to enjoy most of GoT's "The Long Night" because all that superb CG was too dark to see a damn thing. What's the point in that, it ruined it. People worship James Cameron when his way of making movies has evolved into insanity. All his main work is before 2000. Since 2000 he did Avatar, and he's been working on Avatar 2 - 4 ever since. That's nuts, no matter how it turns out, but that's what perfection will get you.

OK, now my rant is over, for now.