Did you discover the books because of the TV Show?

[AcornArmy]

At some point last year, we had a big discussion on how we'd approach the show if we were starting over from scratch.  Don't remember which thread that was in or if it's still around.  Anyway, my idea would be to have HBO or one of the other premium networks do the show as a season of 10-12 one hour long episodes.  The first season could contain the first three books, the second season could possibly cover the next three, but after that it'd cover two books per season, giving each book a solid 5-6 hours of screen time.  These books aren't nearly as long as GRRM's, so they wouldn't need a full season per book, as squeeifying as that would be.  If the books got the premium network treatment in that general format, I think it would most likely be a phenomenal production.

That is an awesome idea, and I now hope it happens.

[Shecky]

     I admit that I could be wrong about production costs. Having said that; I lost my taste for broadcast television years ago. I would rather see the franchise go to the theaters the way Star Trek has gone. The publicity for movies would generate more interest in the Dresden Files books, as well as Jim's other works.

Game of Thrones is a huge point in the other direction; with the airing and success of the TV show, the books jumped back on the bestseller list and have stayed there.

Hey, I'm not a TV fan, either—I could easily go a month without seeing any TV and not miss it. But I have to admit that there are some things that have made the small screen that are quite pleasing to watch, and GoT is one of them. In fact, I have to admit that I like the show better than the books.

[kacowkachow]

In fact, I have to admit that I like the show better than the books.

GoT benefits from great costuming and set design, which is the reason that I enjoy the show that much more than the books. There's only so many multi-page descriptions of belt buckles I can read. Also, they have a pretty great cast, and the characters really pop out with a lot of nuance. Plus, who doesn't enjoy a little sexposition.

I'd love to see the DF on the big or small screen (again-ish), but I'd be a little worried about special effects. CGI is expensive, and you can only make slinging around tubes of fire look so real. They could definitely pull it off if they took a practical approach with everything except the actual magic--seeing a full sized RCV costume would be super cool.

A direction I wouldn't mind as an alternative to live-action would be animation. It has the benefit of being able to show everything as they're described in the books, which would be pretty amazing. The only downside is the divide in acceptance which would impact the popularity somewhat, or so I would imagine.

[Quantus]

GoT benefits from great costuming and set design, which is the reason that I enjoy the show that much more than the books. There's only so many multi-page descriptions of belt buckles I can read. Also, they have a pretty great cast, and the characters really pop out with a lot of nuance. Plus, who doesn't enjoy a little sexposition.

I'd love to see the DF on the big or small screen (again-ish), but I'd be a little worried about special effects. CGI is expensive, and you can only make slinging around tubes of fire look so real. They could definitely pull it off if they took a practical approach with everything except the actual magic--seeing a full sized RCV costume would be super cool.

A direction I wouldn't mind as an alternative to live-action would be animation. It has the benefit of being able to show everything as they're described in the books, which would be pretty amazing. The only downside is the divide in acceptance which would impact the popularity somewhat, or so I would imagine.

I dunno, Ive seen some pretty decent CGI on TV shows these days.  So long as the production crews care enough not to cut corners and let is suck, they can pull off some pretty good stuff even on a weekly show. 

I would honestly rather it go to either a Series like Game of Thrones, or else a well funded Miniseries or something.  Short of a Peter Jackson extended edition epic monstrosity, Id be afraid of what they'd have to cut out to fit it all into a feature length film.

[kacowkachow]

I dunno, Ive seen some pretty decent CGI on TV shows these days.  So long as the production crews care enough not to cut corners and let is suck, they can pull off some pretty good stuff even on a weekly show.

That is true. If the crew and channel are behind it, they can really work wonders. The Blackwater episode from GoT is a great example of what you can do with CGI when your producers believe in your show (they had to beg above their episode budget to get that battle shot). The only problem is making it pretty costs a lot of money, and the places you really see that investment pay off is in dynamic areas like fire. It is definitely do-able though.

I would honestly rather it go to either a Series like Game of Thrones, or else a well funded Miniseries or something.  Short of a Peter Jackson extended edition epic monstrosity, Id be afraid of what they'd have to cut out to fit it all into a feature length film.

I would love to see it picked up by someone that can really make it true to the books like HBO. FX and AMC also wouldn't be terrible places, as they enjoy quirky programming and generally live and let live with fairly modest budgets.

Another format that might be good, depending on how streamlined the story gets, is the way the BBC's Sherlock shoots. They have three episodes a season, but each episode is ~90 minutes long. If you've had the good fortune to watch it, it provides really nice narrative completion as opposed to the cliffhanger at the end of every episode for a weekly series.

It doesn't really matter what happens, as I'll most likely end up watching it no matter public access or premium cable.   

Episode costs for some shows because they were interesting:
GoT (HBO): Pilot-$10 million, Per ep. as of S2-$6 million
Boardwalk Empire (HBO): Pilot-$18 million, Per ep-$5 million
Fringe (FOX): Pilot-$10 million, Per ep-$4 million

[Quantus]

Remember that really great yet short lived series Kings?  It was a modern day adaptation of the biblical story of David.  It was cancelled partly for costing what was called an "extravagant" sum of 10mil for the pilot and 4mil per episode (same as fringe, far less than boardwalk empires).  Most of that went to the set/location rentals.  It also tried an experimental and ultimately terrible marketing strategy. 

[kacowkachow]

Remember that really great yet short lived series Kings?  It was a modern day adaptation of the biblical story of David.  It was cancelled partly for costing what was called an "extravagant" sum of 10mil for the pilot and 4mil per episode (same as fringe, far less than boardwalk empires).  Most of that went to the set/location rentals.  It also tried an experimental and ultimately terrible marketing strategy. 

I did enjoy Kings quite a bit, thankfully I found it after it aired so I didn't have to endure the break. Ian McShane really acted some bits off during it's short run.

IMO one of the more terrible things that could happen quality wise, would be getting picked up by one of the major networks. Their reliance on Nielsen to determine what to keep and cancel is kind of problematic, not to mention their push toward the center of the bell curve. HBO on the other hand, picks up interesting shows to drive subscriptions, so episode to episode ratings don't matter nearly as much. AMC and FX aren't as good, but they are still more savvy about actual numbers (e.g. people who watch it on DVR or people without cable but who stream content) than NBC, FOX, ABC, etc.

I can't fault their business model, because it's making them money, but the cancellation of interesting and one-off shows is kind of disheartening.

[Priscellie]

Remember that really great yet short lived series Kings?  It was a modern day adaptation of the biblical story of David.  It was cancelled partly for costing what was called an "extravagant" sum of 10mil for the pilot and 4mil per episode (same as fringe, far less than boardwalk empires).  Most of that went to the set/location rentals.  It also tried an experimental and ultimately terrible marketing strategy.

Much of Kings was shot in the New York's Central Library branch, a few blocks from my old workplace.  Utterly gorgeous.

[Quantus]

Much of Kings was shot in the New York's Central Library branch, a few blocks from my old workplace.  Utterly gorgeous.

Based on what I saw in the show, I wholeheartedly agree.  Id make a trip to New York just to be able to spend time in that library

[Kunam]

I discovered the books through the tv series but, to be brutally honest, that's one of the only positive things I can say about the series.  I wanted to like it but the most I could come up with is a 'meh', at best.  Maybe it was the hockey stick thing... why on earth would a hockey stick be considered less noticeable than a staff (or, if you'd rather, a hand-crafted Ozark walking stick)??  And how they represented Bob irritated me a bit too... And the actress who played Murphy should've played Susan and vice versa... Luckily, I caught the reference to the books at the end of the opening credits and, since I read faster than I watch tv, I was soon hooked!!

Now, if a network could put the books in 90 minutes episodes, a la BBC's Sherlock, I could totally get behind that!!   Granted, they'd still have to cut tons of stuff out but it'd work better than trying to jam them into 60 minute blocks.

[THE_ANGRY_GAMER]

A Sherlock-style production would definitely work, although you might have to lengthen it as the books get longer. I can't really see Changes or Turn Coat in an hour and a half in all their glory. Done right, the DF could become America's equivalent to Sherlock: well-written, well-shot, utterly amazing.

That said, Can you imagine how good a season finale Chichen Itza would be? So much shocking stuff!

The problem would be the actors, though. I've yet to find an actor who satisfies me for Harry, or Michael.

On the subject of GoT, Emilia Clarke is now my mental image of Mab, and Sean Bean will always be Morgan (they join Benedict Cumberbatch as Nic, Summer Glau as Luccio, Miranda Otto as Charity, Leven Rambin as Molly and Eva Green as Lara).

[Chrono]

I think we need another show about the series, but that may just be my greedy nature talking.

[Quantus]

I could get enthusiastic about an animated series of proper quality.  Avatar the last Airbender level or better, and intended for American audiences (ive seen some good American stories get mangled when produced for Japanese markets).  Hell, maybe James Marsters would be up for the voice-acting

[kacowkachow]

There's actually some good things happening in American animation these days because all those kids who grew up on Batman:TAS (and the like) and comic books are getting into that industry.

In particular, Young Justice and the two Avatar series' are fairly good all around shows. For quirkyness we've got Adventure Time, Regular Show, Misadventures of Flapjack, and The Boondocks. I suppose there's also My Little Pony, not my bag but the Bronies seem to enjoy it. At least it isn't condescending and it appreciates it's fans. Forgot to mention Phineas and Ferb, great show as well.

Marsters doing some voice acting would be pretty cool, and I could see his popularity with the Whedonites helping the show take off.

Heck, Toonami just came back recently, that would be a great place for an animated DF to go.

[Quantus]

Marsters doing some voice acting would be pretty cool, and I could see his popularity with the Whedonites helping the show take off.

And he does such a damn good harry in the audiobooks, and has already developed distinct voices for a number of characters