Interesting stats...

So weird how HBO does *beep* They praise Girls even though barely anyone watches. I don't get it. All I can say is, their subs must skyrocket amongst feminists between Jan-March.

I would guess it all comes down to the overall production costs. There is a reason channels like History, A&E, and TLC show what they show. At least HBO doesn't flood its network with 10 different versions of Girls.

There are a few things to consider, though. Girls has a minuscule budget compared to "Carnivale"...it was $3-$5 million per episode, no? And it's obvious, too because this show that's now older than a decade has such great production values it's believable that it was shot in 2012. Also who knows what the execs then were thinking, but I know they thought the show was slow paced, confusing and boring. (When in fact IMO it's the most interesting show they've ever had, tied maybe with GoT but I'd rather know how Carnivale ends than how GoT will.)

--

"Betty's voice brought darkness to the land." - Amanda Tanen

There are a few things to consider, though. Girls has a minuscule budget compared to "Carnivale"...it was $3-$5 million per episode, no? And it's obvious, too because this show that's now older than a decade has such great production values it's believable that it was shot in 2012. Also who knows what the execs then were thinking, but I know they thought the show was slow paced, confusing and boring. (When in fact IMO it's the most interesting show they've ever had, tied maybe with GoT but I'd rather know how Carnivale ends than how GoT will.)

--

"Betty's voice brought darkness to the land." - Amanda Tanen