HBO TV Show Rome

[Mark Antony]

The first season of Rome is one of the best seasons of television ever. The second season not so much, if it wasn't for James Purefoy as Mark Antony being such a class act, I would have called that season a disaster.

Kinda overstating it no? Season two is not anywhere near as good as season one cause of the cancellation which made them have to rush Egypt but the season is still top television imo and up to Phillipi I'd say it's on par with most of season one.

[Mark Antony]

Cirian Hinds as Caeser.

Masterclass showing. Hinds is great in everything he does but his Caesar is a cut above. Terrific performance.

[Humble AK]

Love Rome. It's one of the few series I can rewatch. I think season 2 is terrific as well, even with the pacing issues. I think I like it even better than the first season, in fact.

He's got hard feelings towards GoT IIRC. Supposedly GoT might have been partially responsible for Rome being canceled.

Purefoy talked about this in an interview, then later recanted and said he'd love to be in Thrones. I imagine now that that abomination of a show The Following has ended, he 'd really love to be in Thrones.

As for whether Thrones actually ended Rome, I doubt it. Rome lasted until 2007, which is when HBO bought the rights to Thrones. The pilotof Thrones took years to develop to a state where HBO could greenlight the show. Several times during early production D & D had to go out of their way to reignite HBO's interest in the property.

It would be odd if HBO had decided to cancel a show that was performing somewhat more weakly than they'd hoped but was in full production swing for the sake of some distant future show that only had a chance of even being made.

Regardless of what the case is, I doubt HBO regrets the outcome. Even if you don't count for inflation Rome was way more expensive than Thrones, but the payoff was much less. Thrones is waaaaay more of a critical and commercial success than Rome. It's not even close. Look at the metacritic and imdb scores; also Rome was never even nominated for best show for the major awards (Emmy, Critic's Choice, WGA), whereas Thrones is nominated or wins every year.

This is probably the only site where you'll find highly negative opinions regarding Thrones. With Rome, opinions are much more mixed. Yes, I'm sure HBO is very happy with the outcome if it was the case of Thrones replacing Rome.

Anyway, Rome got a far better ending than Deadwood or Carnivale, so there is that at least. It's a great show, and the best swords and sandals show out there (it kicks the ever-loving crap out of Spartacus).

[Cashless Society]

^ Actually, the execs at HBO do regret cancelling Rome, they admitted that they never took into account the DVD Boxset sales which would have covered the production costs.

[The Lord of Cinder]

THIRTEEEEEENTH!!! THIRTEEEEENTH!!!

I love that scene so much.

I love Rome so much. Need to rewatch so much. That show made learning about the Roman Empire in high school history class so much more interesting. Season 1 has to be one of my favorite seasons of anything, but it's such a shame season 2 was so rushed. HBO, you dun goofed.

Edit: When FTW happened in GoT, I couldn't help but think back to Ides of March in Rome and how much better it was in basically every way.

[Humble AK]

^ Actually, the execs at HBO do regret cancelling Rome, they admitted that they never took into account the DVD Boxset sales which would have covered the production costs.

I was speaking in terms of replacing it with Thrones. Thrones easily outsells Rome in DVD sales. Thrones sells the most DVDs of any TV show out there and regularly competes with top movies. That's in addition to being the most watched show in HBO's history, and the most marketable show internationally. Just selling the rights to air overseas nearly covers Thrones' budget. The rest is pure, ludicrously high profit. And then there's merchandising, of which for Rome there was none and for Thrones it's crazy.

Indeed, Thrones is regularly credited as one of the most, if not the most, profitable properties for not just HBO, but the parent company Time Warner. When you see their quarterlies, you see Thrones mentioned.

So obviously, if HBO had to go with one or the other, they would easily go with Thrones. That said, it is too bad we couldn't have both.

[Myrddin]

Or you can say that HBO learned their lesson by underestimating the power of merchandising with Rome, and corrected that oversight with GoT.

[Humble AK]

Or you can say that HBO learned their lesson by underestimating the power of merchandising with Rome, and corrected that oversight with GoT.

Yes, I think they learned from a lot of mistakes in their handling of Rome. Budget, merchandise, and DVD sales as something to consider. And to be truly fair to Rome, Thrones didn't really take off like it did until after season 3, so if Rome had a Red Wedding kind of event in store, perhaps it would have rocketed on high.

But I doubt it. Thrones is a unique concoction that from the beginning has really resonated with fans. It's weird and different and there's literally nothing else out there like it. There is no show that is like Thrones. There are plenty of shows like Rome; Rome just happens to be the best of them.

People didn't cosplay or attend Rome conventions. It wasn't that kind of show. Likewise with its merchandise. I think it might have had a market for merchandise, but it would be minimal. Sort of like if Deadwood or Band of Brothers tried to merchandise.

[RumHam]

Wasn't it canceled in part because the BBC didn't want to co-finance another season?

[Zorral]

He's got hard feelings towards GoT IIRC. Supposedly GoT might have been partially responsible for Rome being canceled.

How would that have been the case? Links?

[Zorral]

In any case Rome was vastly better scripted, shot and acted in every way.

[Humble AK]

In any case Rome was vastly better scripted, shot and acted in every way.

That certainly seems to be the opinion of dozens of people around here. It's a shame none of them are professional critics, hand out awards, or are millions in number or there might be legitimacy to that claim.

[Arakan]

That certainly seems to be the opinion of dozens of people around here. It's a shame none of them are professional critics, hand out awards, or are millions in number or there might be legitimacy to that claim.

Who cares about GOT in a thread about Rome? Jesus...

There is a Show forum, go there and praise the greatness of GOT.

[Humble AK]

Who cares about GOT in a thread about Rome? Jesus...

There is a Show forum, go there and praise the greatness of GOT.

Apparently a lot of people, since it has been brought up several times, to which I've responded.

I would be perfectly content just praising Rome, because it's awesome. At the same time, I like to address opinions that would suggest it is an evidently superior show than Thrones, because there's nothing evident about it.

Fortunately we live in a world where you can choose to watch and enjoy one or the other, or both.

[CyanidePie]

I did not hate Rome, but I certainly didn't love it either. I mean we were sitting in the most fascinating period in military and political history and we're spending entirely too much time watching Atia and Servilia's bitchfight, Prefect Robot IV's awkward attempt to assimilate himself back into his home life, and a classic Jock-Gets-The-Girl-After-Killing-Her-Husband love story. Fuck. Off. What are we doing? We're in the middle of the death throes of the Roman Republic and we're watching a whose-baby-is-it soap opera plot line. Wow, fascinating.

Costumes looked nice though.

[Castel]

Yes, I think they learned from a lot of mistakes in their handling of Rome. Budget, merchandise, and DVD sales as something to consider. And to be truly fair to Rome, Thrones didn't really take off like it did until after season 3, so if Rome had a Red Wedding kind of event in store, perhaps it would have rocketed on high.

But I doubt it. Thrones is a unique concoction that from the beginning has really resonated with fans. It's weird and different and there's literally nothing else out there like it. There is no show that is like Thrones. There are plenty of shows like Rome; Rome just happens to be the best of them.

People didn't cosplay or attend Rome conventions. It wasn't that kind of show. Likewise with its merchandise. I think it might have had a market for merchandise, but it would be minimal. Sort of like if Deadwood or Band of Brothers tried to merchandise.

I have to agree. What drew people to the books when they weren't selling that well drew people to the show, except that there was nothing else like it on television and it was perfectly up HBO's alley.

It's a show that not only doesn't have strange historical baggage but mixes in a bunch of tropes that today's "nerds" (read: anyone that has heard of a dragon) can get behind while also seeming like a mature show for mature adults who want to see the complex politicking and shit.

Even if I don't love it (or honestly even like it) today I can recognize that it is sort of the perfect storm of a show regardless of whether it's actually a better show than Rome.

I did not hate Rome, but I certainly didn't love it either. I mean we were sitting in the most fascinating period in military and political history and we're spending entirely too much time watching Atia and Servilia's bitchfight, Prefect Robot IV's awkward attempt to assimilate himself back into his home life, and a classic Jock-Gets-The-Girl-After-Killing-Her-Husband love story. Fuck. Off. What are we doing? We're in the middle of the death throes of the Roman Republic and we're watching a whose-baby-is-it soap opera plot line. Wow, fascinating.

Costumes looked nice though.

Rome significantly bungled (in the first season) imo the entire point of having "normal" characters.

Look, I get that you might think that it's cheaper and will resonate emotionally if you tie larger events to the common men you introduced but it really was irksome to see Vorenus and Pullo involved in almost every major event in the Late Republic.

Stuff like Pullo causing a fight that stopped Marc Antony from getting to the Senate and kicking off a series of major events is cute, at best. The later stuff, with massive implications just got fucking galling.

I don't mind seeing Vorenus do stuff like organize a festival so he can become a vendor (although, if we must go there, I prefer more minutiae). I mind him being the deciding factor in the major conflicts of the crumbling Republic.

It reminds me of GRRM complaining about how, on one of the shows he worked on, he was forced to keep an "ordinary man" character, to the point where he had to insert them into the plot of the work he was adapting in increasingly awkward ways.

This is probably the only site where you'll find highly negative opinions regarding Thrones. With Rome, opinions are much more mixed. Yes, I'm sure HBO is very happy with the outcome if it was the case of Thrones replacing Rome.

The opinions are probably more mixed than they'd otherwise be because of what HBO did, which probably created most of the problems with the second season.

[Humble AK]

The opinions are probably more mixed than they'd otherwise be because of what HBO did, which probably created most of the problems with the second season.

Yeah, it really is unfortunate. I can accept the premature conclusion because the end of season 2 transitions pretty well into I, Claudius (another favorite of mine), though the shows' respective Augustus were quite different.

I am curious what Rome would have done with the promulgation of Christianity, as the show runners had intended to address that. Alas for what could have been.

[CyanidePie]

I have to agree. What drew people to the books when they weren't selling that well drew people to the show, except that there was nothing else like it on television and it was perfectly up HBO's alley.

It's a show that not only doesn't have strange historical baggage but mixes in a bunch of tropes that today's "nerds" (read: anyone that has heard of a dragon) can get behind while also seeming like a mature show for mature adults who want to see the complex politicking and shit.

Even if I don't love it (or honestly even like it) today I can recognize that it is sort of the perfect storm of a show regardless of whether it's actually a better show than Rome.

Rome significantly bungled (in the first season) imo the entire point of having "normal" characters.

Look, I get that you might think that it's cheaper and will resonate emotionally if you tie larger events to the common men you introduced but it really was irksome to see Vorenus and Pullo involved in almost every major event in the Late Republic.

Stuff like Pullo causing a fight that stopped Marc Antony from getting to the Senate and kicking off a series of major events is cute, at best. The later stuff, with massive implications just got fucking galling.

I don't mind seeing Vorenus do stuff like organize a festival so he can become a vendor (although, if we must go there, I prefer more minutiae). I mind him being the deciding factor in the major conflicts of the crumbling Republic.

It reminds me of GRRM complaining about how, on one of the shows he worked on, he was forced to keep an "ordinary man" character, to the point where he had to insert them into the plot of the work he was adapting in increasingly awkward ways.

The opinions are probably more mixed than they'd otherwise be because of what HBO did, which probably created most of the problems with the second season.

Agreed with everything you said. Pullo and Vorenus are the Forrest Gump of Ancient Rome. Somehow stupidly finding themselves in the middle, either directly or indirectly, of every major event in their small window of history. So stupid.

It's going to sound really trollish on my part, but I have never understood the love for Rome. I binge-watched it for the first time about a year and a half ago, and when it was over the first thought I had was "Wow that could have been so much better."

Maybe it's because I had watched 3 seasons of Game of Thrones and cinematically it just blows Rome out of the water, but I was just really unimpressed with the show after hearing it lauded for so long. The acting was fine, and the costumes and set pieces were great and you could tell that's where they put all their money, but the story itself was almost insufferable. As a self-proclaimed student of Roman history, I was offended that this was just Days Of Our Lives: Rome.

[Howdyphillip]

I personally though that putting in two "every men" in Rome was an absolute perfect way to tell the story. To this day, I can't think of a pair on television that I liked more than Vorenus and Pullo. I also feel that they did not have to stretch the story in unbelievable directions to place them as witnesses to the large events that they were present for.

Finally, anyone complaining about Atia just doesn't understand greatness. Polly Walker can do no wrong. She was the glue that bound this story together and made it one of the best TV shows of all time.

[Nictarion]

I personally though that putting in two "every men" in Rome was an absolute perfect way to tell the story. To this day, I can't think of a pair on television that I liked more than Vorenus and Pullo. I also feel that they did not have to stretch the story in unbelievable directions to place them as witnesses to the large events that they were present for.

Finally, anyone complaining about Atia just doesn't understand greatness. Polly Walker can do no wrong. She was the glue that bound this story together and made it one of the best TV shows of all time.

:Agree: