I think it's safe to assume many people thought this show was going to be like "Talking Dead," and sure it's not AMC so it wouldn't be identical but the aftershow standard has been set with "Talking Dead/Bad/Saul" and hell even in "Bachelor Live/After Paradise" from what I've seen when my girlfriend watches them; "After the Thrones" is nothing like them. In fact, if I were to compare it to anything it would be a YouTube video podcast. This means no interviews, no guest stars, no special features, no extended previews-- just two people talking about the episode.
Now, two people talking about the episode could be fine (especially if you are used to their personalities like the Rooster Teeth guys or the lesser known Geekdom101 or Chris Stuckmann), but when you have no idea who they are and they don't act like human beings, it becomes difficult. Watching these two hosts is like watching HBO executives talk about "Game of Thrones," or basically if NPR hosts decided to try stand up comedy. I honestly don't know how to explain it, but they don't feel genuine. It feels oddly scripted because of their robotic feel. If you went to college and had a very upbeat, smiling RA who over accentuate their personality, that is exactly how these hosts are. Chris Hardwick on "Talking Dead" is a great example of how you can act like a human/fanboy and a host. Same with Sue Perkins on "Thronecast," which I'll get into at the end.
THE CONS: Uncomfortable Hosts (see above); long clips from the prior GoT episode (we literally just saw the episode, why do I need to see a clip reminding me what I know-- could also say that about the show but they do call it a "re-cap show"); they call a segment "Preview" when all it encompasses is questions the think about for the next episode (not a bad concept, but it's not a preview, so don't call it that); a weird reluctance to mention the novels (they almost seem to forget that it exists outside the show, the great thing about Hardwick on TD is that he will drop a comic/show comparison and acknowledge them; I guess their "Ask The Expert" segment is with someone who memorized all the books and teleplays, but they never really explained how she's an expert so idk); no studio audience (this may be nit-picky but it adds to the human feel of an aftershow); it airs the next day (already talked about the show with friends and family, why do I need to watch people talk about it? I hate to be repetitive but "The Walking Dead"/"Bachelor" aftershows air immediately after the show so it's fresh).
THE PROS: Their segment "Who The F!&K Is That?" is conceptually a great idea because it's easy to forget small or minor characters; and I guess the map that shows where all the characters are (however, "Thronecast" does the same exact thing").
HBO really missed their mark on this one. It's obvious they wanted to capitalize on an aftershow but it's even more obvious that they really didn't think it through. If they wanted to make a show like "Talking Dead" they should have just followed a similar formula. The five minute "Inside the Episode" show they broadcast after the show is more so worth your time.
This show is almost universally disliked and at this point, HBO has three options: 1) Listen to the fans and their criticisms on how to make the show better, 2) cancel the show, or 3) air "Thronecast" in it's place. The latter is a fan produced after show aired exclusively in the UK with a likable humorous host, celebrity guests (random, cast/former cast members, crew members), studio audience, cool and lively set, fan interaction via Twitter, informative and interesting clips about the lore and history as well as humorous countdown clips and such.... So basically everything "After the Thrones" should have been!
I gave this show four episodes to improve or grow on me and it's done neither. Probably dropping it and I suggest you don't make the same mistake I made.
Now, two people talking about the episode could be fine (especially if you are used to their personalities like the Rooster Teeth guys or the lesser known Geekdom101 or Chris Stuckmann), but when you have no idea who they are and they don't act like human beings, it becomes difficult. Watching these two hosts is like watching HBO executives talk about "Game of Thrones," or basically if NPR hosts decided to try stand up comedy. I honestly don't know how to explain it, but they don't feel genuine. It feels oddly scripted because of their robotic feel. If you went to college and had a very upbeat, smiling RA who over accentuate their personality, that is exactly how these hosts are. Chris Hardwick on "Talking Dead" is a great example of how you can act like a human/fanboy and a host. Same with Sue Perkins on "Thronecast," which I'll get into at the end.
THE CONS: Uncomfortable Hosts (see above); long clips from the prior GoT episode (we literally just saw the episode, why do I need to see a clip reminding me what I know-- could also say that about the show but they do call it a "re-cap show"); they call a segment "Preview" when all it encompasses is questions the think about for the next episode (not a bad concept, but it's not a preview, so don't call it that); a weird reluctance to mention the novels (they almost seem to forget that it exists outside the show, the great thing about Hardwick on TD is that he will drop a comic/show comparison and acknowledge them; I guess their "Ask The Expert" segment is with someone who memorized all the books and teleplays, but they never really explained how she's an expert so idk); no studio audience (this may be nit-picky but it adds to the human feel of an aftershow); it airs the next day (already talked about the show with friends and family, why do I need to watch people talk about it? I hate to be repetitive but "The Walking Dead"/"Bachelor" aftershows air immediately after the show so it's fresh).
THE PROS: Their segment "Who The F!&K Is That?" is conceptually a great idea because it's easy to forget small or minor characters; and I guess the map that shows where all the characters are (however, "Thronecast" does the same exact thing").
HBO really missed their mark on this one. It's obvious they wanted to capitalize on an aftershow but it's even more obvious that they really didn't think it through. If they wanted to make a show like "Talking Dead" they should have just followed a similar formula. The five minute "Inside the Episode" show they broadcast after the show is more so worth your time.
This show is almost universally disliked and at this point, HBO has three options: 1) Listen to the fans and their criticisms on how to make the show better, 2) cancel the show, or 3) air "Thronecast" in it's place. The latter is a fan produced after show aired exclusively in the UK with a likable humorous host, celebrity guests (random, cast/former cast members, crew members), studio audience, cool and lively set, fan interaction via Twitter, informative and interesting clips about the lore and history as well as humorous countdown clips and such.... So basically everything "After the Thrones" should have been!
I gave this show four episodes to improve or grow on me and it's done neither. Probably dropping it and I suggest you don't make the same mistake I made.