After the Thrones (2016– ) User Reviews

Ringer/Grantland is better in print

[yemusmc · 4/10 · 26 May 2016]

Nice to see a Grantland-esque studio set up and running again. They provide play by play recaps of the episodes and pepper in analysis and background info on characters. They show where scenes are happening on the world map, this actually helps a lot.

But the overall feel is weird.

This might be mean but I feel Greenwald and Chris Ryan have zero pull when it comes to being on screen outside of podcast recordings on Youtube. Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of them as people, I read their recaps on Grantland all season last year and they were the best. Everyone from the Ringer/Grantland including Simmons himself is far better in print.

Right direction, bad format

[lenvm · 6/10 · 14 June 2016]

I like the way that the show seems detached from GoT even though it has the network's imprimatur. Thankfully, there are no actors or directors as guests, which would turn the discussion into a mere celebration of the show. In fact, "After the Thrones" avoids evaluating the show at all. At its best, the show offers a helpful focus on themes and "big ideas." (In this respect, it's better than the weekly discussions of GoT on TYT's "What the Flick," for example.)

The two hosts are amateurs who are unlikely ever to get another show, and this makes them likable. Their willingness to be corrected by GoT expert Mallory made them sympathetic at first, but after a few episodes this repeated format gets annoying. Other aspects of the format that seem forced are the "Who Won the Week?" discussion, as though they were forgetting that the show is fiction and not a sports contest.

The two hosts and two guest experts are likable, although they try too hard to steer a middle ground between being too geeky on the one hand, and too cool on the other; their references to "bros" and sports figures feel like forced attempts at sophistication. There's an annoying tendency to play everything for laughs.

The best parts of the discussion are when the hosts play their roles as really smart English majors and take a stab at synthesizing the big ideas. Hearing that kind of discussion is thought-provoking. It's harder to come up with an argument than with a ton of sophisticated pop-culture references. Stick with the big ideas rather than the fireworks.

OMG. My 14 year old who has never watched an episode could do better.

[mjktoys · 1/10 · 28 April 2016]

Is this a parody? I'd rather place my genitals on hot coals than watch another episode. They try to make what sounds like fake fan-boy chatter with girlish giggles all the while not having ANY insight to the show, the characters or even just the episode they "just" watched. A show like this done right is "The Talking Dead". Are these guys supposed to be a parody? Are they doing this for free? Whatever portion of my cable bill/HBO Go account that goes to support this after show; can I please have it back? Watching GOT is a nicely chilled after dinner adult beverage then After The Thrones comes in like a shot of hot vomit. How in the hell is this still on? I can't say enough bad things about it. Mallory was palpable. Keep her and find some other knowledgeable or at least watchable talent. In one sentence: they are the cheese graters of my senses.

It's Good

[bautister · 8/10 · 9 May 2016]

The tone is lighter than the actual show, and no it's not The Talking Dead which is a moderated discussion of the show and comparing it to that isn't necessarily correct IMO. Chris Ryan and Andy Greenwald show their enthusiasm for the show, and they've helped in trying to organize the vast ouvre of this universe. The segments: "Who The That" helps figure out people who have not been in the forefront of the narrative "Who Won The Week" is a fun look at which character did well for themself.

The argument that they're giggly and all that stuff is a matter of preference, as someone who listened to "Watch The Thrones" on Grantland I'm really happy to see these guys do their thing under HBO and I hope to see them til the end. Mallory Rubin has been awesome and we need more Jason Concepcion. The people complaining about this show doesn't like the tone but the content is fine.

Forced

[sbry21 · 3/10 · 21 May 2016]

The problem with "After the Thrones" is that it seems that they're just trying too hard and the result is this stilted, awkward mess of a show. The constant game of "how many pop culture references can we shoehorn into the show" is very tiresome as is the incessant one upsmanship on display.

It might be unfair to compare AtT to "Talking Dead", which is the gold standard of after shows, but because of the nature of the format, the comparisons are inevitable. AtT suffers from not having the same level of access that TD has. There are no show runners, cast members or writers as guests and because of a lack of access, the show's time slot is pushed to the next evening which is kind of pointless. These types of shows are essentially post game shows and who exactly is going to watch a post game the day after the game aired? Everything has already been chewed over and discussed. You have to be bringing something REALLY special to the table to make a day after show a worthwhile watch.

I must say that the "Who the Fcuk was That?" segment is very useful and brings insight to the audience. Mallory Rubin is also another standout, but even she sometimes comes off as trying too hard to be "one of the guys." I can also do without the cringeworthy sports references. I'm a big sports fan and I get that the show started out at Grantland, but I do not tune into this type of show for ham-fisted Rajon Rondo references. They also need to scrap the "Who Won the Week?" segment. It comes off as filler from some third-rate ESPN afternoon opinionfest.

I really wanted to like this show and gave it a fair shot, but after four episodes, my watch has ended.

I'd rather die of the Black Plague.....

[Scain678 · 1/10 · 29 May 2016]

....then watch this drivel one second longer. Their voice...their intonation...their ridiculous pop culture references. I hate with a red hot fiery passion everything about them. They come across as smug Ivy League know it alls...who really no nothing. When I see their faces, I want to vomit green goo. I would rather lay on a bed of nails then watch this show. I'd rather handle rattlesnakes. I'd rather be eaten by ravenous wolves. I'd rather have Hannibal lecter remove my cranium and eat parts of my brain. I'd rather jump from plane with no chute. I'd rather be raped by 10 gorillas then watch 2 more seconds of this show. Why HBO would you unleash such evil upon this world?

A terrible attempt to emulate Talking Dead

[ramair350 · 1/10 · 7 June 2016]

I eagerly awaited this show, and was incredibly disappointed to find it is so bad that it is just not watchable. The hosts are so bad it is almost funny; seriously, they were just god awful. It feels like they probably had no more experience than a Youtube channel; I am shocked that HBO let these clowns run such an important show.

If you want to see the right way to do this type of show, watch Chris Hardwick on The Talking Dead. These hosts seemed to not really know the content, and did not have a clue about their audience.

In summary, this show is a complete waste of time, even for die-hard fans.

Disappointing

[ericsschultz · 1/10 · 8 June 2016]

I've watched every episode of After the Thrones and multiple times during each episode I wonder if these guys have even watched the show. They question details from past seasons that every mild fan would remember. Also put down the stupid bells . I do appreciate the lore but everything else (predictions, character's motives, GoT tradition) is all kinds of screwed up so sorry guys but 1/10 in my book. This show could be saved though. Keep the studio and the people in the control booth, they seem to be doing their job perfectly fine, but ditch these awful hosts. When people watch shows about a show it's like watching something in the extras menu on a DVD, we want something extra not just half attempts to recap the episode.

Save Time and Watch "Thronecast" Instead

[saahdrahcir · 3/10 · 20 May 2016]

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.

A toast to Geeks Galore an edge above the rest

[emeraldstudio · 10/10 · 10 May 2016]

There are moments when i have to reflect on what i have just watched. Just to absorb the emotional context before passing judgment. This show does not require such thought because its a very down to earth review of a show you are already interested in. I am not an author/writer movie reviewer but i felt the need to give a review of this show because my wife and i both enjoy watching and can't wait to watch another. Both hosts offer tongue in cheek humor while outlining the important moments of the show by staying true to the show without tainting it with nonsense. I hope the show continues with elegant success.

What a pathetic show.

[greedware · 1/10 · 28 June 2016]

These people are parasites. They basically talk about the GoT episodes like they were some real life event. And all they do is recap what happened on the episode. They add absolutely nothing. Their voices are annoying and nasally. I can't believe these two parasites are getting paid to just give recaps on a TV show. Just watch the actual GoT and skip this after show nonsense. I guess this show is for people who can't think for themselves, or don't have anyone to talk about the show with. Is that what HBO is trying to do with this? Honestly I do not see a point to this show. It is not like they are adding any insight or pointing out symbolism in the show. It is not like they're doing kind of scholarly analysis. They just blab about the literal events in the show.

Like Having an Intelligent and Fun Conversation With Your Friends

[gabegodoi · 10/10 · 19 May 2016]

This show does precisely what it sets out to do, delve into the underlying and overarching ideas presented in each Game of Thrones episode, and have fun doing it.

The hosts, Andy and Chris, are great and often have very eloquently worded perspectives on the world of Game of Thrones as well as guest experts Mallory and Jason.

If you've just watched GOT and are in the mood for a little more, definitely check this out, it will enrich your GOT experience.

For anyone who listened to the Grantland podcast that prefaced the show, you know what your getting.

For everyone else, bottom line is that this is a show made for GOT fans by GOT fans and it completes its goals perfectly.

More maps and less trivia please.

[bvare · 3/10 · 23 June 2016]

First of all I'm a big fan of Game of Thrones, and relish the drama and great acting, despite the convoluted plot lines (as I did Lost). This after-show is extremely obscure, much worse than True Detective season 2. As GoT is itself quite complicated with over 200 characters, I was hoping to get some insight to help me better appreciate it. Instead I get minutia and frustrating references to names I don't know (please lose the gotcha bell). I strongly suspect that many of the names and facts were only mentioned in the novels from which the show was adapted. The hosts need to stop trying to show how smart they are and remember that that this is just a TV show that we viewers like to relax and enjoy *after* a hard day's work. The point is to reach the audience and make *us* smarter. As TED advises its speakers, pick a smaller number of points you want to make and explain them in more detail. As a former nerd, this show makes me see the other side. GoT is a show that millions of people watch, and as such represents an opportunity to bring people together. Don't squander that!

Not for true fans of the show!

[arttransplant · 1/10 · 6 July 2016]

Why is one of the most successful shows on HBO followed by an atrocity like "After the Thrones"? This is a question I asked myself during my first ever viewing of the show. This viewing took place after Season 6 Episode 10 of GoT and was able to last all of 10 minutes max. My rationale was that I would try watching the show after they loosened up from their debut, hence episode 10. I don't know if it was just their buttoned-up, giggly, girl-like, powder-puff demeanor or their complete lack of depth when it came to Game of Thrones but these are not the kind of personalities I would cast for a show with such a fanatical following. Instead it would be smarter to bring someone in like AltShiftX - https://www.youtube.com/user/JaiWbio (I'm not affiliated in any way) simply due to the level of knowledge of both the books and the shows as well as the perspective he brings. He's doing this on YouTube and puts "After the Thrones" to shame. Shame! Shame!

I write this because it's HBO and the show deserves better than the current "After the Thrones" hosts. Furthermore, it's baffling how they got their deal approved. They must have a relative or a college buddy working at HBO. Either ditch "After the Thrones" completely or get rid of the current hosts, it does a disservice to the GoT fans out there. If you don't believe me read the other one star reviews.