Ranking of the Best HBO Shows of All Time - #6

[McOilers97]

Voting for Rome even though it should have been 4th or 5th.

You band waggoners who voted GoT into 4th place should feel bad.

I'm not sure that "Bandwagoners" is the right term, but I do think that GoT benefited in this poll because it is currently on tv and therefore, fresher in the minds of the viewers, while most of these other shows have been over for 10 years. There's also a significant possibility that many of the GoT fans haven't seen Deadwood/SFU/Rome/Oz etc.

 

[FLYLine27*]

Band waggoners?

Obviously. if GoT hadn't won the Stanley Cup in 2016, nobody would be voting for it. Bunch of band waggoners can't think for themselves and just jumped on the hot ticket.

 

[Tkachuk4MVP]

I'm not sure that "Bandwagoners" is the right term, but I do think that GoT benefited in this poll because it is currently on tv and therefore, fresher in the minds of the viewers, while most of these other shows have been over for 10 years. There's also a significant possibility that many of the GoT fans haven't seen Deadwood/SFU/Rome/Oz etc.

GOT has much higher ratings than any of those other shows, so I'd say the chances are pretty good. And while you're right about its freshness having an effect, nostalgia can also swing people's opinions the other direction.

 

[McOilers97]

GOT has much higher ratings than any of those other shows, so I'd say the chances are pretty good. And while you're right about its freshness having an effect, nostalgia can also swing people's opinions the other direction.

Yes, more people watch it by far, that's undeniable. But it also doesn't mean that it's better than these other shows. The subject matter is just more accessible and less niche than these other shows. I also attribute it to the era of television that that these other shows were part of. It wasn't necessarily the widely held belief 10 years ago that cable was where the quality shows could be found; now it is pretty much accepted by everyone in the know about tv that the networks can't offer what HBO/FX/Showtime/AMC/Cinemax/Starz etc can in terms of quality programming.

 

[Tkachuk4MVP]

Yes, more people watch it by far, that's undeniable. But it also doesn't mean that it's better than these other shows. The subject matter is just more accessible and less niche than these other shows. I also attribute it to the era of television that that these other shows were part of. It wasn't necessarily the widely held belief 10 years ago that cable was where the quality shows could be found; now it is pretty much accepted by everyone in the know about tv that the networks can't offer what HBO/FX/Showtime/AMC/Cinemax/Starz etc can in terms of quality programming.

Not saying higher ratings = better (True Blood is terrible). I was just addressing that poster's point that the many of the GOT voters haven't seen those other shows which, if you look at the ratings numbers, would have to be the case.

 

[Shareefruck]

I mean, yeah, it's not fair to accuse a fan of being a bandwagoner just because they disagree with you. But I also don't think using a Stanley Cup analogy to suggest that it's the wrong term to use makes sense. It's about equally fair/unfair to accuse someone who likes GOT of bandwagoning on its public interest/cultural hype as it is to accuse someone who likes a hockey team that's currently doing well and is the center of attention of bandwagoning on its success. If the term is appropriate for one, then it appropriate for the other.

It's a rude thing to say, but I don't think it's incorrect use of the term.

 

[Eisen]

It's not like GoT is completely out of place here either. It's not an absurd vote.

 

[Blender]

Maybe people legitimately think GoT is better than some of these shows? I personally don't think Deadwood or SFU are better. I've seen Deadwood, but couldn't get through all of SFU as it really didn't interest me.

 

[Soliloquy of a Dogge]

Maybe people legitimately think GoT is better than some of these shows? I personally don't think Deadwood or SFU are better. I've seen Deadwood, but couldn't get through all of SFU as it really didn't interest me.

I don't understand how people can render judgement on a show compared to another when they haven't even watched it in its entirety.

Will never get that.

 

[Blender]

I don't understand how people can render judgement on a show compared to another when they haven't even watched it in its entirety.

Will never get that.

If I can't even get through a show due to disinterest, that is enough to base judgment on. I didn't find it to be captivating or entertaining enough to warrant watching the entire series. I can't objectively judge the acting/writing/characters over the entirety of the show, only the parts I have seen.

 

[Soliloquy of a Dogge]

If I can't even get through a show due to disinterest, that is enough to base judgment on. I didn't find it to be captivating or entertaining enough to warrant watching the entire series. I can't objectively judge the acting/writing/characters over the entirety of the show, only the parts I have seen.

Fair enough, but it's hard not to be inherently biased against a show you didn't finish because it didn't appeal to you or align with your viewing habits. I also don't think that the premise of a show has to completely captivate or entertain you to be enjoyable or appreciated; at least it's not something I've found dictates my viewing habits.

 

[Shareefruck]

If I can't even get through a show due to disinterest, that is enough to base judgment on. I didn't find it to be captivating or entertaining enough to warrant watching the entire series. I can't objectively judge the acting/writing/characters over the entirety of the show, only the parts I have seen.

I don't think this is true, personally. How easily something initially takes to grab my attention ends up being a pretty insignificant factor, when all is said and done, IMO. They are definitely hurdles that affect whether or not someone is going to bother trying, but once I jump over them, they don't really matter, I find. (and they don't really re-appear on a second viewing after the show's won me over)

All my favorite things had hurdles, and most of the things I've tried that didn't have any, for whatever reason, don't manage to reach those heights. And after a while of noticing that pattern, I start to notice and be actively annoyed by the gimmick of shows trying too hard to desperately grab your attention right away, and tricking you into being engaged/addicted/hooked week after week (the way shows like Breaking Bad or Game of Thrones do).

I think of it as a factor that somewhat clouds judgement rather than contributes to it.

(this isn't me trying to convince you not to think GOT is good, btw-- I've just never agreed with the validity of that specific reasoning)

 

[RobBrown4PM]

I'm not sure that "Bandwagoners" is the right term, but I do think that GoT benefited in this poll because it is currently on tv and therefore, fresher in the minds of the viewers, while most of these other shows have been over for 10 years. There's also a significant possibility that many of the GoT fans haven't seen Deadwood/SFU/Rome/Oz etc.

You're right, it was a bit of a slip on my part. I should have said unenlightened plebs.

I do hope that one say they will take the time to watch some of these other shows.