So Netflix's Marco Polo

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

PricklyPete

Lifer
Sep 17, 2002
14,582
162
106
Not The best, but my wife and I watched the first season and definitely would watch another.
 

LevelSea

Senior member
Jan 29, 2013
942
53
91
No, it's not GoT, but then again I don't use it as a comparison to determine whether or not I watch a show.

It's a decent, plot driven show. It's better than the other 95% of shit like Dance Moms and Sex Box, so don't get butthurt that it's not as good Breaking Bad or GoT.
 

phucheneh

Diamond Member
Jun 30, 2012
7,306
5
0
Every time I see this picture pop up in Netflix:

UVH4tqB.jpg


I think that they've created a show where Peter Dinklage has CGI arms and legs.
 

ioni

Senior member
Aug 3, 2009
619
11
81
They tried to be the Game of Thrones of Netflix and forgot the great storyline, excellent acting and awesome costumes/props. Tits and violence can only get you so far.

GoT forgot the great story line too. Polo has fantastic costumes though.
 

Homerboy

Lifer
Mar 1, 2000
30,890
5,001
126
I'm about half way through. I've enjoyed it thus far. (Just finished "White Moon"
Rock solid story line. Pretty decent acting.
I've been entertained.
 

LucJoe

Golden Member
Jan 19, 2001
1,295
1
0
I watched this, then realized I never watched season 4 of GoT so I watched that. Marco Polo was entertaining, but to me GoT is on such a higher level of quality.

And they spent 2x as much on MP... :eek:
 

Homerboy

Lifer
Mar 1, 2000
30,890
5,001
126
I watched this, then realized I never watched season 4 of GoT so I watched that. Marco Polo was entertaining, but to me GoT is on such a higher level of quality.

And they spent 2x as much on MP... :eek:

Source on that? I read that Marco Polo was $90M, whereas the cost on Game of Thrones is ~$6M per episode ($60M per season)

Still, I'm not sure where the other $30M was spent. The production quality on Polo is pretty impressive though. But $90M for a pretty small (unknown) cast and limited sets? Seems insane.
 

Homerboy

Lifer
Mar 1, 2000
30,890
5,001
126
And for the record, its money MUCH better spent than the $10M per episode for Friends!
 

Homerboy

Lifer
Mar 1, 2000
30,890
5,001
126
Finally wrapped it up.
Got WAY better towards the end (episode 7-10)


While completely ludicrous, the fight between the Chancellor and the Monk was awesome. When the Monk when to cricket style kung-fu, the Chancellor's face was awesome.

Definitely looking forward to season 2
 

PricklyPete

Lifer
Sep 17, 2002
14,582
162
106
Agreed, I will definitely watch 2nd season if made. Biggest fault...hottest girl on show never got naked. I kid, I kid...well not really.
 

TechBoyJK

Lifer
Oct 17, 2002
16,699
60
91
Source on that? I read that Marco Polo was $90M, whereas the cost on Game of Thrones is ~$6M per episode ($60M per season)

Still, I'm not sure where the other $30M was spent. The production quality on Polo is pretty impressive though. But $90M for a pretty small (unknown) cast and limited sets? Seems insane.

costumes and carpentry. Many of those sets were handmade following traditional methods.
 

Excelsior

Lifer
May 30, 2002
19,047
18
81
This show is no more than a 7/10, but damn if it isn't fun to watch. Yes, it's fictitious, story is often shit...but kung-fu, swords, and tits.
 

Kornflakes

Junior Member
Dec 16, 2017
2
0
11
Not bad, Game of Thrones but with Asians

Hi there. I just LOVE this Marco Polo series on Netflix and I think they are underrated, I don't get tired of watching it over and over again, I also binge watched it in 1 winter week.

I have never watched Games of Thrones but I hear a lot about it. If I watch it, is it like Marco Polo but with caucasians? Are the series similar to each other??