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

Julia Roberts, Michael Stuhlbarg, Andrew Garfield, and Ayo Edebiri in After the Hunt (2025)

Brandon Wilson and Ethan Herisse in Nickel Boys (2024)

David Duchovny, Carice van Houten, and Jack Whitehall in Malice (2025)

Rose Byrne in If I Had Legs I'd Kick You (2025)

Pedro Pascal, Ben Mendelsohn, Ji-young Yoo, Jay Ellis, Angus Cloud, Normani, Jack Champion, DeMario Symba Driver, and Dominique Thorne in Freaky Tales (2024)

A talk-show series about Game of Thrones.

After the Thrones

Right direction, bad format

I like the way that the show seems detached from GoT even though it has the network&apos;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, &quot;After the Thrones&quot; avoids evaluating the show at all. At its best, the show offers a helpful focus on themes and &quot;big ideas.&quot; (In this respect, it&apos;s better than the weekly discussions of GoT on TYT&apos;s &quot;What the Flick,&quot; 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 &quot;Who Won the Week?&quot; 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 &quot;bros&quot; and sports figures feel like forced attempts at sophistication. There&apos;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&apos;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.

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.

bappamtv

After the Thrones

🎭 Top Cast

🎬 Technical Specs

🏷️ Keywords

🎯 Categories

⭐ Featured Review

🎬 More Like This

📖 Synopsis