TV: Ranking of the Best HBO Shows of All Time - #2

[sully1410]

Wow, we were talking about completely different things.

I'm talking about accessibility as in "how challenging is it to become engaged in the show, how immediate are the rewards, and how much time/effort needs to be invested before it starts to click and pay off." The Wire is a show that requires patience and has a definite barrier that makes it hard to immediately warm up to, especially for raw viewers. Game of Thrones is pick up and go for most people, unless they have reality-show-level ADD. Popularity usually suggests that something is relatively easy to grasp and consume.

I wasn't talking about distribution or availability.

--
Again, I don't know why you're reacting like my point had anything to do with GOT being a better or worse show. I mean, I do have an opinion on that, but that opinion wasn't connected to anything I said in that argument. We could have not been talking about GOT at all for what I care. My point was about the correlation between popularity and quality.

OK, now I see your point. Is GOT more accessible than the sopranos though? I think that's debatable. The Wire for sure though.

 

[Shareefruck]

I think in terms of subject matter, they're both similarly appealing, but I had a tough time with the pace of Sopranos, personally. I actually still haven't finished it.

GOT is super easy to watch. And the payoff is much more obvious/in your face.

I think Sully is confusing my argument and Sharee's argument and drawing his own conclusion off of a mashing together of both our arguments, but one that applies to neither.

And accessibility isn't something pared down to just how simple it is to consume/where to find it and watch it. Particular subject matter, and how it is thematically explored doesn't appeal to everybody. I have some friends the synopsis of Six Feet Under or The Wire, or even Game of Thrones and some of them are interested in one or another while other people just don't feel that it would appeal to them.

I think it's probably more likely confusion because just a few pages back, I was giving my opinion about how I don't think shows like GOT hit that higher frequency that some other shows do. He probably thinks we're either still talking about that or that I'm planting a continued agenda.

It's two seperate discussions. The first one was about subjective preferences about how good GOT is. The second one was an objective argument about using popularity to claim objective greatness, and it really shouldn't have had anything to do with GOT.

 

[Dick Sledge]

The Wire to me is the Toews of tv shows.

Great 3 times. (3 cups/seasons 1-3)

Some disappointment. (Bad stats/seasons 4 and 5)

Great great player. Yet overrated.

 

[chicagoskycam]

Most of this all personal preference as well. GOT is kind of mid evil/fantasy Scifi. The mid-evil aspect of it turned me off and I had to give it a 2nd chance.

Where a show like the Sopranos is more identifiable. GOT has the momentum from the book fans as well. Binge watching can also have an impact on how one perceives a series vs another.

 

[sully1410]

Shouldn't the fact that Game of Thrones is an easy show to get into and an easy show to stay into be a point in its favour though?

 

[Shareefruck]

Is that directed at me?

Let's recap my argument, because it keeps getting mixed together with our feelings about GOT

Forget we're talking about GOT altogether. We're talking about <Mystery Show>. It could be Desperate Housewives, Walking Dead, The Bachelorette, The Sopranos, Seinfeld, or Hannah Montana. It doesn't matter.

Let's say the only piece of information you know about <Mystery Show> is that it gets the highest viewership out of all the shows and alot of people watch and talk about it. You don't know anything else about it.

You can assume that the show must be very universally accessible and approachable and that it probably isn't completely devoid of entertainment value. Is that a point in its favor? Yes, to some degree, it is. With this information, can you tell if <Mystery Show> is or isn't one of the best shows of all time?

That's the entire argument, no agenda/implication behind it other than what it is.

 

[Soliloquy of a Dogge]

I think in terms of subject matter, they're both similarly appealing, but I had a tough time with the pace of Sopranos, personally. I actually still haven't finished it.

GOT is super easy to watch. And the payoff is much more obvious/in your face.

I think it's probably more likely confusion because just a few pages back, I was giving my opinion about how I don't think shows like GOT hit that higher frequency that some other shows do. He probably thinks we're either still talking about that or that I'm planting a continued agenda.

It's two seperate discussions. The first one was about subjective preferences about how good GOT is. The second one was an objective argument about using popularity to claim objective greatness, and it really shouldn't have had anything to do with GOT.

Ah, yeah, that's probably it. Not a tough distinction to make between the two dialogues IMO, but if people are going to want to see what they want to see, easy to see how lack of comprehension may be a factor in failing to identify the points each made in both separate discussions.

 

[Soliloquy of a Dogge]

The Wire to me is the Toews of tv shows.

Great 3 times. (3 cups/seasons 1-3)

Some disappointment. (Bad stats/seasons 4 and 5)

Great great player. Yet overrated.

Season 4 of The Wire was disappointing?

It is generally regarded as having some of the most consistent and high quality episodes of the series. This is confusing to me because I think that it perfected everything about the show by establishing the societal conditions that lead to the majority of what happened in the first 3 seasons. Thematically, what it touches upon is an emotional roller coaster, carried on the backs and through the eyes of a handful of kids for the most part.

 

[aufheben]

I think in terms of subject matter, they're both similarly appealing, but I had a tough time with the pace of Sopranos, personally. I actually still haven't finished it.

GOT is super easy to watch. And the payoff is much more obvious/in your face.

I think it's probably more likely confusion because just a few pages back, I was giving my opinion about how I don't think shows like GOT hit that higher frequency that some other shows do. He probably thinks we're either still talking about that or that I'm planting a continued agenda.

It's two seperate discussions. The first one was about subjective preferences about how good GOT is. The second one was an objective argument about using popularity to claim objective greatness, and it really shouldn't have had anything to do with GOT.

There's a big drop off after season 5. 3 and 4 are the best. I think there were 2 years or something in between the end of 5 and the 6 premiere. Gandolfini's Tony starts to become too much of a caricature, the plots are generally uninteresting, and a lot of that characters are just old.

For me, The Wire was much more complex and realistic, but not as enjoyable to watch, or at least not as re-watchable. I've only watched the whole show maybe twice. Game of Thrones is complex but it's fantasy and I don't find any aspect of it relatable, it's just a very well-done show with a great story. And dragons.

 

[Dick Sledge]

Season 4 of The Wire was disappointing?

It is generally regarded as having some of the most consistent and high quality episodes of the series. This is confusing to me because I think that it perfected everything about the show by establishing the societal conditions that lead to the majority of what happened in the first 3 seasons. Thematically, what it touches upon is an emotional roller coaster, carried on the backs and through the eyes of a handful of kids for the most part.

I thought it was ****ing annoying.

I've stated many times why I think that season is the most overrated in tv history. To me of course, we all differ.

I hate Marlo and his entire crew except maybe Chris? Was that his name?

I thought the kids were annoying and were hoping they would just OD and get off my screen.

And worst of all that "real life" drug dealer piece of **** chick. I would love to watch Joffrey, Ramsay, Cersei and every other despised tv character torture her.

So, to sum up, I pretty much hated all the new characters and story lines. I also don't care about the portrayal of young inner city youths. I get the significance but I just don't care.

 

[chicagoskycam]

The Wire was such a chore to watch for me. I appreciated the realistic characters and acting but just couldn't get through it.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Add Oz.

Voted Sopranos. I have a lot of thoughts on that series. Not all are good, but when it's on, it's on. It's a trailblazer. It's ambitious in many admirable ways even when it didn't always work. I give it points for that.

GOT is an amazing piece of entertainment. That's great and I enjoy it immensely. But there isn't much going on with it beyond that.

 

[les Habs]

Deadwood is the best HBO show of all time.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Deadwood is the best HBO show of all time.

It would be 2 or 3 for me personally, for sure. Suggested Oz as an add because Deadwood already had votes. Oz should be part of the discussion.

 

[WarriorOfGandhi]

Rome should've gone number one

 

[sully1410]

Is that directed at me?

Let's recap my argument, because it keeps getting mixed together with our feelings about GOT

Forget we're talking about GOT altogether. We're talking about <Mystery Show>. It could be Desperate Housewives, Walking Dead, The Bachelorette, The Sopranos, Seinfeld, or Hannah Montana. It doesn't matter.

Let's say the only piece of information you know about <Mystery Show> is that it gets the highest viewership out of all the shows and alot of people watch and talk about it. You don't know anything else about it.

You can assume that the show must be very universally accessible and approachable and that it probably isn't completely devoid of entertainment value. Is that a point in its favor? Yes, to some degree, it is. With this information, can you tell if <Mystery Show> is or isn't one of the best shows of all time?

That's the entire argument, no agenda/implication behind it other than what it is.

It's in general. It's not all abou you Sharee. God.

I was actually trying to spark a conversation about what makes GOT better.

 

[Corto]

GoT wins #2 for me.

Especially since the "pay off" hasn't really happened yet, I expect the last 2 seasons to be up there with seasons 1, 4 and 6 in terms of quality and excitement.
(and no Dorne!)

 

[Shareefruck]

It's in general. It's not all abou you Sharee. God. le

I was actually trying to spark a conversation about what makes GOT better.

Oh. Well here goes anyways

The way I see it, the fact that a show is easy to get into is a point in its favor, but only as far as trying to get over the initial hump of trying to get into a show.

However, once you've successfully overcome the obstacles and you "get" what makes something tick, it all ends up clicking and feeling comfortable and accessible anyways, regardless of initial accessibility, so the advantage completely disappears in hindsight. It stops mattering almost entirely.

That's why I don't value that quality very much at all when all is said and done, and would encourage people to try and see past hand-holding, attention-grabbing, and instant gratification, because it just gets in the way of finding long term reward.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Some context is in order.The Sopranos is from a different era and it played a huge part in the explosion of TV Series that followed.Game Of Thrones is a great Series but I seriously doubt it passes the test of time to the level of The Sopranos.Even Breaking Bad, which I already adored before it became monstruously popular, has little replayability value.It won't pass the test of time.

I also think Sopranos > Wire, and I've watched (and enjoyed) both while they were airing.The Sopranos will be the iconic series 20 years from now, hence it has my vote.

There's also not a single character that is deeper than Tony Sopranos.

Edit: The Sopranos ran from 1999 to 2007, which covers the almost entirety of the post-9/11 and pre-2008-crash era.I have a feeling it will be THE series representing that era in two or three decades.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Some context is in order.The Sopranos is from a different era and it played a huge part in the explosion of TV Series that followed.Game Of Thrones is a great Series but I seriously doubt it passes the test of time to the level of The Sopranos.Even Breaking Bad, which I already adored before it became monstruously popular, has little replayability value.It won't pass the test of time.

I also think Sopranos > Wire, and I've watched (and enjoyed) both while they were airing.The Sopranos will be the iconic series 20 years from now, hence it has my vote.

There's also not a single character that is deeper than Tony Sopranos.

Edit: The Sopranos ran from 1999 to 2007, which covers the almost entirety of the post-9/11 and pre-2008-crash era.I have a feeling it will be THE series representing that era in two or three decades.

I agree with you on most of this. But it's something I wrestle with -- how much should the revolutionary aspects of that show weigh versus my personal assessment of the actual show? The Wire is the clear greatest in my mind, but after that I honestly probably LIKE Deadwood, Oz and Game of Thrones better than I like the Sopranos. But as I said in a post last night, when the Sopranos was on point, it was ON and there's little debating its influence and its ambitions.

Great Sopranos is among the best TV ever, buuuut there was a decent amount of filler and fat especially in the later seasons. I try not to hold its own success against it. Can't fault anyone involved for wanting to capitalize on the success. TV biz then wasn't like TV biz now. But at the same time, it's hard to forget when it was dragging. You'd wait all week for the episode and it's Johnnycakes and Vito up in Vermont ...

I erred on the side of history and gave it my vote in this poll though.

I remember the first two seasons as straight fire emojis, but it began to meander a lot after that. Always good, often great, sometimes plodding.
I'm probably long overdue for a rewatch.

 

[Tkachuk4MVP]

Some context is in order.The Sopranos is from a different era and it played a huge part in the explosion of TV Series that followed.Game Of Thrones is a great Series but I seriously doubt it passes the test of time to the level of The Sopranos.Even Breaking Bad, which I already adored before it became monstruously popular, has little replayability value.It won't pass the test of time.

I also think Sopranos > Wire, and I've watched (and enjoyed) both while they were airing.The Sopranos will be the iconic series 20 years from now, hence it has my vote.

There's also not a single character that is deeper than Tony Sopranos.

Edit: The Sopranos ran from 1999 to 2007, which covers the almost entirety of the post-9/11 and pre-2008-crash era.I have a feeling it will be THE series representing that era in two or three decades.

The Sopranos was much more popular than The Wire, certainly more accessible, and features an incredible character as the face of the show, so I would agree with you that it will likely be seen as more "iconic." That being said, I think it's much more flawed than The Wire. Lots of extraneous subplots and filler (especially in the later seasons as Kallio said), the same type of villain (Richie, Ralphie, Frank) thrown in to create conflict with Tony, and one of the worst TV characters of all-time in A.J. Soprano. Still a great show (Gandolfini's performance is as good as it gets), but I think it's a tier below the all-time greats.

 

[Shareefruck]

The influence and cultural significance is undeniable, and it is great, but to me, it seems like The Sopranos has already started to show its age a bit compared to The Wire. I see the latter as being more likely to remain iconic and fresh in 20+ years.

I'm not sure I get the accessibility => iconic thing. Usually accessibility doesn't factor into long term timelessness as much as it does during its original run, and many timeless things aren't that accessible. If anything that's a factor that loses its importance over time, I think.

 

[CantHaveTkachev]

The Wire is getting the "Citizen Kane" treatment nowadays

not appreciated enough during it's day but looking at it retrospectively, it garners high praise

still think its overrated

 

[Shareefruck]

Do many people pick up Citizen Kane for the first time today and get legitimately blown away by the experience? I tend to think of it as having a reputation based on technical merit/influence rather than being an amazing experience that holds up in its own right. And that's why I'm hesitant to agree with its reputation.

 

[sully1410]

Oh. Well here goes anyways

The way I see it, the fact that a show is easy to get into is a point in its favor, but only as far as trying to get over the initial hump of trying to get into a show.

However, once you've successfully overcome the obstacles and you "get" what makes something tick, it all ends up clicking and feeling comfortable and accessible anyways, regardless of initial accessibility, so the advantage completely disappears in hindsight. It stops mattering almost entirely.

That's why I don't value that quality very much at all when all is said and done, and would encourage people to try and see past hand-holding, attention-grabbing, and instant gratification, because it just gets in the way of finding long term reward.

I think the opposite. A show that initially snags your interest doesn't always hold it.