Succession There are those who did not bow under the Lannisters,
They won't bend under Daenerys's arm.
And if one says, "Valar Morgulis!"
Millions will answer, “Valar Dohaeris!”
(instead of epigraph)
On the wave of the phenomenal success of the series “Game of Thrones”, HBO TV channel with grief forges an iron profit while it is hot with the audience’s attention. Contrary to the Mouse House conveyors, the channel's producers were wiser not to flood consumers with tons of cheap (or not so) fan service. Systematic feeding in huge doses of the universe of interest sooner or later causes disgust and rejection (in theory). Here the masters of the channel decided instead of the next portion of the main course to serve a small aperitif to the table. It was called “After the Thrones.”
As the name suggests, the sabj goes on the air exactly after the Thrones themselves. Two men, one of whom is deliberately nerdy-looking, sit in the studio and discuss what the viewer has just seen, sometimes to enhance orgasm, shooting scenes from the main series into the frame. In the middle of the episode, they are joined by one or two “experts” from among the creators of Thrones. This is how it works.
To understand what is wrong and why it is wrong, one should be puzzled by the question: why do we need a post-throne? For the TV channel, this is, of course, an extra way to remind about one of its most successful products, and score time slots. For viewers watching “IP” not in the recording, this is an additional opportunity to plunge into the beloved world, to prolong the joy of touching the miracle. But how relevant is “After Thrones” in isolation from the euphoria of alternate viewing, what can it offer the viewer more?
The duo of presenters diligently discusses what happened in each series, trying to dilute the discussion with jokes in the name of liveliness and ease. It looks sick out of your hands. The viewer, aka an unintelligent child, diligently retells the plot, as if he himself had not watched the series ten minutes ago, jokes are pronounced learnedly, diligently looking at the camera, and not at the interlocutor, as in a real conversation. False streams nullify all attempts to appear friendly. It seems that the leading is not just indifferent to knowledge - it is a burden to them.
Apart from retelling and tense petrosianism, there are experts. Alas, they do not disclose any insider information, they do not even share funny stories from the shooting. In general, the role of these experts is very incomprehensible and looks like everything else - an awkward attempt to do well. There are also traditional columns. Traditional, Carl! For ten episodes, the established traditions, some of which will be forgotten by the season finale.
Okay, we can forgive retelling, unnecessary guests and overly serious faces. It would be for what. For example, for the sake of interesting theories that the synopsis promises, and the analysis of the series. But none of that either. It is clear that the shooting is conducted in advance, that it is impossible to monitor fan theories in social networks (because they are many times more interesting) and voice them, but nothing prevents you from doing this in the next issue. But instead, we are given a chewed-up retelling for the stupidest with microscopic intersperses of abstract thoughts. Yes, what can be said, when the most interesting author’s point of view was the selection of a future husband for the Buryozdennaya (by the way, Ironborn Yara was recorded among the candidates, in glory of the feminization of Westeros). But each viewer, in principle, is able to make such a list himself, and some also rationally argue its pros and cons within the framework of far-reaching politics and more clearly than the leading couple with experts.
As a result, this series is intended primarily for those who did not have the hour-long series “Game of Thrones” and urgently need a new dose. Those who are not chasing the air, instead of him to review the old seasons of “IP” – it will be many times more interesting.
4 out of 10