Spartacus or Rome - which is better?

Richard Dower

which show do you think is better?

Basq

Rome for it's strong performances and writing.

Spartacus is enjoyable and over-the-top.. but it's just that. The performances are piss-poor and the writing is patchy.

Clareman

Rome is 1 of the best TV programs ever made imvho

Esse85

I enjoyed Spartacus, havent watched Rome yet but will get around to it.

ziedth

I haven't seen Rome but for what it is I haven't enjoying a single season of anything tgecway I have spartcus.

So I'll vote for that.

Ste05

Rome ATM, but IMO Spartacus could be as good, if not better in a few seasons.

If Rome had been concluded properly I think it'd be up there with the best shows of all time.

Richard Dower

Lets do a theme tune battle!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1Q-PSWYwls

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3t1OhP0nVU

don ramo

i started watching rome when it first came out i actually liked it but for some reason stopped watchin it around half way through season 1, ill have to start it again id say,

from what i saw of rome it seemed a bit slower paced but much more dynamic than spartacus, spartacus is compelling and intrigueing as its playing in political, entertainment and underworld themes, rome came across to me as being very politicaly motivatated,

Clareman

Rome has better acting, CGI, production and story lines but Spartacus has it's own pluses as well, I enjoy both programs but I think I would be more likely to watch Rome again than Spartacus

robby^5

I think I like both equally, but I'll give it to Rome because it delivered quality for two seasons whereas Spartacus is still early days.

JP Liz V1

Rome is miles better imo

JohnK

I'm shocked anyone could even compare them :eek:
Rome is just in a class of its own, Spartacus doesnt come close.

dr.bollocko

It's like comparing mad men to eastenders or the Sopranos to the Bill tbh.

Otacon

JohnK wrote: »

I'm shocked anyone could even compare them :eek:
Rome is just in a class of its own, Spartacus doesnt come close.

dr.bollocko wrote: »

It's like comparing mad men to eastenders or the Sopranos to the Bill tbh.

Depends on what criteria you use to compare them really. Personally, I go for what entertains me and in this case, its Spartacus. Rome had fantastic production values, excellent acting and a good story, but Spartacus was always more fun to watch.

JohnK

Otacon wrote: »

Depends on what criteria you use to compare them really. Personally, I go for what entertains me and in this case, its Spartacus.

True, however at least for me it took about 5 episodes before I went from "I'll watch it as I've nothing better to do" to "MUST WATCH NOW!!!". On the other hand with Rome, I was completely hooked from episode 1.

paddyismaddy

JohnK wrote: »

I'm shocked anyone could even compare them :eek:
Rome is just in a class of its own, Spartacus doesnt come close.

+ 1

ixoy

Rome obviously.

'Spartacus' is great fun, but it's pure pulp. It's like an '80s action movie. It hasn't got the story, depth, acting, etc. that 'Rome' had.

Clareman

ixoy wrote: »

Rome obviously.

'Spartacus' is great fun, but it's pure pulp. It's like an '80s action movie. It hasn't got the story, depth, acting, etc. that 'Rome' had.

Stephen Segal vs. Jean Claude Van Damme in a fight to the death in the arena = instant ratings