Marco Polo

Although littered with historical and biographical inaccuracies and exaggerations, Marco Polo has a good quality production and creates an escapist atmosphere of a mythologized past. The acting is average, and the story lines and characters are intriguing. The settings and camera work are great, and rather than solely focusing on Marco Polo the show has many other characters' roles and perspectives. The sense of power struggles is well laid out, although not even close to Game of Thrones level in scope (obviously).

In terms of any comparisons and/ or contrasts of other historical-epic type t.v. shows, I would say those that enjoyed the shows Rome, Spartacus, Vikings, and Shogun would enjoy this show. This show isn't quite as good as those particular shows, but is better than shows like Black Sails, Davinci's Demons, and The Tudors.

Considering it's Netflix first venture into historical-epic/ fantasy type genre, it's really good quality and more signs of great original content on the Netflix horizon.

All in all, I give it an 8.

If anything to give it a proper ending. I thought this was a well done series and I would continue watching it. The actors were outstanding the plots good the action sufficient.

Marco Polo has most of the components of a great show: An intriguing plot, great cinematography combined with astounding and exotic settings, and complemented by above average choreography and costumes.

I say most, only because of a few bland acting performances scattered scarcely across the show, mostly by the main actor playing Marco Polo. This however, did not affect my enjoyment of the show, since it excels in so many other respects. The show does a good job of not focusing solely on Marco Polo, but also on Kublai Khan, his empire, as well as a very strong antagonist.

Marco Polo is being unjustly panned by critics. It is being unfairly compared to Game of Thrones, which has very little in common with it, which leads me to suspect that these critics haven't watched anything past the trailer. Even if it is not on the same level of Game of Thrones, it should not be completely dismissed, as is being done by critics.

I say give Marco Polo a chance, regardless of what the critics say. Completely dismissing a show because it is not on par with one one of the greatest shows on TV, especially one that demonstrates this high level of film-making, is really unfair.

Marco Polo: 9/10.

Season 1 was perfect and season 2 wasn't far off with the last two episodes in particular being near perfection. It seemed set up so nicely to go from strength to strength in further seasons but alas Netflix decided we deserved no more. Well worth a watch though all the same.

Marco Polo is such an entertaining and underrated show, the only thing I'm mad at is it took as long as it did for me to watch it. You can tell they put a lot of money into this show by the sheer scale of it. Although Season one was really good it really takes off on season two. It almost feels like a different show in season two. This was one of Netflix's first big shows when Netflix was first taking off. Is it historically accurate? No...but who cares? It doesn't claim to be. It's just an entertaining show that's very well done! They canceled it too early but I read that it was so ridiculously expensive to make that they didn't have a choice. Still, glad we got two amazing seasons out of it.