News Speculation

Will Camelot have GoT fans seeing Starz?

James Hibbard of The Hollywood Reporter reports that the cast to Starz’s CAMELOT has been rounded out by Joseph Fiennes and Eva Green, playing Merlin and Morgana respectively. Fiennes most recently starred in FLASH FORWARD on ABC, and Green has been a fan favorite whose name has been bandied about more than once for possible roles in GAME OF THRONES. They join Tamsin Egerton and GoT’s own Jamie Campbell Bower in the newest retelling of the trials and tribulations of King Arthur’s court.

The article can be read in its entirety here, but this part is telling:

“Camelot” is an international co-production between Irish company Octagon and Canadian outfit Take 5 and developed in association with the U.K.’s Ecosse Films.

Production starts this month on 10 episodes for the series, which will debut on Starz early next year.

Fire And Blood: The gauntlet has been thrown, it seems. The Starz network is thrusting CAMELOT right into the path of the speeding train that is GAME OF THRONES, countering our ten-episode sword-and-sorcery epic with one of their own, releasing it at what appears to be the exact same time — and doing so with much greater product name recognition.

But by my estimation this appears to be a rush job; they never bothered to shoot a pilot before greenlighting the show, and there doesn’t seem to be an entry for this version of CAMELOT on IMDB as of this article. I’d bet my house GAME OF THRONES will be the better show, Eva Green aside.

That said, CAMELOT could still do some damage as far as the market goes; the casual fan may decide two S&S epics equal one too many, and may opt for the more familiar name. Starz isn’t anywhere in HBO’s league as far as its track record goes (and don’t even try to compare subscription numbers), but … this could still be saturation, and could hurt THRONES’ overall numbers.

Or, it could just be really cool, and we’ll all be getting our geek on with multiple shows come this time next year. What do you think?


  • Fire and Blood: is there any word as to what rating Camelot will have? If it is more of a PG show (in the same vein as Merlin), I doubt it is really tapping into GoT's target audience. But if it is targeted at adults and has mature themes, it has the potential to threaten GoT.

    • Good point. If these two tv-shows are for the same target audience, the casual tv-viewer might go
      with Eva Green and Joseph Fiennes (if the choice had to be made). GoT has Sean Bean, but that man is a machine. You can see him everywhere.

      Besides, the better quality doesn't always have anything to do with the popularity.

      However, I personally consider this to be really cool. My inner geek is very excited at the prospect of TWO fantasy shows :D

      • Damn good thing it isn't Ralph Fiennes if that was the case then GoT would be in the run for their money, that guy has acting cred written all over him.

  • HBO has the advantage in terms of network track record. In the long run, quality will pravail over everything, positive buzz and reviews and awards is what HBO aims for. It is true, though, that there are numerous parallels in terms of subject matter and the timeline (except for HBO already having enough footage to make a trailer! :P). Still, I believe that Borgias will represent a stronger competition to Thrones.

    • HBO is also quite infamous for canceling quality shows like Rome and Deadwood :(

      You are probably right about the Borgias being a more serious rival for GoT

    • Wow, if The Borgias has been mentioned on this blog before I totally missed it. I'm not a Tudors fan, and I hadn't heard of it before you just mentioned it, but after some research I'm really looking forward to it.

      • Camelot is schedueled for the fall season, so probably won't clash with GOT which I think will be on for spring or summer. The Borgias will probably run at the same time as GOT but it's more in the vain of The Tudors.

  • No damage there for me, the more, the merrier. I'm thrilled, that movie/series-makers jump on the bandwagon of producing (hopefully!) high-quality visualisations of fantasy/mideval themes. Was about time! Where or when all of this productions will air, is fine with me either way – since I will have to torrent it anyway, befor it comes the looooong way to me in Germany. :o)

    • Ich bin auch in Deutschland, aber guck mal hier
      Da gibt es meistens sogar die HBO shows auf Megavideo schon am nächsten Tag gelinkt.

  • The other thing is that with the Starz/Netflix deal, you could watch Camelot without a subscription.


    I guess this answers the question about JCB perhaps coming back to Game of Thrones in another capacity.


  • I think, at least, they'd be stupid to air that show at the same time as WIC, since they'd split up the market share, whereas the same audience would probably be willing to fully commit themselves to Camelot on an other night. I believe they're hopping on the train.

    I would watch Camelot with Fiennes and Green most definitely (I guess most of you would)!! So, they'd get a big audience share from the Fantasy department, but not if it was aired the same night as WIC. So, why go into competition, if there could be a nice co-existence, with more total viewers for Camelot – that's what the advertisers care about. Not how many people watch a show compared to another show on a pay TV network, but how many people in total watch a show.

    It's like airing Robert Pattinson Movie vs. Justin Bieber concert. In the end you lose.

    • I'm just trying to figure out if Game of Thrones would be the Robert Pattinson Movie or Justin Bieber… tough call.

    • I don't think anyone expects that they'll both air at the same time on the same night. That's just bad business. This post is more speculating as to whether airing the series concurrently will hurt one or the other or both.

      It would be interesting if they did both air on the same night, though, because one might serve as a good lead in for the other. For instance, if HBO chooses Monday nights at 9pm, Starz might place Camelot on Monday night at 10, hoping to scoop up some of Thrones's viewers.

      • Actually, Starz is way more likely to do this to HBO than the other way around. HBO might not want any associations with the likely inferior and more fantastical Camelot.

        Also, if Starz does choose to place Camelot following Game of Thrones, they'd be inviting comparisons between the two shows' quality, which might be an error.

  • In that case there is but one way to make the GOT series work..


  • I don't expect Camelot to come close to the depth and quality they are putting into GoT – I mean, HBO has created an entire language for GoT, Camelot didn't even shoot a pilot.

    Trouble is there is a HUGE market for the more cheesy shows like Spartacus and even True Blood(which I think is still a really good show, despite being intentionally and overtly campy.)

    Also, I don't see a story about Camelot being all that enticing, unless it looks like it will be really good. It's one of the most common stories and I can't imagine people being super excited about another show about Merlin and Arthur. What would be awesome, is if they made it based off Bernard Cornwell's Warlord Chronicle. That brought the grit and realism to the Arthur story in a similar way that ASoIaF does to the fantasy genre. But it doesn't look like that is the case.

    It should be fun to see how it plays out, but I doubt HBO is too worried, they have a pretty good grip on the Pay-For TV market.

    • I think Camelot is no threat to GOT, as you say GOT is a much more complex show, judging from the one episode of Spartacus I saw starz have a completely different style and quality standard for their productions and I think that Camelot's target audience is much smaller then GOT's, GOT is a serious drama that can appeal to mainstream audience and not mainly cheesy fantasy for a specific niche.

  • I sincerely hope Starz doesn't pull another Spartacus: Blood and Sand. I hope they aren't rushing into the historical epic fad (at least HBO seems to be taking great care in getting GoT together)… because Spartacus is awful (shallow, bloody, raunchy). But the cast looks impressive so far and I have high hopes for it. That aside, I wouldn't call any of these shows rivals. I for one would watch them all :D.

    • Sorry, but i didn't think Spartacus such a historically awful series.. Except for the extended arena battles and the tons of blood spilled on the sand i would call it quite historically accurate. If you read a historic novel about the Romans' lives, or search in wiki for Spartacus you would see both the orgiastic (sexually) and the bloodthirsty aspects of the Roman life. Even the food shown in the series was accurate! As for Spartacus himself he was Thrasian, he was a gladiator, he did have a wife taken by the Romans, and of course he did start the biggest slave revolution in history known as the Revolution of Gladiators.
      As for the GOT i would agree that i would see all the shows even though i am kind of concerned because if the GOT series doesn't come before the others, the quality comparison will be unavoidable. HBO had better do a hell of job in that case..

    • I don't want to be misunderstood, of course i wouldn't want the GOT series to be alike in anything to the Spartacus: Blood and Sand series. It's just a different type of show..

  • GRRM has said before that HBO puts subscriptions, critical acclaim, and awards before actual television ratings (which is probably the reason why it's so good), so even if Camelot might adversely affect the numbers for Game of Thrones, that's not as detrimental as it would be on a network or non-subscription cable channel.

  • Have any of the Spartacus haters even watched more than 2 episodes of that show? It started to get really good around episode 5 and the season finale was actually the best of any series aired this season.
    Sure, in the first episodes it felt like a cheap 300 knockoff and some of the actors are lousy, but the intrigue gets more exciting, the twists more thrilling and surprising and the main characters become more complex with every episode. It's still no Rome, but it is sure as hell is "more Rome" and a lot better than Tudors season 1. The most entertaining series on the air next to True Blood and Sons of Anarchy. A lot of critics who dissed the pilot learned to love it.

    • To each his own, I for one watched the first episode of Spartacus and a few of Sons of anarchy and I can't stand to continue watching them, True blood is also no elite culture but it's watchble and entertaining, it's not frustrating to the eye like Spartacus and SOA.

      • You see the pattern? You shouldn't judge a whole series after one episode….or maybe you just have bad taste ;)
        Sons of Anarchy was one of last years best reviewed dramas right next to Breaking Bad, Treme and Mad Men. It just received 2 nominations (Best Drama, Katey Sagal) for the prestigious Critics Awards.
        Although while I liked it from episode 1 there were a lot people who didn't like the first episodes and wrote raving reviews about season 2.

        • I watched abuot 4 hours of SOA I think it's enough to determent whether it's good or not, I don't think it was the acting, the acting was fine, the writting was awful, the characters's motives and behavior was badly constructed, it made the whole story unreliable.
          Spartacus is a joke, talking about a show for 13 year olds…

      • I follow perhaps 40 different shows. Some are good, some are bad and some are just annoying.
        The ones that top everything else are the ones with the superb acting.
        The Wire comes to mind….The Shield….Hung……In Treatment….Rome. I can name others.
        Sons of Anarchy is just below that standard.

        Spartacus is not even on the same scale. Perhaps it can compete with LotS….but it still looses because LotS is original while Spartacus is a complete 300-ripoff.

        Acting, folks! Good acting and bad acting. Its not taste its a fact.

        Right now I have started watching Friday Night Lights and I suppose it is the O.C. for men.
        But still, the acting is really good.

        • Are you kidding? Sons of Anarchy has one of the finest ensembles in TV. You can argue about the lead Charlie Hunnam, but Katey Sagal or the guy who plays Opie are amazing. It has a lot of Deadwood and The Shield alumns, too. Almost everyone who loved The Shield will love SOA. The showrunner Kurt Sutter was the most important Shield writer right behind Shawn Ryan.

          The Wire on the other hand was all about it's excellent writing. Sure, there were a few great actors like Idris Elba, but most of the black actors who played the gangsters weren't that great. It has it's reasons you haven't seen much of them after the show ended.

          Spartacus: I agree that some of the actors were bad …some even awful(Crixus), but John Hannah could rival any HBO lead besides Ian McShane. Xena was also surprsingly good. And as already mentioned …besides the first episodes and the fighting style there is not a lot of 300 in the second half of the season.

          LOTS? Please…now it gets ridiculous. That's not even in the same universe as Rome or Spartacus. It's a show aimed at 13 year olds in the vein of Hercules or Xena. It runs on sunday afternoons in my country.

          • Vic, I meant that SoA is right below those I named. That means SoA is the best series out there right now. Well, In Treatment is also back but thats a completely different genre.

            Sure The wire didnt have the emotional depth in the characters as The Shield or SoA has but that was because it focused more on their jobs….their actions. The psychological portraits were more hidden.
            That many of the actors havent been seen in other productions. Well, I got the feeling that many of them were acually acting themselves.

          • "most of the black actors who played the gangsters weren't that great. It has it's reasons you haven't seen much of them after the show ended."

            That might just be because there aren't all *that* many roles on American TV for black actors. Also, some of them might be very talented, but not have the speech training necessary to shed their dialect in order to get roles that require standard English.

      • Of course it won't go but just because you have prejudged and wile seeing it you'll think damn i am wasting my time.. It will not have a boom different show, no. But the fact is that the show becomes more dramatic, the roles of each actor gets to be separated and everyone is put to the test due to his past sins. If you didn't like the show there is no way to keep on seeing it. Personally i was prepared for both the gore and the sex and enjoyed the story as it evolved and became complex and beautiful.

    • I haven't seen Sons of Anarchy yet, but to those who have, how is Henry Rollins' performance (as a neo-nazi)? I saw him live last week, and he was making lots of jokes about it. He always jokes about how he's a terrible actor, but manages to get small parts once in a while.

  • ——
    For those who dismissed the show as a sex-obsessed "300" ripoff, think again. "Spartacus" turned out to be so much more than that, especially when it kicked into high gear midway through Season 1. Over the course of 13 hours, and especially in several well-paced recent episodes, this swords-and-togas saga became downright addictive, in part due to its distinctive dialogue, which mixes Shakespearean flourishes with "Sopranos"-esque profanity.

    Other mistake in this thread: Camelot isn't rushed. It's in development for over a year. Originally developed for showtime in November 2008.

    That being said and besides being a huge fan of Eva Green … Game of Thrones is still my biggest hope for a worthy Rome replacement and the first great adult fantasy series on TV. Number 2 on my must see list after AMCs Walking Dead and tied with HBOs Boardwalk Empire.

    • I watched the finale, it was kind of fun and I'm curious how they're going to handle next season. Will they include more storyline or will it be one rampage-ass battle to Rome?

      I think 24 had the same problem this year, very bad at the beginning and the last 10 episodes were great.

    • I've read in different places and from different people exactly the same opinion that you're expressing: that Spartacus really, really improved from mid-season and was very good until the finale. We'll see, I've already set my digital box to record the whole series now that it has started airing in the UK.

      • I've heard this from other places too. Haven't watched it yet, not sure if I will. But I have heard that improves.

    • I totally agree with you Vic. The show was pretty bad for the first 2-3 episodes then really picked up and became one of my favorites of the past few years. Sure it wasn't perfect with the sometimes poor special effects and the overly stylish fight scenes but, the plot and characters truly began to shine when given the chance and the political intrigue and betrayal was weaved nicely throughout. I truly think people need to give it a chance. Just look around at reviews on imdb and to see what I'm talking about. Just dismiss the first 3 episodes.

    • Spartacus is what it is. I personally watched the entire season and enjoyed it – and definitely agree it got better as it went. But it also definitely had different goals than what most of the really good HBO shows have had, and what many expect GoT to have.

      But I would definitely not put it on the same tier as some of my favorite HBO shows: The Wire, The Sopranos, Deadwood, etc. I personally think GoT will strive to be just an all around awesome show, where as the best I could say for Spartacus is that it was entertaining. That's just me though.

  • The head of programs of Starz used to be the guy that bought the ASoIaF rights for HBO right? My guess is he'll respect HBO too much to counterprogram this show. If not for that reason, he'll know Starz is too small at the moment to start counterprogramming HBO.

    • He was fired by HBO, so I don't think he owes them anything. I'm actually sick of Arthurian legends and I can't believe people will tune in even if it was great.

  • One more remark. The biggest advantage Game of Thrones has over these other shows, the storyline is already written out and everyone knows it's rock-solid. We know what's going to happen every episode and despite of that we all want to see it. My guess with Borgias en Camelot is, they have to get one storyline out of the thousand stories written about these people. For these shows it'll remain a question whether the story will be good untill it airs, with GoT you know that at least the story won't be the problem for the show's failing.

    • On the other hand, there are probably a lot of ASOIAF fans who will want to check out how HBO is handling the story, but who might stop watching if they feel that the results aren't good enough. GoT is facing a lot more expectations, because the story is known to be rock-solid. People will always compare it to the books. The Borgias and Camelot don't have that kind of pressure.

      • In all honesty, I can't imagine any ASOIAF deciding NOT to watch the show. Unless it's really, really, really, really bad (which is very unlikely), every fan of the books will likely watch every episode.

        • Oh, I can easily imagine that. I for one could end up doing so. I know some other people who could do so. (But then again, I'm more of a book person than a tv/movie person.)

          I did watch all the LotR movies even though I find some things I disliked about them. But it's not a same thing with GoT, because it's going to be a tv series, with several episodes and seasons. It's entirely different kind of commitment. If the adaptation is "wrong" enough, it's difficult to continue watching it week after week. I know some people who feel the LotR movies ruined something (e.g. they couldn't anymore remember how they imagined some places or characters to look like before). I could easily see that if some ASOIAF fans would feel the same about GoT, they'd just stop watching. Their curiosity about the show would've been satisfied and stopping to watch it is easy.

          • And since they are already ASOIAF fans, it's not like they had to continue watching the show to find out what will happen. Which is one major reason to follow some mediocre or somewhat good show even if it wasn’t entirely to your taste. In GoT, the story isn’t so “important” but the manner how it’s told. How many different theories, viewpoints and perceptions are out there? In the end they cannot choose all of them to be highlighted. It would be impossible and I wouldn’t recommend them even to try it – it’s better to make a choice and stick with it, otherwise the story would just collapse. The tv and the books are two different media and they work differently. GoT will be a somewhat simplified version of the story and it isn’t going to please everyone.

  • I think this is the bandwagon effect. I'm convinced that historical fantasy drama is the new "vampires" as far as new movies and television shows go. Anything and everything will be it in a year's time.

    • I'd take historical fantasy drama over vampires any day, but I don't know if I should get my hopes up. Everyone thought fantasy was the next movie revolution after Lord of the Rings, but, apart from Pan's Labyrinth, that sort of petered out. Everything else was inevitably compared to Lord of the Rings, and paled in comparison. I wonder, even if Game of Thrones becomes a phenomenon (fingers crossed), if there will be other shows and movies that can also excel in the genre.

  • While it's most likey that Starz will programm the Spartacus prequel minseries(they can't film season 2 because the lead actor is recovering from cancer) in January we don't know what "early 2011" means. Same goes for Game of Thrones. March seems likely, but it isn't written in stone. But I have to say there could be a fantasy/historical series overkill in early 2011.
    Showtimes Borgias series with Jeremy Irons AND the european produced Borgias from the Oz Showrunner Tom Fontana and former HBO head of programs and now Starz boss of programs Chris Albrecht

    are also aiming for that time window. Also I'm not sure if Fontanas Borgias has already made a deal with an US-channel. Maybe Starz won't buy it because Albrechts involvement.

    • I'm pretty sure Borgias will air on Showtime, I think I saw trailers for it airing with the Tudors – not positive though. It looks pretty good, either way.

        • Ahh, apparently I misread your comment, sorry about that. It's weird to have two separate shows made around the same time… I wonder if it is coincidence or if one is dipping in the other's Kool-aid, so to speak.

  • If Spartacus is any indication, then Camelot won't be anywhere near the quality that Game of Thrones will be. I loved HBO's Rome, but I just find Spartacus unwatchable.

  • Not even close. Everyone knows the story of Camelot, it's been done again and again and has no suprises left. Everyone knows who the villains are, everyone knows where the twists are. On the hand GoT is something new and isnt close in comparison. Plus, there is the BBC Camelot show 'Merlin' knocking about.

    The Showtime Borgias is the real competition for GoT (I'd be suprised if the other gets on US tv quickly), while Camelot's competition is much more the BBC show. Anyone who tries to compare the two based simply on setting will be hard pressed to do so, as beyond that, they are absolutely nothing alike.

    I see nothing to worry about here.

  • As has been stated before Spartacus got very cool mid season. I plodded thru the first several shows very disappointed. But it really began throwing some excellent curves plot wise. I also fell in love with the Gladiator owner, forget his hame but the guy was great.

  • If the other STARZ original programs, such as Spartacus, is any indication, their shows a poorly done anyway, so I don't think they can stand up to HBO. Besides, I see the name and I think of the musical…

  • I almost gave up on Spartacus too…for me it was episode 8 that got the ball rolling…and the finale was incredible…hopefully they invest some more dough in the production (sets ) it looks kinda cheap sometimes…but it’s a lot of fun to watch… I love the show now..

  • Sean Bean > Joseph Finnes as name recognition goes.
    If the series is as gritty as in the books, then I don't think getting viewers should be a problem. Besides, it's HBO, for the sevens sake. They made Sopranos and Rome, so they've earned their household name.

  • I am seeing forward the Starz adaptation of "The Pillars of The Earth" much more than "Camelot". I think it could be a good gauge on how a cable produced, novel-based tv show might look like.

    There's something about "Camelot" that makes me think on a teenager approach to the Arthurian Mythos. Almost like it's the CW producing and not Starz.

  • this reminds me a little of when Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip and 30 Rock came out simultaneously. It was unlikely that both would survive, but in the end quality won out over hype. I expect this to be the same.

    besides… Camelot is so boring… been there, done that.

  • If I was Starz, I'd want to launch Camelot AFTER the GOT finale, and bank on it being a success. With all the hype GOT has been getting, plus HBO's track record, it could be a big opportunity. Most of the GOT fans would transition over to Camelot, and they could both be successful.

    Even if they air Camelot during the same TV season, I think the odds of Starz running Camelot in the same time slot are pretty small, and frankly it would be really bad for them.

    • Starz runs it's originals on Friday.. HBO (mostly) on sundays. So even if both show should air in the same weeks it won't be the same timeslot. ;)

  • Honestly the fact that this is yet another rehash of the Arthurian legend makes me much less likely to watch it than if it was something I'd never heard of. The Arthur story isn't fresh and has been done so many times as to not be that interesting any more. For me to go out of my way to see Camelot I'll have to hear some damned good things about it.

    That said, if I can afford it I'll be signing up for HBO when GoT hits.

  • Oh come on guys! 'Spartacus' is fun! It's a great guilty pleasure… like somebody grabbed HBO's 'Rome' when it was walking down a poorly lit back street, hustled it into an alley, beat it with a great big redneck stick and then forced it to mate at knifepoint with '300'. And the bastard born 9 months later was… SPARTACUS.

    I know it makes baby Pullo cry, but I watched the whole first season, and I LIKED IT. It was good, dumb fun, perfect for winding down a bad week at the office.

    Seriously though. Maybe this Camelot show would be competition, but it probably wouldn't generate as much buzz as AGOT. I'd expect the critics to get much more lathered over 'our' show. Do the cable networks even work on the same production decision model as the networks? They don't do advertising dollars. So do they base it on new subscriptions? Merchandising? Critical acclaim?

    • I agree, although I felt like I enjoyed Spartacus for all the wrong reasons, I did enjoy it.

  • And nobody's mentioned the other medievalesque production that Starz is doing: Pillars of the Earth. With none less than Ian McShayne as… well… some cardinal. I never read the book. So I guess maybe he won't be shaving his head for Lord Tywin. Or was that the reference about 'the Borgias' above?

    • I can't see PotE having any real impact (good or bad) on GoT. It's only a miniseries and starts next month so will be over long before GoT starts to air.

      • As I said before, I'm more concerned on the artistic and production values of PotE. They could be a good milestone to GoT.

  • uh oh. as much as i hate stars and as much as i hated the 3 episodes of Spartacus (reading these comment makes me think i will have to suffer thru a few more now) i cannot lie. eva green is going to be someone who i cannot refuse watching. i said over and over again that GoT needed to get Eva Green but nobody in casting would listen =(

    it is true that the arthur legend has been done to death. it would be interesting to see if it could be done in a dark, twisted and adult manner. maybe the stars show will be good?

    there are two sets of books i would like to see as pay television tv shows since they are unlike to be able to be competently done as movies. The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant Unbeliever and The Elric Saga (maybe even the whole Eternal Champion). but i won't be holding my breath. as with any other "hip" trend, it usually only scratches the surface, usually finding a piece of quality work by accident on it's shallow rapine dip into any "genre" and doesn't really ever take the time to really fully explore the genre and all of the hidden gems. i would also love to see the world of China Mielville on HBO.

    the pillars of the earth show intrigues me. the books are pretty good so that might be exciting.

  • Spartacus is great. But it works since they are stylistically borrowing from 300. However if Starz tries to do the similar cheap filming method with Camelot it won't work.

  • Joseph Fiennes… uh oh.. the red flags are up for "cheesy". Probably not too bad for Starz level network. Hopefully. For them.

    I think if nothing else, this show will be a nice contrast against GoT. GoT will be gritty and harsh, lotta grey, lotta misery. Meanwhile Ralph will be skipping around, doin' magic, going on quests, and other tired medieval heroic deeds.

    Camelot will by contrast separate GoT into another, less fantastical category.

    • Did you even watch Shakespeare in Love or the FX pilot Pretty/Handsome? Joseph Fiennes is no Ralph Fiennes, but a more than decent actor.

      As for Camelot : I guess it will be somewhere between Tudors and Spartacus. Lots of intrigue, scheming and sex. Bloody fights. Hopefully not as pretentious as Tudors.

      I don't understand the need to mock other fantasy/historical series. GOT has it's greenlight and when it's well received it will get it's second season no matter how much similar stuff is on the air. I for one look forward to Camelot, Borgias, William the Conquerer and ah Borgias II. Not as much as for GOT, which hopefully can do for Fantasy what Galactica did for sci-fi or Deadwood for western , but it's some of the most promising stuff in 2011.

      • I guess people have different opinions Vic. I don't feel like I am mocking Camelot because it feels natural, simple and true.

        I don't watch a lot of TV. I didn't like Galactica or Deadwood, never saw Spartacus, and stopped watching Tudors at the end of last year. I won't watch Camelot, as it seems a waste of time. Yes I saw Shakespeare in Love which was a terrible movie for which the female should never in a million years win that Oscar, and everyone knows it.

        Camelot and Merlin are not historical. They are THE most tired stereotypes of fantasy. Good luck with the reboot, Starz.

        • I saw also Stealing Beauty, Enemy at the Gates, Elizabeth, and other movies Joseph Fiennes was in.

          Over and over Joseph proves that having a British accent and little brother of an actor simply isn't enough.

          As Merlin I think this is going to be hysterical.

  • ahh another rendition of arthur and his knights. frankly im getting a little worn out of the premise but if they manage to keep it fresh and different, i'll check it out for sure.

      • Why? Tv -Directors only have a huge impact in the pilot episode when they help to set the mood and style for the entire series. After that a monkey could do the job, because they just have to ape that style. ;) The actors know what to do and the showunner fixes the episode in editing.

        • Therefore why would this news be exciting? I think we agree in different ways.

    • Ugh, they lost me at Joseph Fiennes. I can't stand that guy.

      Either way, I don't think this harms GOT's chances. If anything it will create more buzz about how the fantasy genre is currently the in thing and attract more viewers who aren't usually into that genre. The shows that are good (and GOT has everything going for it so far) will keep those viewers, and the others won't.

  • GoT has sex and real hardcore violence. More people will watch it because it is more sensational. I know it is a cheap reason to do so, but who cares! :D People will be watching!

    • If the reasons to make people watch GOT is sex and hardcore violence, then Camelot probably would have a good shot if they follow the same pattern than Spartacus. And the foundations for raunchy scenes are there: love triangle Lancelot-Arthur-Ginevere, incest encounters Morgana-Arthur and a whole bunch of virile knights and cute maids. Make half of them horny and you'll have a Round Bed instead a Round Table.

  • Apart from being a fan and therefore a bit unfair in my judgement…I truly believe that GoT will become one of those epic shows.

    Have you ever sat down and watched a episode of "In Treatment"?
    In all its rights it should be boring as hell. It takes place in one room. A dialogue between two persons….about everyday life.
    Still it nails you to the chair. Watching it Ive sometimes found tears coming to my eyes. The superb acting and the raw ugly emotions. Its so human…

    Rome, the epic, the great.
    When Lucius and Titus became friends I found myself smiling, dumbfounded. What wonderful characters! The way they banter eachother. How like life.

    Hung with the forever cool Ray (Thomas Jane). Cool, not the way John McLane is cool….but everyday cool. The way I could be cool.

    And always the love. The love between parent or child or between lovers. Not the fairytale love, but the real deal. The dirty love. The frustrated anger-f***s, the sweaty lovemaking, the arguing and the fights.

    The characters in the wire. After five seasons with McNulty you still dont really know him. He is a simple person but still complicated just like you or I. He is no actionhero, no supercop. He is me. Still Im intrigued.
    He is a perfectly crafted person but without the cheap emotions painted on his forehead. He is an enigma.
    It is so evreyday…

    True Blood is also wonderful and so different from the above. It is stylish. It tells its tale in pictures and scents. Its not focused on the acting but on the scripting. What happens and how it looks.
    You know the vampirehype?
    One word: True Blood (okay two words)
    It changed our lives.

    Six feet under, The Sopranos, Sex and the City, Generation Kill…..

    All these twisted shows in these twisted worlds…
    but with one thing in common. They are human. They are dirty and ugly and raw and that is what hooks us. They mirror our souls. They are real. HBO will probarly make me believe in dragons. Why shouldnt the dragons exist? They must. Look at the world that is drawn around them. It sure looks real.

    Look at the fighting. No stylish moves like in some Spartacus-crap. It is real and to the point. Dead is dead. Kill him in the simplest possible way. Like Titus again. Sword to the neck and thrust down.
    It is as raw and real as any Michael Mann gunfight.

    So upon the HBO-canvas they will paint the picture of Game of Thrones.
    The f***ing, the killing and the multi-layered characters.
    For the first time ever we will see the fantasy genre become something as real as life itself. For the first time we will see dragons and believe in them.

    I dont think it will turn into a fantasy-hype. It surpass fantasy. It cant be compared to LotR or LotS or Merlin or any other fantasy out there.
    It will break the ground for someting else.
    Turning complicated and "unreal" litterature into something adapted to the screen.

    What will we see after this? A show based upong Stephen Donaldsons books?
    I dont know, but the future looks bright.
    Bright and ugly and dirty and bloody.
    Just the way we like it

    • I'd like to see an HBO take on The Black Company, by Glen Cook, but have them do what they did for True Blood, and take it in their own direction. They could pitch it as "Generation Kill meets Game of Thrones".

    • Havent seen it. Should I?
      Im busy with Friday Night Lights a week or two. In the middle of season 2 now.
      It is really good. I like the characters. Probarly the closest to a soapopera I'll ever get. Still, good acting. Though, swedish soccer-fan as I am, american footbal is a complete mystery to me.

  • BTW, Spartacus is a huge pile of steaming crap too. It's production values are a huge massive joke. Starz could never ever match the money and production value that HBO is able to produce.

    • You obviously didn't watch the whole season. Ending up being well worth suffering through the first few episodes. Was the best show on TV for the last few weeks of the season. You can get away with looking cheap if you have great writing which it did.

  • Stephen R Donaldson ‘ The Chronicles of Thomas Convenant’ would make awesome tv…hope to see it one day too

    • Me too. To me SRD is head to head with GRRM and Thomas Covenant is probarly the coolest antihero ever

      • i put up a long comment yesterday that got eaten by the stupid intertubz that mentioned that i would love to see a cable series of Thomas Covenant. i also mentioned that HBO would be a cool place for the greatest fantasy anti-hero … elric. maybe even the whole eternal champion series if not just elric. i also would love to see China Meilville Scott Bakker on TV.

  • With countless books and movies Camelot has a been there, done that sound. Probably end up being a good show but GOT is something new and fresh with characters people haven't heard of or seen on screen before. Doubt it will hurt HBO unless your just a Camelot freak

  • HBO is vastly larger and has a vastly more powerful reputation and profile to promote the show. Starz is a distant little brother in the subscription TV service. If you watch or listen to the Time Warner presentation (or just look at the graphics) they are an 800 pound gorilla. GOT will feel little bump from an Arthur show.

    • Yes, there is some interesting responses from concerning Sansa s character.
      Do not know would Sophie be in some kind of trouble if she would continue to answer.

  • Bleh. Only way this is a threat to GoT is if the producers somehow manage to actually tell the Arthurian Legends correctly this time around (unlikely).

    @ the people saying "It's all been dooone befooore"…not really. Don't underestimate the depth of legend and mystique behind King Arthur's Court. Hollywood has never been exactly chock full of risk-takers, so they haven't much strayed from the cheesiest myths (Arthur pulls sword out of stone, marries Guinevere. Lancelot bangs Guinevere, oh noes, here comes evil Mordred to off them all!) but there's an incredible amount of source material out there to draw from, everything from Sir Gawain and the Green Knight to the Grail Cycle. The Knight of Two Swords, the war with Lancelot, and pretty much the entirety of the Orkney brothers' respective sagas have never been brought anywhere near a camera.

    An absolutely epic show is right there for the taking if Starz wants it.

    Happily, of course, they probably don't. Their marketing people have informed them that their audience are lowbrow morons who want to see Mordred twirling a black mustache while brooding Lance plays footsies with bimbo Gwen, so that's what we'll get. GoT is safe.

  • I live in the USA and I just discovered the show Merlin that plays on BBC one. It is so fantastic!!!! At first when I learned about this show Camelot I was excited that there would be a show about King Arthur and Merlin in the states, and then I became upset because Merlin is such a great show, I hope that this one doesnt crush it.

  • Well it’s pretty obvious by now that “Camelot” is crap. There is little that can be done for a show where the lead actor is a disaster.