Into the Badlands - Review!

Discussion in 'Entertainment' started by supersonic, Jan 3, 2017.

  1. I saw the trailer in 2015 and thought it was a cable TV knockoff of Game of Thrones. I finally got around to watch it and while the basic concept is similar... this show is actually better.

    Think Game of Thrones on high-speed rails. Into the Badlands has a lot of action, and the show gets right down to business. The action sequences themselves are amazing. There is no guns so it's all hand to hand martial arts and sword play. The fight choreography is film quality and extremely well done. It's topped off with over-the-top Tarantino-esq gore.

    The first season is 6 episodes with no filler, something that plagues GoT. However, the trade off for that pacing is lack of character development. I never really cared who lives or dies and I'm not rooting for anybody. It's just fun watching what happens. Another negative is that AMC milks this show with a ridiculous amount of ads, way more than other shows. I Tivo'd the New Years marathon but will probably buy season 2 than go through that again.


    In conclusion. If Tarantino did a Game of Thrones concept, in the style of Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, you'd have Into the Badlands.

    9.5/10 - action
    1.5/10 - story

  2. Is this that kickboxing motorcycle man show that AMC used to show as filler after Walking Dead? If so, this show is pretty bad and really dumb. I thought it got cancelled for sure. And lol at comparing it to Game of Thrones.
    • disagree disagree x 1
  3. Game of Thrones is an overall great show... but it has too many Dragon Ball Z "power up" episodes. If you didn't like John Wick, I could see you not liking this. It's not meant to be deep and it doesn't stop for character motivations or backstory. But it's 8.1 on IMDB and 87% audience reviews on RT. Calling it bad is exaggerated.
  4. #4 cmdrmonkey, Jan 3, 2017
    Last edited: Jan 3, 2017
    Enjoy your kickboxing motorcycle man show. I'm sorry I made fun of it. I actually thought the fight scenes were pretty good. The problem is the story is terrible and you could probably sleep through the story sections or fast forward through them to the fights and not really miss anything. Comparing the storytelling to GoT is just silly. GoT has the best storytelling and character development of any TV show other than Breaking Bad.

    The fight scenes are a 9/10. The story segments are a 3/10 at best. The problem is that there are long sections of story with no fighting and the story is bad. The lack of guns in the post apocalyptic future seems contrived. The villain looks like evil Abraham Lincoln. Some of the women on it are hot. Overall this show might be a 6.5 or 7 out of 10, but I think giving it a 9.5/10 is way overselling it.
  5. I wasn't comparing it to GoT storytelling. But it's basically warlords fighting for territorial supremacy. I'm pretty sure an AMC exec finished watching GoT to come up with it.

    GoT puts way more investment into characters. I absolutely love and hate characters on that show. Even reacting badly when my favorite characters die.

    This show doesn't spend any time on character development. I wouldn't care if the "hero" died as long as the sequence was cool.

    It's a mindless action flick with cool fights, in episodic format.
  6. Watched Season 2... they actually focused on story line and character development much to my horror. It's a much more balanced show season 2, but I actually loved the non-stop action of Season 1.

    Also, based on the trailers for Season 3 it looks like they are trying to get away from the Game of Thrones ripoff story line and go in a different direction. Overall still one of the better shows on TV.