The Borgias

:

Season 1
  • Network: SHOWTIME
  • Series Premiere Date: Apr 3, 2011
Season #: 3, 2, 1
User Score
7.7

Generally favorable reviews- based on 140 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 117 out of 140
  2. Mixed: 11 out of 140
  3. Negative: 12 out of 140
Watch Now

Where To Watch

Buy on
Stream On
Stream On

Review this tv show

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

view
per page
  1. Puck342
    Apr 22, 2011
    10
    The Borgias is a show that, by it's placement on a subscriber network like Showtime, and it's focus on intirgue and sex and death, must be compared to the Tudors. I am safe to report 4 episodes into the first season (which, unless there are mighty changes a-coming, has seemed to have shown the gambit of what this first season intends to bring us in manner of light/dark tones and generalThe Borgias is a show that, by it's placement on a subscriber network like Showtime, and it's focus on intirgue and sex and death, must be compared to the Tudors. I am safe to report 4 episodes into the first season (which, unless there are mighty changes a-coming, has seemed to have shown the gambit of what this first season intends to bring us in manner of light/dark tones and general plot delivery), The Borgias have already far outpaced even the best moments of The Tudors.

    I believe this is in part due to the fact that simply put, Jeremy Irons from his first moment on screen as the soon-to-be-pope Cardinal Rodrigo Borgia so totally fills the role that he looks appropriate, if perhaps a bit lean for a papal figure of the time. However, his delivery, carriage, and mannerisms all are so enveloping as to erase any doubt by the midpoint of the opening episode. While this show does take historical liberties like the Tudors, it does not go nearly as far and they are mostly to add to the show, not to simply make it more marketable. So for those who are more intimately familiar with the zeitgeist of Machiavellian Italy and Cesare Borgia in particular might at first be a bit startled by his apparent complexity and depth. This becomes obvious from the get-go as Cesare is cast (not only in an eldest brother role, one that he was not in real life) as the double-edged foil to his somewhat immature (both too cruel and yet not cruel enough) brother and his menacing (and oh how he menaces) and scheming father.

    What I find so enthralling is that this show, after 4 episodes, has not given any sort of Singular Answer to the question of why, when by the end of the first episode Rodrigo Borgia is made Pope Alexander VI, the most powerful man in the Christian world, that is only the very tip of the iceberg. Sure, there is simple greed and ambition, but by a few episodes in you begin to realize that Pope Alexander VI is simply a man who cannot be defined like some sort of Gargamel, constantly searching for one singular end. Rather he clearly has many motivations, not all of which are even clear to his own family or even possibly, himself.

    So far, the historical cameos have been magnificent. The Medici's main scene so far (hopefully they will be returning, central historical figures that they are) was wonderful, to mention one. The architecture is also given a historical amount of detail for the most recognizable vistas that is an aesthetic pleasure (for those of you who have played Assassin's Creed II, this will seem like the live version of the stages) and also serves to ground the series, making you not want to look to the corner of every moving shot to see if you can see daylight behind the sets.

    Luckily for the series, the 11 year papal reign of Alexander VI has no shortage of drama to draw upon, and since it began in the auspicious year of 1492, glib historical references can (and I am sure, given the first 4 episodes, will continue to be) be peppered in regularly for bit sized chunks of humor and levity, which this show is able to provide at times.

    Overall this series seems to have done (and left itself enough room to continue to be able to do for many seasons to come) the best job of a historical drama from definitively pre-industrial times. Yes, it is clearly a cheerier, less hairy, more attractive version of the past, with mild edits to keep the plot aerodynamic, but it is still stunning none-the-less, and deserves the highest of praise.    … Expand
  2. dierregi
    Feb 27, 2014
    10
    I was a bit undecided about following this series as I thought it was going to be disappointing compared to The Tudors. It turned out much better for several reasons, among which the fact that the cast is much larger and the story does not focus mainly on one character (such as Henry VIII). Besides, the story of this family is a lot less known, so it is intriguing to discover a fictionalI was a bit undecided about following this series as I thought it was going to be disappointing compared to The Tudors. It turned out much better for several reasons, among which the fact that the cast is much larger and the story does not focus mainly on one character (such as Henry VIII). Besides, the story of this family is a lot less known, so it is intriguing to discover a fictional version of historical facts. Jeremy Irons as Rodrigo Borgia is intriguing and decadent enough. His two sons, Cesare and Juan, are played by excellent actors; the women (ex-lover Vannozza, new lover Giulia, daughter Lucrezia) are all interesting characters. Even Michelozzo, the “bad boy” assassin serving Cesare is intriguing. A special mention to the gorgeous costumes, much nicer than anything seen in the Tudors.… Expand
  3. J_B
    Nov 5, 2011
    9
    The cast is great, especially Jeremy Iron, playing the Pope, and Francois Arnaud, who's Cesare. I bought the season on DVD and watched it within a week. And while the facts are stretched a bit, the main parts are true. The only thing is that some episodes are pretty fast paced.
  4. Gamer147
    Aug 22, 2013
    8
    Liked it! There were some faults, but none that hindered it so much I would write about. I enjoyed watching it, it's lewd, kinky and interesting. A well done look into the curroption religious factions tend to have, I liked the characters (Juan and Chizera were awesome, most of the time) as well as the plot, I'd recommend this to anybody over eighteen who doesn't wince at some indecent acts.
  5. JennetP
    Apr 4, 2011
    10
    I'll admit I was predisposed to like "The Borgias" by the subject matter, by the network, by the involvement of Neil Jordan, and by the casting of Jeremy Irons as Rodrigo Borgia. And I do like it, very much. As usual with historical series, the show edits the facts quite a bit, but some of the editing is doubtless in the interest of fairness, given the blackening of the Borgia name afterI'll admit I was predisposed to like "The Borgias" by the subject matter, by the network, by the involvement of Neil Jordan, and by the casting of Jeremy Irons as Rodrigo Borgia. And I do like it, very much. As usual with historical series, the show edits the facts quite a bit, but some of the editing is doubtless in the interest of fairness, given the blackening of the Borgia name after the family's downfall. Cesare, promoted to elder brother in the series, is a more conflicted, self-aware thug than his historical counterpart, and, played with intelligence and charm by François Arnaud, serves as a strong foil to his menacing father. And no one does menace like Jeremy Irons. Even when he's not saying a word, just staring into space, his face advertises his cruelty and depraved ambition. Then he speaks, complicating the portrait with a dark charisma that lures and repels simultaneously. From top to bottom, the casting is unusually good, as should be evident from the participation of heavyweights Colm Feore and Derek Jacobi, who play rival cardinals. Also first-rate is the overall look of the show, which is sumptuous in the extreme. One critic complained that Rodrigo's reason for seeking the papacy was obscure, but, for me, it was obvious in the buildings, the clothes, the ornaments, the art, all of which proclaim the massive wealth and power of the church in Rome. "The Borgias" is splendid, in at least two senses of the word.… Expand
  6. Bubblehead
    Oct 29, 2013
    4
    Absolute, utter garbage. I came across this crap after searching for shows staring Derek Jacobi (Caligula, Cadfael). Yes, this great historical actor has his name is in the credits but his character graciously dies in the second episode. Good for him, he must have decided the show was too crap to continue. So what's wrong about it?

    The acting is crap, the accent are aweful or    Absolute, utter garbage. I came across this crap after searching for shows staring Derek Jacobi (Caligula, Cadfael). Yes, this great historical actor has his name is in the credits but his character graciously dies in the second episode. Good for him, he must have decided the show was too crap to continue. So what's wrong about it?

    The acting is crap, the accent are aweful or non-existent, the history is exaggerated and butchered. The characters and historical setting are stereotypical to an almost comical level. Just look at the French king, he looks like the hunchback of Notre dam and acts like one too.

    Worse than the history being butchered is that fact that every five minutes there is raunchy act of butchery followed by some murder. Very accurate stuff for a show about the vatican

    If you read the other reviews you will notice one thing- they were written by el idiots or Americans. The show was made for an audience used to Jerry Springer. Of course they are going to like it.

    If you are looking for a show with Jacobi, don't go anywhere outside of BBC. This cable-made, American crap can stay put.    … Expand
  7. klopow
    Apr 22, 2011
    7
    I watched the premere of The Borgias and was underwhelmed, but not completely turned off by the show. I found the acting to be adequate, though at times, a bit stale. There's an interesting dynamic within the Borgias family - the way each member handles Rodrigo's rise to pope-dom, and each member's role in securing/safeguarding that coveted seat. I found that dynamic to be the mostI watched the premere of The Borgias and was underwhelmed, but not completely turned off by the show. I found the acting to be adequate, though at times, a bit stale. There's an interesting dynamic within the Borgias family - the way each member handles Rodrigo's rise to pope-dom, and each member's role in securing/safeguarding that coveted seat. I found that dynamic to be the most interesting of the show as a whole, and I want to see how that plays out in the next episodes. Strangely enough, the show is intriguing, yet it is flavored with a typical murder, betrayal and espionage storyline that can be seen from a mile away. This is true even in light of the fact that major liberties have been taken in developing the Borgias story for this show. Everything is obvious - nothing is hidden from the viewer's vision, so there's no guessing over who likes who, who's plotting against who, etc. All in all, I like the show, but it does not leave me in wonder about what I just watched. It's one of those shows that you can watch once and get all that there is to get from it.… Expand
  8. iceey
    May 30, 2011
    8
    The borgias as a tv show reveals the secrets of the most important family (originally spanish family) of rome in 15th century. I personally interested in borgia family (spanish borja) so called crime family. First season now complete and if must admit that so far, story proceeded paralel to the fact which was really happened in 15th century. I also enjoyed the amazing performace of JeremyThe borgias as a tv show reveals the secrets of the most important family (originally spanish family) of rome in 15th century. I personally interested in borgia family (spanish borja) so called crime family. First season now complete and if must admit that so far, story proceeded paralel to the fact which was really happened in 15th century. I also enjoyed the amazing performace of Jeremy Irons (as pope) and François Arnaud (as son of pope, cesare borgia). Anyone interested in historical stuff should give at least a try for this show.… Expand
  9. jcoles
    Nov 1, 2011
    9
    What an outstanding depiction of power cloaked in religious edifice that is the Catholic church at the height of its political significance! The anti-hero, played by Jeremy Irons, instantly has you rooting for him as he out-plots his power hungry rivals. When he proves capable of committing the heinous deeds necessary, he simply invokes the religious façade that theyWhat an outstanding depiction of power cloaked in religious edifice that is the Catholic church at the height of its political significance! The anti-hero, played by Jeremy Irons, instantly has you rooting for him as he out-plots his power hungry rivals. When he proves capable of committing the heinous deeds necessary, he simply invokes the religious façade that they collectively depend on to stifle any outbursts of religious hypocrisy. The whole series is deeply satisfying.… Expand
  10. chughead
    Jan 7, 2012
    9
    Renaissance and Machiavellian in all its glory. No separation of corrupt church and state from this bittersweet era. Jeremy Irons makes a likable evil ruler who is clever and ruthless. Godfather for the century
  11. ckelly
    Apr 16, 2013
    7
    I just wanted to say that I love the series, but I do think that the history should be checked before the put it on TV. In Season 1 Episode 8, a Cardinal speaking with the French King by the water, makes reference of three popes. One of those popes was Pope John the XXIII, who was actually born in 1881- died 1963. this is not good since the Borgias takes place in the late 1400's

    ckelly
  12. Tvlovr702
    May 4, 2013
    9
    The Borgias is a captivating story of one of the most infamous families who just happened to have lived during one of the most salacious times in human history. Jeremy Irons, who plays Rodrigo Borgia, aka Pope Alexander VI, proves, yet again, what an extraordinary actor he is, and it's difficult to imagine this role being played so well by anyone else. While Mr. irons acting reputationThe Borgias is a captivating story of one of the most infamous families who just happened to have lived during one of the most salacious times in human history. Jeremy Irons, who plays Rodrigo Borgia, aka Pope Alexander VI, proves, yet again, what an extraordinary actor he is, and it's difficult to imagine this role being played so well by anyone else. While Mr. irons acting reputation precedes him, the relatively novice actors in the cast are every bit as talented. Holliday Granger, who plays the much maligned, Lucrezia Borgia, is exceptionally beautiful and an actor of immense range beginning the series as a rather childlike, sweet girl to an intelligent, strong and sensual woman by the beginning of the 3rd season. Francois Arnaud, who plays the ambitious and intense, Cesare Borgia, is truly an up and coming actor, who is destined for stardom. It's impossible to keep your eyes off of him when he's in a scene. Rounding out the family is Joann Whalley as the family matriarch and the Pope's first mistress, Vinozza de Catanei. Ms. Whalley is an absolute joy to watch. Although not part of the family, Sean Harris as the assassin, Micheletto, must be mentioned as he is so incredibly wonderful in his role as the Luca Brazzi of this family, that no matter how scary he is, or how many people he tortures and kills, you find yourself liking him. Now that's good acting. The entire cast comes together on some of the most sumptuous sets I've seen, to provide one of the best shows on television today. It is truly astonishing and an utter shame that this show and its actors have been overlooked for Emmy statues as superb storytelling such as this should be encouraged, and to that end, rewarded.… Expand
  13. ElhamSalih
    Aug 7, 2013
    10
    The Borgias is an amazing show, everything in it is perfect, writing, acting, directing, costumes, etc.
    It is really my favourite show, I hope Showtime will give us a fourth season because it is an amazing show and I am sure that it will have a positive reaction from the audience.
  14. Bagger92
    Jun 6, 2014
    10
    It is like ... or actually my conviction is: Michael Hirst is trying to celebrate every cultures' 'greatness' ...
    And now he is expression my cultures' greatness, legends, mythes and much, much more!

    For me! Michael Hirst, and the actors, and the Co. behind ... proving top class "new morden" art!

    Deepest respect, if my conviction is true!

    (review's source: "Vikings")
  15. das_gute
    Jul 12, 2014
    6
    Neil Jordan's vision is an intriguing and vulgar that plays off unevenly, but audiences will find many things to be interested in with this family and the individual characters that will be met with open arms (to an extent).
  16. mmm71666
    Sep 8, 2015
    10
    this show needs to come back!! great show - lots of fabulous actors and plots were awesome.. depicted real time in that era and was authentic... should really take this back on to tv.
  17. FilipeNeto
    Feb 9, 2019
    7
    This series was produced by a Canadian TV channel and had three seasons. It focuses on the figure of Pope Alexander VI and his bastard children and their political games. But the series has several problems that I have to point out. First of all, it doesn't have a closed conclusion. At the end of third season you understand that it should have continued, but audience concerns probablyThis series was produced by a Canadian TV channel and had three seasons. It focuses on the figure of Pope Alexander VI and his bastard children and their political games. But the series has several problems that I have to point out. First of all, it doesn't have a closed conclusion. At the end of third season you understand that it should have continued, but audience concerns probably spoke louder and dictated an early end, so you get an unfinished story that would need, at least, a few more episodes to properly shut down. Another problem is the exaggeration of the sex scenes and the way the series faces some potentially shocking elements in the plot. I will explain: when you study the Renaissance and their popes, you understand that they were anything but holy. They were noblemen who used the Church to gain power, for themselves and their dynasties, not hesitating to run over anyone who opposed them. Therefore, for a pope or cardinal of this historical period, having lovers and children, or even having someone killed, was quite normal, it wasn't shocking, but the series shows this as something horrible because we, in the 21st century, think it's horrible. This difference of mentalities is essential to understand this pope but never appears in the series. In contrast, the series has made an effort to realistically show the Renaissance environment, and this paid off: the CGI-loaded scenarios are excellent, although sometimes we can see obviously the use of digital resources, in a way it spoils the effect. The costumes were also excellently done, movie quality, and faithful to the period. Jeremy Irons leads the cast, giving life to the Pope in a great performance, at his best level. Alongside him are François Arnaud (in the role of Cesare Borgia) and Holliday Grainger (Lucrezia Borgia), two actors who stand out throughout the series, giving life to two historical characters who, even today, are controversial. I also liked the work of Gina McKee (in the role of Caterina Sforza), Lotte Verbeek, Peter Sullivan, Sean Harris and David Oakes. On the other side, I hated the way that Colm Feore (a good actor, with great talent) played the role of Cardinal della Rovere, one of the pope's opponents. But it's not Feore's fault. The problem is the way his character was developed in the series. Its very few 15th century and a lot of 21th century. In the real life, Rodrigo Borgia and Giuliano della Rovere aren't so different. They think in the same way but they're in opposite sides of the board. Just that. But the series have transformed Della Rovere in a champion of 21th century morality and this simply doesn't make sense. It's anachronic. I will finish with a recommendation: this series has lots of sex scenes, discrete or more obvious, and some violence also, so keep it away from children and teen's eyes.… Expand

Awards & Rankings

62
#62 Best TV Season of 2011
56
#56 Most Discussed TV Season of 2011
25
#25 Most Shared TV Season of 2011

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
66

Generally favorable reviews - based on 25 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 16 out of 25
  2. Mixed: 8 out of 25
  3. Negative: 1 out of 25
  1. Wall Street Journal
    Reviewed by: Nancy DeWolf Smith
    Apr 8, 2011
    30
    Some shading aside, some occasional twinges of remorse, nothing can hide the fact that these people have no souls to lose, no character to develop. Apart from looking for "Godfather" homage moments, there isn't more to root for here than there is at a cage fight.
    Read full review
  2. Miami Herald
    Reviewed by: Glenn Garvin
    Apr 7, 2011
    80
    Murder and sexual predation sure look fun when they're done by pretty people in luscious gowns. Jeremy Irons is splendidly depraved as Rodrigo, and Holliday Grainger (Robin Hood) so sunnily sweet as Lucrezia that it's damn near impossible to hold a little arsenic against her.
    Read full review
  3. Slant Magazine
    Reviewed by: Phillip Maciak
    Apr 4, 2011
    50
    The Borgias is merely the network's most recent, shallow exploration into precisely how murderous, horny, and fabulously costumed the wealthy were at the turn of the 16th century.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »