Back in 2014, Netflix decided it was going to challengeGame of Throneswith a sweeping, epic original series of its own, and all they got for their efforts was a $200 million hole in their balance sheet.Game of Throneschanged fantasy TV forever, and try as they might, no other fantasy series has been able to touch it.
Even accounting for the steep decline of thelater seasons ofGame of Thrones, the HBO juggernaut stands head and shoulders above anything else in the genre. The next shows on that list would kill to have seasons likeGOT’s seventh and eighth. Plenty of streamers tried to dip into the mania, of course.
Netflix may be the old guard of streaming, butwhen it came to original programming, Netflixlagged behind HBO and Starz, so dabbling in a genre that’s already proved successful wasn’t a terrible idea. However, had Netflix known theirGOTcompetition would cost them $200 million, they may have reconsidered.
Marco Polo Was Netflix’s Ambitious Answer To Game Of Thrones
The Series Was Also A Multi-Year Medieval Epic
Game of Thronespremiered in 2011, and by 2014, it was in its fourth season, and only getting better and more popular. It’s no surprise, then, that Netflix decided it needed its own multi-season epic series to compete with HBOs. Instead of fantasy,Netflix chose history, andMarco Polowas born, created by John Fusco.
The series follows the titular Venetian explorer, played by Lorenzo Richelmy, as he travels to China and becomes embroiled in the court politics of Kublai Khan’s (Benedict Wong) Mongol Empire. An incredibly ambitious series,Marco Polowas reportedly picked up for $90 million after Starz released the project back to The Weinstein Company (viaBusinessInsider).
Extensively researched, Fusco traveled the Silk Road by horseback in order to prepare to make the series (viaCNTraveller).Marco Polowas shot in multiple countries, including Kazakhstan, Italy, Malaysia, Slovakia, and Hungary, similar to howGame of Throneswas filmed across Europe, Africa, and North America.
Marco Polo’s Massive Budget Wasn’t Enough For It To Become A Hit
The Show Cost Netflix $200 Million
Despite the incredibleexpenses that went into makingMarco Polo, the series did not end up being a hit. That’s not even comparing it toGame of Thrones. The series floundered on its own, and after two seasons,Marco Polowas canceled. The show ends on a cliffhanger with the Crusader army on their way to China.
The show was canceled after season 2 launched to little fanfare in July 2016, andNetflix opted not to pick it up for season 3(viaTHR). Apparently, the decision not to move forward with a third season was a joint decision between Netflix and The Weinstein Company, with Netflix VP of original content, Cindy Holland, saying,
“We want to thank and are grateful to our partners on Marco Polo from the actors, whose performances were enthralling and top-notch; to the committed producers, including John Fusco, Dan Minahan, Patrick Macmanus, and their crew, who poured their hearts into the series; and of course Harvey [Weinstein], David [Glasser] and our friends at TWC, who were great collaborators from start to finish.”
Marco Polowas allegedly responsible for a $200 million loss for Netflix. With on-location filming, massive sets, high production values, a multinational cast with restrictions and barriers, and a story that was looking to only get bigger, it’s clear Netflix was fed up and could no longer shoulder the series.
The Real Reason Marco Polo Couldn’t Be Netflix’s Game Of Thrones
Marco Polo Was Not Nearly As Exciting As Game Of Thrones
However, financial problems may not have spelled the end forMarco Polohad it just been better received. After all, streamers have often taken on expensive series for multiple seasons, andit’s not as if the huge expenses ofMarco Polocame as a surprise. A high-cost, massive epic was exactly what they were looking for.
The real reason the show was canceled was that it just wasn’t that good.
The real reason the show was canceled was that it just wasn’t that good. The series has a 66% onRotten Tomatoes, and for a show that intended to knockGame of Thronesoff its pedestal, that’s a pretty measly score. All the money in the world could not improve the core problems with the show.
Marco Polotook the wrong lessons fromGame of Thrones, piling in unnecessary nudity and violence when it was unwarranted, but forgetting that the show also needed to be more than a slog through history. Its greatest sin is that the series is boring. Beautifully shot and impressively staged, there’s just very little to keep you engaged otherwise.
Netflix Learned Important Lessons From Marco Polo’s Failure
Marco Polodid teach Netflix an important lesson, however. It was never going to succeed by simply copying the successes of other streamers; it was not built for that, andNetflix audiences were not expecting these sweeping epics from the company. Their next shows had a distinct focus on characters and story.
The Crown,Narcos, andStranger Thingswere the next big shows to come from Netflix, and each of these feels much more unique and of a piece with the Netflix style that people would come to appreciate. These series focus on characters and stories first, then comes the production and world-building.
Netflix did learn one bad lesson from theMarco Poloexperiment, however, and that is that the streamer can simply cancel a show the moment they think it’s no longer worth it.Canceling a series with little to no explanation seems second nature to Netflix, and it’s somethingGame of Thrones' network, HBO, does not do nearly as much.
