User Score
8.4

Universal acclaim- based on 415 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 42 out of 415

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
  1. MIG
    Jan 25, 2010
    6
    The show itself is basically 300 in a television format. The visuals are pretty nice too look at with some good art direction, but thats where it stops. 300 was a nice diversion where you didn't need the best script or top notch acting as long as the visuals could keep you enthralled with good direction. What this show lacks is a good script and good acting. This show has moments of The show itself is basically 300 in a television format. The visuals are pretty nice too look at with some good art direction, but thats where it stops. 300 was a nice diversion where you didn't need the best script or top notch acting as long as the visuals could keep you enthralled with good direction. What this show lacks is a good script and good acting. This show has moments of really good acting and writing but its spaced so far apart that it is almost not worth mentioning. The rest of the time its no very good. Tapert should have kept the camp factor from his earlier works, had that been done this would have been better. That being said this sin' a terrible show, its actually not bad although overly serious and quite dumb. I'd say give it a shot, the show has promise, and hopefully unlike Heroes it will expand on that promise. Expand
  2. TitoM.
    Jan 29, 2010
    4
    Very disappointed. Love this genre but the direction is woeful. The dialogue makes me squirm. It's obvious they have an ample budget so what went wrong - the constant blood splatters are annoying - an idea used too many times in this show - I get it - it's bloody! I hope it gets better - yes I will watch hoping they have still time to change it. How can you go wrong with this Very disappointed. Love this genre but the direction is woeful. The dialogue makes me squirm. It's obvious they have an ample budget so what went wrong - the constant blood splatters are annoying - an idea used too many times in this show - I get it - it's bloody! I hope it gets better - yes I will watch hoping they have still time to change it. How can you go wrong with this great story? Expand
  3. BrandonS.
    Jan 22, 2010
    5
    Incredibly violent and sexually explicit, t's about as subtle as a battering ram. But it's got a lot of talent involved, and it has potential. Did I mention it's really really violent? Definitely not of the same quality as Rome, but I'm going to stick with it for a while and see how it goes.
  4. Einar
    Jan 23, 2010
    6
    Does every fight scene have to be in slow motion? but am interested to see what happens next.
Metascore
52

Mixed or average reviews - based on 22 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 7 out of 22
  2. Negative: 5 out of 22
  1. Reviewed by: Ken Tucker
    83
    After artistic duds like the TV version of "Crash," Starz may have found its destination series in Spartacus. This might prove to be the not-at-all-guilty pleasure of the season.
  2. Though the violence is designed to be gorgeous, like a graphic novel, it doesn’t have the pacing of a comic book. The creators of Spartacus: Blood and Sand seem a little too enamored of their ability to sketch a vast Thracian tableau, a fight scene, or a coliseum full of cheering CGI Italians.
  3. Reviewed by: Verne Gay
    58
    After Spartacus blows most of its special-effects budget on the pilot, it settles into a not-bad sword-and-sandal genre series, a la "Xena" or "Hercules."