The Borgias: Season 1

METASCORE

Generally favorable reviews based on 25 Critic Reviews

See All

USER SCORE

Generally favorable reviews based on 140 Ratings

See All

7.7

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7.7	Your Score
7.7	User Score Generally favorable reviews based on 140 Ratings

Would you like to write a review?

There is a 75 character minimum for reviews. If your review contains spoilers, please check the Spoiler box. Please do not use ALL CAPS. There is no linking or other HTML allowed. Your review may be edited for content. 0/5000

Check box if your review contains spoilers

Play Sound

Please enter your birth date to watch this video:

You are not allowed to view this material at this time.

The Borgias

Now Playing: The Borgias

Season Details & Credits

SHOWTIME | Season Premiere Date: April 3, 2011

Starring: Derek Jacobi, Elyes Gabel, Colm Feore

Summary: The rise of power by the Borgias clan led by Pope Alexander VI (Jeremy Irons) and his children (Cesare, Lucrezia, and Gioffre) is examined in the Neil Jordan series.

Creator: Neil Jordan

Genre(s): Drama

Watch Now

Buy on

Stream On

Expand

Season 1 Episodes

tbd
S1:E9. Nobody
Air Date: May 22, 2011
tbd
S1:E8. The Art of War
Air Date: May 15, 2011
tbd
S1:E7. Death on a Pale Horse
Air Date: May 8, 2011

See all Seasons and Episodes

Metascore

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Critic Reviews

Robert Bianco

Mar 31, 2011

If it plays a bit fast and loose with facts, it's nowhere near as outrageous as its Showtime cousin The Tudors, whose ever-young, ever-fit Henry VIII was an affront to history and to common sense. Irons may not look anything like the real Pope Alexander, but he makes you believe in him - and for The Borgias' purposes, that's what matters. Read full review

David Hinckley

Mar 30, 2011

What makes for a mixed stewardship of the Roman Catholic Church can also make for lively television. Read full review

Glenn Garvin

Apr 7, 2011

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

Tim Goodman

Mar 30, 2011

The fact is, these kinds of grand historical reimaginings can be a scrumptious combination of costume drama acting, soap opera theatrics and pay cable promiscuousness. That'll make the hours fly by. And it doesn't mean your pleasure needs to be all that guilty. Read full review

TV Guide Magazine Matt Roush

Apr 1, 2011

Like the notorious family that bribed its way into the Vatican's papal chamber while sullying many a Roman bedchamber, we want our money's worth. And The Borgias wickedly delivers, serving up an operatic feast of delicious malice and unbridled lust: for power and wealth, for carnal pleasure and vulgar theatrics. Read full review

Phillip Maciak

Apr 4, 2011

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

Nancy DeWolf Smith

Apr 8, 2011

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

SEE ALL 25 REVIEWS

User Score

Write a Review

7.7

User Reviews

Bagger92

Jun 6, 2014

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 "newIt 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")… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

Puck342

Apr 22, 2011

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 shownThe 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 of 2 users found this helpful20

JennetP

Apr 4, 2011

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 ofI'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 FranÃ§ois 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

5 of 6 users found this helpful51

chughead

Jan 7, 2012

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

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

Gamer147

Aug 22, 2013

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) asLiked 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.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

FilipeNeto

Feb 9, 2019

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 theThis 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

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

Bubblehead

Oct 29, 2013

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 tooAbsolute, 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

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

SEE ALL 17 REVIEWS

Seasons & Episodes

69

Series Overview
Season 3

72
- Season 3 Overview
  Air Date: April 14, 2013
Season 2

81
- Season 2 Overview
  Air Date: April 8, 2012
Season 1

66
- Season 1 Overview
  Air Date: April 3, 2011
- tbd
  S1:E9. Nobody
  Air Date: May 22, 2011
- tbd
  S1:E8. The Art of War
  Air Date: May 15, 2011
- tbd
  S1:E7. Death on a Pale Horse
  Air Date: May 8, 2011
- tbd
  S1:E6. The French King
  Air Date: May 1, 2011
- tbd
  S1:E5. The Borgias in Love
  Air Date: April 24, 2011
- tbd
  S1:E4. Lucrezia's Wedding
  Air Date: April 17, 2011
- tbd
  S1:E3. The Moor
  Air Date: April 10, 2011
- tbd
  S1:E2. The Assassin
  Air Date: April 3, 2011
- tbd
  S1:E1. The Poisoned Chalice
  Air Date: April 3, 2011