Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What are the highest-rated action TV shows released after 2020 across critics and audiences?
Executive summary
There is no single, authoritative list in the provided sources that ranks “highest-rated action TV shows released after 2020” across both critics and audiences; available reporting instead offers multiple curated lists, critic aggregation pages, and fan-voted rankings that highlight different titles such as Gangs of London, Jack Ryan, Arcane, The Boys, and Our Flag Means Death (examples in [3], [7], [5], [11], p1_s3). Aggregators like Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes collect critic scores but require filters (and Metacritic excludes titles with fewer than seven critic reviews), so cross-referencing critics and audience sentiment requires manual comparison across those resources [1] [2].
1. What the existing lists emphasize — violent choreography and genre variety
Critical roundups and “best of” pieces repeatedly single out shows where action choreography or stylistic physical violence is central. GamesRadar! and Empire praise Gangs of London for its brutal, Raid-style set pieces and direction, making it a frequent critic favorite for action intensity [3] [4]. Meanwhile ScreenRant and IndieWire call out action-oriented animated series like Arcane for marrying strong animation and action to broad appeal [5] [6]. These critics place emphasis on craft — fight choreography, cinematography, and showrunning vision — rather than audience vote totals [3] [4] [5].
2. Fan and audience lists diverge from critic taste
Fan-voted and popularity-based lists highlight more mainstream or serialized-action properties. Ranker’s crowd-sourced list (over 1,000 votes) ranks shows such as Jack Ryan, Warrior, and The Blacklist highly, reflecting viewer preference for serialized thrillers and established franchises rather than arthouse violence [7]. IMDb lists and The Vore’s aggregated pages similarly focus on viewer ratings and streaming availability to compile “top” action series of the 2020s, which can favor accessibility and franchise recognition over critical appraisal [8] [9].
3. Aggregators exist but require careful filtering
Metacritic provides critic Metascores for action & adventure TV and can be filtered by year, but it excludes titles with fewer than seven critic reviews — limiting visibility for newer or niche series [1]. Rotten Tomatoes groups action series by freshness and popularity, but its “best action” browse is oriented to current popularity and the binary Fresh/Rotten metric rather than a single ranked score combining critics and audiences [2]. The practical implication: to identify “highest-rated across critics and audiences” you must consult both aggregators and also cross-check audience-driven platforms like IMDb or Ranker [1] [2] [7] [8].
4. Representative shows highlighted across sources
Several titles recur among critics and audience lists in the provided reporting. Gangs of London is repeatedly called out by critics for its action direction and visceral violence [3] [4]. The Boys and The Umbrella Academy are invoked in Rotten Tomatoes’ and IGN’s coverage as action-forward series that also earned critical attention in the early 2020s [10] [11]. Arcane is cited by ScreenRant and IndieWire as an animated show that blends strong visuals and action with broad acclaim [5] [6]. User-focused lists also elevate Jack Ryan and Warrior as audience favorites [7] [9].
5. How to build an apples-to-apples “highest-rated” list using available tools
Based on the limitations described in the sources, a defensible method would be: (a) choose a release-date cutoff (post-2020), (b) extract critic Metascores or Tomatometers from Metacritic/Rotten Tomatoes where available (watch for Metacritic’s >7-review rule) [1] [2], (c) pair those with audience ratings from IMDb or Ranker to measure popular sentiment [8] [7], and (d) reconcile discrepancies by noting where critics praise craft but audiences prefer familiarity [3] [4] [7]. The sources indicate no one-page result does all this automatically, so manual cross-referencing is necessary [1] [2] [7].
6. Caveats, disagreements, and hidden agendas in the sources
Editorial lists (IGN, GamesRadar!, ScreenRant, IndieWire) reflect each outlet’s taste and readership: IGN emphasizes comic-book and genre action alongside mainstream franchises [10], GamesRadar! and Empire foreground auteur-style violence [3] [4], while Ranker and IMDb reflect fan popularity via votes [7] [8]. Aggregators (Metacritic, Rotten Tomatoes) promote the authority of critics’ consensus but impose thresholds and categorical filters that shape which titles appear [1] [2]. These editorial and methodological choices create systematic differences between critic “best” and audience “best” lists [10] [3] [7] [1].
If you want, I can use this approach with the provided sources to produce a short ranked list (e.g., top 10 post‑2020 action series) by pulling the critic scores and audience rankings available in these pages and noting where critics and audiences agree or diverge (sources: [3], [4], [5], [11], [7], [8], [1], [10]4).