Raven25

Wooden acting, terrible dialogue, slow plot that doesn't really go anywhere, ideological circlejerk. Do not bother.

Ok opener. If they spent less time on giving nods to the femo-lefty-multi-culties and more time on telling the story, it would've been better. No matter, this too shall pass.

The writers clearly read Marx's Capital and a Linux handbook before they came up with this. Half the plot is an exposition of a critique of capitalism which is used as justification to destroy the banking system. This has already been done in Fight Club, it was just done better in Fight Club. The other half simply focuses on the means by which to accomplish the goal - hacking (rather than explosives). The series has so far been unoriginal because of this. The lead is a solid actor but his love interest is a caricature, and so is her boyfriend. The plot has been rather one dimensional - basically the main character falling through a rabbit hole into a new world. Nothing terrible about this but nothing original. Also - and perhaps this is the point the writers are making, the character used as the criticizer of society is no angel himself - he is a drug addicted, mentally ill womanizer who deems himself to be judge, jury and executioner of all injustice in the world. Perhaps people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. The problem that the plot faces is the same problem that Fight Club faced and it is the fundamental problem with all Marxist rhetoric - what happens after the grand revolution and why is this brave new world better than the one in which we live? Why is it worth fighting for? Fight Club had a poor ending - a bunch of buildings falling down - probably a lot of people losing their jobs and their lives. Revolutions have inherently bloody characters and always end up with a new order that just oppresses different people in different ways (see: France; Russia). The writers are going on a Marxist and egalitarian crusade - they provide valid criticisms of society but offer little in the way of solutions. If the writers are going to improve the show over Fight Club, they should consider this. Overall, the show has thus far been unoriginal but decently executed.

Let me start out by saying I had high hopes for this after season 1. I really was a fan. But season 2 is a let down. Pure and simple. Nothing terrible, just not interesting or entertaining, and simply not worth the time and effort to follow. The story is not particularly cohesive, the acting is truly down a notch (or several). There don't really appear to be many themes, and the ones that exist aren't particularly interesting. I think that the series has turned away from being character driven to being plot driven. This is a mistake. A significant part of the series seems to have been a response to feminist criticism of what was a brilliant first season. I guess this is the difference between a TV series that unashamedly wants to create something brilliant and a TV series that is so scared of critics that it panders to them at the expense of engaging with anything interesting. All I can say to the writers is: challenge me with something, don't give me a bunch of people with problems circling each other. To the directors: bring back the eerie suspense of season 1 and the darkness that all characters go through, the appeal of season 1 was that both lead characters went through a very dark shared experience and their worldviews determined what they got out of it as well as what they shared with each other. Don't give me a bunch of alcoholics with anger problems and daddy issues.

Not as good as the first couple of seasons but still pretty decent. The flashbacks are a good concept but in my view are too drawn out and they seem to be recycling some concepts.

More SJW screenwriter nonsense: 1. 'The symbol of freedom in the face of oppression' pendant - sound familiar? 2. The over the top white alpha male who has been cast as a downright ass who is obsessed with big guns, hates helping people and is sexist and ageist...they might as well have gone with a white male master race as the bad guys and every minority as the good **** wait...they practically did. 3. The asian guy who walks around with **** a sci-fi...a racist SJW TV series - who would've thought? 4. The token black guy who is clearly just that 5. The two females who contradict gender roles by being nerdy and/or **** edgy. The 'plot' is a bunch of people who have no idea who they are or what they're meant to do on a ship. So basically, no real plot, no character development, and to the extent there is any, the characters are one dimensional. The themes are transparent SJW ones that aren't discussed at all beyond being noted. Ultimately, this is a TV series that is either so scared of being criticized for not being PC enough that it can't make a single interesting character or plot point OR that this is a TV series that genuinely believes that putting a critical theory essay onto the small screen somehow makes a good TV series. In either case, it fails. Please do not watch.

LOVE the screenplay and writing. Jarrod and Hooli are the ultimate parody of corporate life and bringing the two women in the cast without any overt feminist nonsense is a great idea and well executed.

Its a gender studies essay delivered through Dawson's Creek story lines and acting in the setting of Lost. There are no redeeming features to this train wreck of a series.

Not particularly accurate from a historical perspective, but very entertaining, well written and acted. Be warned, it is a slower paced show than most these days, but if you keep with it, its rewarding.

Summary of themes: 1. Girls can do anything guys can do 2. Girls are oppressed 3. Misogyny = bad 4. Girls should empower themselves Now you don't have to watch a poorly thought out, poorly written, acted and cast gender studies essay on the small screen so that you can enjoy better TV such as House of Cards, Game of Thrones and True Detective. I hope this show saves CBS some time and money and just gets cancelled. 0/10.

A typical example of the 'new standard' which conflates artistic merit with discussion about 'social issues'. The issues discussed are completely one sided radical feminist ones. The straight male characters are portrayed as one dimensional wallflowers or incompetent buffoons while women are portrayed as strong, independent leaders with complex lives and issues. I have no problem with feminist TV shows (see my review of Masters of Sex season 2), just completely unbalanced debates which shove a political agenda down everyone's throats like this one. The plot is transparent and is clearly being used as a vehicle to drive what should have stayed a (poorly conceived and unbalanced) gender studies essay. To anyone who is not already a radical feminist - don't bother with this show. It is preaching to the converted. To anyone who still believes that exploring social issues does not enhance a work's artistic merit - this is a waste of time as it is all that it does. To those who I haven't convinced - take for example relatively undisputed works full of artistic merit - William Shakespeare's plays, Rembrandt's paintings, JS Bach's music - conducting a feminist analysis of these may tell you an awful lot about women's roles and status 500 years ago. But it will tell you nothing about how beautiful the works are as pieces of art. In conclusion, this TV show only derives appeal to a limited (and rather already brainwashed) audience for reasons only to do with discussion of social issues. As I do not award points for that (and if I did, I wouldn't award many as they are badly discussed), and this show has no other artistic redeeming qualities, I award it zero score.

Interesting concept. Shame they had to ruin it with nonsensical feminist plotlines, cheap writing and plot, shoddy direction and terrible acting. They portray women being leaders, fighting and saving men while completely ignoring the point that their small primitive society needs to reproduce and women need to be protected in order to do that (as you only need 1 man to populate a village but 1 woman won't do so men should fight and risk dying not women). I do approve of the occasional piece of eye candy though.

Brilliant black comedy. This is what the Coen brothers do best. This may even be better than the movie. Yes the dialogue is a bit stretched and i'm sure Minnesotans don't say oh yaaaaa every 2min but it is still a unique and hilarious series.

I thought the first season was ok and had an innovative idea. The second season takes everything that is bad from the first (ramming feminism down our throats) and takes little to nothing good from the first season - the general exploration of human sexuality - I also note the acting has gone down a notch. How should they improve? Easy, don't take away the feminist driven agenda, just challenge it with something thats a little better than a straw-man. The show has stopped being intellectually stimulating because of this. I won't be watching seasson 3.

What starts as a reasonably thought provoking series on a taboo subject even by today's standards quickly turns into feminist propaganda that is rammed down our throats. The acting is solid, the show is well directed and produced, around 3/4 of the season has a good plot but this is quickly ruined by the 'subtext'.