TheKiddy

Timothy Olyphant is one of the sexiest men alive and a very strong actor with star power. None of this is in evidence in Santa Clarita Diet. They must be paying him a huge amount per episode, because this is a huge waste of talent.

I just finished bingeing the sixth and final season of Longmire. It's one of the best. I can't say much without many spoilers, but I will say: this season brings things nicely to a close but makes you miss these characters and the fine actors who play them all the more. In particular, Robert Taylor as Walt Longmire, who you realize is one sexy man: and A. Martinez and Jacob Nighthorse. Also, a call out to Zach Maclarnon as Mathias and Alan Bartley as Ferg. (I never could have imagined I would ever like Jacob or Mathias, but I have come to. Will miss all of you guys!

I'm torn between dreadful and awful. Anne Heche's character is basically, "whatever my daughter just got grabbed into the sky but whatever". and with people going insane around them ignores her son's warning about a casual acquaintance they invite into their RV. Is the RV a reference to Breaking Bad or to The Walking Dead? Do we care?

While professional reviewers seemed on the whole to like this series, I find myself weighed down by the plodding, repetitive writing (most of it delivered in what amounts to monotone). How many times must we hear statements on the order of "I killed my father". "My mother didn't shoot my father, I did." (Or, as a reason for freezing, "I saw my father's face".) Well, our heroine mentions this deep dark secret by her own count three times to three different strangers and all delivered with the same husky monotone in the first four episodes. Of course the people in charge already know about it. Most of all I don't give a damn about any of them.

This is a bizarre and strange show. After watching 10 minutes of it I am wondering if there is something wrong with the sound or if I am going insane. I have no idea what this is about. And I keep hearing voice that are so nasal and.. it must be the sound. What is this show about?

The lead Catherine Heigl seems so uncomfortable and miscast, like a cheer leader pretending to be a spy or pretending to be an actress pretending to be a spy. I admit to not watching a whole lot of broadcast TV shows: I'm more of a cable kinda gal. But I am enthralled by Scandal and this is no Scandal -- and this character (as played) is no Olivia Pope.

It's absolutely all there: great performances by leads and supporting actors. Terrific directing. Incredible photography. Producers, writers, and the director should be congratulated. And yet...sometimes, no often, with certain television series especially on HBO, one can feel that it just isn't OK to express doubts. Like Treme' this is so intelligent, so grown up. How can it NOT be entertaining? How can it NOT be great? Indeed, most of the critics will tell you it IS great. Maybe I will be sorry later for writing this, but, this is a beautifully executed, atmospheric, serial killer story, too heavily influenced by Henning Menkell's work (without saying so) but without Wallander at its center. And that's what it is, a story about ritual serial killing and two cops playing the Wallender role. It does not make me love it or even care about its protagonists. I will keep watching because it is so intelligent but never look forward to **** and one slightly spoiler snark: the cops drive out to a burned out church in the middle of nowhere and there is the iconography of the killer and it is supposed to be what, a moment of insight? a thrilling but terrifying reveal? I lack the rhetorical power to say what happened there but I think, just maybe, at its simplest, it was unoriginal.

This is a terrific show. The first episode of the second season seemed a bit disjoint, but things soon settled in. I don't know if anyone else has mentioned, but the theme music is really good.

After a rocky start with the first episode, I found the first season of Ray Donovan fascinating and didn't want it to end. There are a lot of threads to follow, but they are worth following. Jon Voight is brilliant of course, and there are other strong performances. Looking forward to the next season.

Does the music and look of a show and its first season or so story and characters make up for a really weak, lazily written third season? I say no. I know Neil Cross is busy but this is lazy writing. When in doubt, kill someone. Make everything about Luther (a vigilante decides he's a serial killer who is really killing everyone Luther loves, that's the ticket) then, how farfetched can it get, have Luther arrested for having arranged for people to be in a position to be killed by someone he is chasing. Bizarre.

I am disappointed by what I saw trending in last season's Luther and is in the first two episodes in spades: the Criminal Minds style demented serial killer Jack the Ripper-ish etc. that the British love so. Shame shame Neil Cross. There's a great deal that's terrific about season 2, but nothing to compare to the wonderful Alice story. I like the new girl friend but based on the trailer guess she might be a plant. Oh lord.

I don't know if this is cheating, but basically this is the same review I posted for Season 1. I came to this show late. I'd been curious, but never got over there to HBO to watch. Then a friend (in the favored demo are you listening HBO?) told me it was fantastic. So, I watched the whole season and woke up this morning, a Sunday, excited that I get to watch another episode tonight. What a great concept. What great writing. What terrific acting. And along the way, some really great directing. Thank heavens Mike White (the writer) and Laura Dern (the out of this world lead and co-creator) put their heads together (I think they are neighbors), took it to HBO, and HBO had the great sense to develop it. Will it make it beyond Season 2? I have my doubts. It is genuinely quirky and well acted, not the ironic self-conscious quirk of Girls, and it has not been as promoted by HBO. So, it's a show you discover by yourself and then become addicted to, in a less fevered way than some others, but addicted nevertheless. How can one love Homeland and love Enlightened, too? I will leave that to greater minds than mine. BTW: one user reviewer seemed upset that the show is classified (is it?) as a comedy. Certainly for awards purposes, it has been. But it is painfully funny in the way life is. Good luck Enlightened.

What a great concept. What great writing. What terrific acting. And along the way, some really great directing. Thank heavens Mike White (the writer) and Laura Dern (the out of this world lead and co-creator) put their heads together (I think they are neighbors), took it to HBO, and HBO had the great sense to develop it. Will it make it beyond Season 2? I have my doubts. It is genuinely quirky and well acted, not the ironic self-conscious quirk of Girls, and it has not been as promoted by HBO. So, it's a show you discover by yourself and then become addicted to, in a less fevered way than some others, but addicted nevertheless. How can one love Homeland and love Enlightened, too? I will leave that to greater minds than mine. BTW: one user reviewer seemed upset that the show is classified (is it?) as a comedy. Certainly for awards purposes, it has been. But it is painfully funny in the way life is. Good luck Enlightened.

I am on episode 2 and am having real trouble caring about any of these people. (Well, I care about the 14 year old girl who just got hit on by one of the adult bad guys. We are one step away from pedophilia.) Perhaps it's the wooden dialogue. Perhaps it's the lead who has mastered an American accent but doesn't walk like an American (moves more like a small time British film gangster, although Australian). Perhaps it is because he is supposed to at least try to act like a sheriff but acts like a violent crook and never shaves, especially in uniform. And he seems like more of a sociopath than the bad guys. And needs a shower. Who would want to sleep with this guy (and there are a lot of women falling into sex with him..) There is something wrong here in the sensibility at work. Something faintly perverse.

There seems to be a kind of knee jerk response from critics to many HBO shows: they must be good because they are HBO. Meanwhile, as here, there is a definite disconnect between professional critics and viewers. My bias runs the other way.. Based on history -- The Sopranos, The Wire, Sex and the City, Curb your Enthusiasm, etc. -- I take a more "prove it" stance. I want HBO to prove it still has it. This is the cable network that set the bar after all. "Girls" is simply not up to standards. Watch the first scene again. If this were not HBO, and you hadn't been told by critics and others that it is fantastic, would you watch beyond that scene?

cloying. saccharin. clumsy, unoriginal dialogue, and too much of it. too little excitement, energy. the world is ending and it feels like nothing is happening. expects us to care about this group of people before we are ready, before we even know them. the opening with the little kids talking -- doesn't sound like real kid dialogue and sounds a lot like exposition. the father -son discussions are annoying.

I watched the first episode streaming at the Starz website and was pleasantly surprised. I am more Walking Dead than The Tudors -- I assume the latter's is the target audience -- but this is a fun watch so far!

Ok, I take it back. The second episode is lots better. I am glad I gave it a try. I like that there is a woman with a brain (the African American woman who worked for the zoning department.)