It looks brilliant. Ive mentioned in another thread thst there is some pretty decent look new shows starting this month and for me this has to top it for my anticipation
Very watchable pilot ep, main characters are likeable, intrigue for a season storyline and good scope for stand alone eps, will tune in for the next one
I really enjoyed it. I'm going to guess that Red is Lizzy's father since it seems to be signposted throughout the episode. I'd give the first episode 8/10
I thought it was quite thin in the middle, with the bad guy simply following instructions and nothing of interest really occuring. It would have been nice if they spend some of that time, incriminating or creating intrigue into the husband.
I'll check out the second ep but i'm nowhere near being sold on this, which i can already see myself getting bored with.
So the baddie made sure her man bleed on the carpet in that specific place, right ?! - he probably made sure to replace all her industrial strength carpet cleaner with low quality crappy eco friendly stuff made from spinach and quorn.
I'm coming back for more but wished they'd found a way of doing the "you tell me something, I'll tell you something" thing without it feeling like they'd copy+pasted a big chunk of the Silence of the Lambs script.
Didn't quite understand why Spader's character isn't being held accountable for the kidnap of the generals daughter, and the subsequent deaths of the FBI agents in the motorcade.
that having been said. if you're prepared to suspend disbelief then it may well be quite entertaining.
I agree, it was also very predictable. But it's one of those easy watch programmes that I'll keep watching, much like the one with Kevin Bacon, so bad I've forgotten the name of it! Fills an hour anyway.
Yes I've just watched that bit. There's no way they'd trust 'road works'. :rolleyes:
Well in the real world yes they would trust road works. How many kidnapping attempts of VIPs or their families (in western countries at least) have involved elaborate sham construction crews on motorways? I don't know why we would question the likelihood of the reactions when the whole premise is so unlikely in the first place? Do people ask these questions during James Bond or Die Hard films? I thought it was obvious this wasn't going to be a gritty slow burning ultra reality programme. Having said that the extravagant implausible action scenes are still eminently more believable than the quasi forensics on CSI.
Well in the real world yes they would trust road works. How many kidnapping attempts of VIPs or their families (in western countries at least) have involved elaborate sham construction crews on motorways? I don't know why we would question the likelihood of the reactions when the whole premise is so unlikely in the first place? Do people ask these questions during James Bond or Die Hard films? I thought it was obvious this wasn't going to be a gritty slow burning ultra reality programme. Having said that the extravagant implausible action scenes are still eminently more believable than the quasi forensics on CSI.
We all know it is just a plot device to get the girl kidnapped, but they could make it a bit more plausible.
We all know it is just a plot device to get the girl kidnapped, but they could make it a bit more plausible.
If you're looking for plausible this might not be the show for you. The entire premise of the show isn't exactly plausible.
There has never been an elaborate high profile kidnapping executed like this before so why should they have known better? Also consider that apart from Elizabeth they may have underestimated the level of the threat? Or still had doubts about the veracity of Red's story? Also, you know perhaps they just weren't expecting the crim to have a full navy seal expeditionary force at his disposal?
Of course in television, especially on these types of programmes, these larks are fairly common. So maybe it's not something more "plausible" you're looking for but something more original or creative?
If you're looking for plausible this might not be the show for you. The entire premise of the show isn't exactly plausible.
There has never been an elaborate high profile kidnapping executed like this before so why should they have known better? Also consider that apart from Elizabeth they may have underestimated the level of the threat? Or still had doubts about the veracity of Red's story? Also, you know perhaps they just weren't expecting the crim to have a full navy seal expeditionary force at his disposal?
Of course in television, especially on these types of programmes, these larks are fairly common. So maybe it's not something more "plausible" you're looking for but something more original or creative?
Just because the main plot isn't very plausible, doesn't mean we have to put up with scenes that are lazy and ill thought out.
The 'road block' kidnapping is a cliche. I don't expect originality, but at least provide some sense of credibility for what is happening.
Just because the main plot isn't very plausible, doesn't mean we have to put up with scenes that are lazy and ill thought out.
The 'road block' kidnapping is a cliche. I don't expect originality, but at least provide some sense of credibility for what is happening.
I know it's cliche. Hence my previous comment about being more creative. But being cliche and having lazy writing has nothing to do with plausibility.
Because in the fictional realm this show actually inhabits it was plausible, because they were clearly not expecting a full paramilitary assault. (Should they have?) More like an assassin, a hitman, a sniper, etc. I don't recall Red warning against a full unit of ex-army Serbian mercenaries that might have accompanied him when he was smuggled into the country.
I know it's cliche. Hence my previous comment about being more creative. But being cliche and having lazy writing has nothing to do with plausibility.
.
I don't care if it is a TV show about a cat that poo that gold bars, I don't really want to see FBI agents falling for the old 'road block' trick yet again, no matter how implausible it is that a cat can poo gold bars.
I don't care if it is a TV show about a cat that poo that gold bars, I don't really want to see FBI agents falling for the old 'road block' trick yet again, no matter how implausible it is that a cat can poo gold bars.
Just because it's predictable to the viewer doesn't mean it's predictable to the characters on the show. You expect them to have that foresight because it's happened on other shows? Cause "the old road block trick" sure as hell doesn't happen in "real life."
How can they fall for it again when it's never happened before? They only exist in their universe. Plausibility =/= originality. Two different things.
Moreover as I've already said the FBI had little reason to expect such a coordinated assault with that sort of manpower.
Comments
Basically showed everything from tonight's upcoming premiere.
Lesson, I shall avoid abnormally long trailers.
Will reserve judgement until I've seen a few episodes.
I'll check out the second ep but i'm nowhere near being sold on this, which i can already see myself getting bored with.
I'm coming back for more but wished they'd found a way of doing the "you tell me something, I'll tell you something" thing without it feeling like they'd copy+pasted a big chunk of the Silence of the Lambs script.
Some good potential here. But loads of shows have shown great promise in the pilot only to fizzle out later.
that having been said. if you're prepared to suspend disbelief then it may well be quite entertaining.
I agree, it was also very predictable. But it's one of those easy watch programmes that I'll keep watching, much like the one with Kevin Bacon, so bad I've forgotten the name of it! Fills an hour anyway.
Will stick with it to see where it goes.
Seriously though, you've been told of a kidnap threat and you don't question someone being there with a STOP sign?
They all deserved to die!
Yes I've just watched that bit. There's no way they'd trust 'road works'. :rolleyes:
It wasn't bad but I thought it was more like 'The Following' than 'White Collar'.
Especially the fact that the FBI were rubbish again.
Well in the real world yes they would trust road works. How many kidnapping attempts of VIPs or their families (in western countries at least) have involved elaborate sham construction crews on motorways? I don't know why we would question the likelihood of the reactions when the whole premise is so unlikely in the first place? Do people ask these questions during James Bond or Die Hard films? I thought it was obvious this wasn't going to be a gritty slow burning ultra reality programme. Having said that the extravagant implausible action scenes are still eminently more believable than the quasi forensics on CSI.
We all know it is just a plot device to get the girl kidnapped, but they could make it a bit more plausible.
If you're looking for plausible this might not be the show for you. The entire premise of the show isn't exactly plausible.
There has never been an elaborate high profile kidnapping executed like this before so why should they have known better? Also consider that apart from Elizabeth they may have underestimated the level of the threat? Or still had doubts about the veracity of Red's story? Also, you know perhaps they just weren't expecting the crim to have a full navy seal expeditionary force at his disposal?
Of course in television, especially on these types of programmes, these larks are fairly common. So maybe it's not something more "plausible" you're looking for but something more original or creative?
Just because the main plot isn't very plausible, doesn't mean we have to put up with scenes that are lazy and ill thought out.
The 'road block' kidnapping is a cliche. I don't expect originality, but at least provide some sense of credibility for what is happening.
I know it's cliche. Hence my previous comment about being more creative. But being cliche and having lazy writing has nothing to do with plausibility.
Because in the fictional realm this show actually inhabits it was plausible, because they were clearly not expecting a full paramilitary assault. (Should they have?) More like an assassin, a hitman, a sniper, etc. I don't recall Red warning against a full unit of ex-army Serbian mercenaries that might have accompanied him when he was smuggled into the country.
I don't care if it is a TV show about a cat that poo that gold bars, I don't really want to see FBI agents falling for the old 'road block' trick yet again, no matter how implausible it is that a cat can poo gold bars.
Just because it's predictable to the viewer doesn't mean it's predictable to the characters on the show. You expect them to have that foresight because it's happened on other shows? Cause "the old road block trick" sure as hell doesn't happen in "real life."
How can they fall for it again when it's never happened before? They only exist in their universe. Plausibility =/= originality. Two different things.
Moreover as I've already said the FBI had little reason to expect such a coordinated assault with that sort of manpower.