Reviews

The enormous flaws in the show are immensely obvious. Surgeons are seen doing everything in patient care from diagnosis to running tests, MRIs and followup care.

Surgeons don't do this! Diagnosis is done by a physician who refers someone for surgery. The Chief of surgery doesn't run the hosiutal, an administrator does. Technical professionals run tests. Most patient care is done by nurses.

The doctors carpool as if they don't make $500,000+ per year.

Worse, the female doctors seem to be unaware of this thing called "birth control" because they are sexually active and getting "surprise" pregnancies.

It's crap.

The creators of this show learned some interesting trivia about fire departments, but failed to understand the very basics.

The Captain decides to retire and his daughter, who isn't even yet a lieutenant wants to take his place? Sure! No need for her to spend any time in grade as a lieutenant before she is in line for the Captain's spot! A firefighter decides she wants to become an officer? Of course! No need to take the exams necessary or wait for a position to actually open up before she is promoted! Want to add an officer to the station? Just ask the Chief and he can OK it without checking the budget.

There's apparently no Union t0 contend with, no concern about fraternization, etc. If two firefighters get hot at the station, they just jump into a room and have sex -- there won't be an alarm until they've finished.

Reality is out the window. Not to mention ALL the officers work the SAME SHIFT. No need to rotate them among shift! In fact, ALL the Station work the same shift ALL the time!

Oh, and the near-universal rule that fire-fighters are not permitted beards because they need their breathing gear to fit properly? NO WAY! These guys have to look hot so they sprout stubble that may never grow into a beard. None of them would be accepted into a real station, but looking good is more important. After all, we have to suspend ALL belief.

This could be a slightly better show, if the judges weren't overacting so much. Between their phones amazement t and their absolutely feigned guesses.

This show is, let's face it, not going to attract A list singers and actors for the most part. Guessing names like Lady Gaga, or Meagan Markle? Those are not people who are going to show up here. Mostly it is for players who, like the panelists, have nothing big going on.

I don't doubt that Cameron believes All he says, but he seems to want to attribute far too many unsolved (and some solved) murders to one man. I could possibly believe Edwards could have murdered far more people than he admits to, but trying to make him the Zodiackiller and the killer of Jon Benet Ramsey AND Lacy Peterson AND list long litany of crimes nationwide just seems forced.

I don't buy that just because there was some overlap with Edwards' MO and other killers is far from conclusive.

Okay, the worst parts of this version of Dirty Dancinf are the acting, singing, choreography and such.

I know Abigail Breslin can act, but she hides it so very well here. Her delivery is flat, but that may only be because EVERYONE was gibpving a flat performance.

Casting should have beeen better thought out as there are actors way too old for their roles.

But the changes made from the original at least seem to make to tone of this version a bit different, it is definitely worse.

It is easy to believe P&T are saying there is no global climate change, but mostly this episode is about the messenger not the message.

They aren't against environmentalists, just the ones who have hijacked the message of environmentalism and substituted messages of anti-capitalism, anti-corporation, etc. to preach socialism under the guise of "saving the planet."

So before you debunk the episode, pay attention.

This show wasn't bad, though the leading man was a poorly developed character.

Actually, the notion of a woman in her late-30s or in her forties suddenly thrust into the role of being "Mom," is a good concept and "Mary" became the weak link. I would've perhaps made the man an engineer and a widower (so the female lead would be stuck as the "only mom" in the show, having failures and successes as she stumbles toward late motherhood with older children.

Elf an can be a delight, but the show often left me confused as to if the couple was living together (whole episodes would pass without her going home) and so on. The boy and older girl seemed very mismatched and neither were believable as the male leas's children.

It needed a renovation at least. Make changes and try again.

I am certain there are those on the Left that love this show. Some of them have likely convinced themselves it is a fair accounting of what is going on.

Of course they are wrong, but like the Right, they want to believe there are two points of view, their own and wrong.

The main problem with the show is that it neither is funny enough to be comedy, nor newsy enough to be news. It's just bad, very bad.

I gave it one star, because I couldn't go lower.

This is just another "Chico and the Man." All the plots are incredibly hack and predictable.

The jokes are about as stale as last week's, well...

It is the usual "old guy has to overcome his bigotry, you guy helps."

The characters are stock stereotypes,

While the show has promise, it breaks with canon in so many ways, it hurts.

The original Supergirl and her more recent incarnations are present here somewhat, but for some reason the creators decided not to hide Kara Zor-L as Linda Lee of Linda Lee Danvers, but allow Kara Zor-El to be Kara Danvers.

Between that and no wig to hide her Blonde hair under a dark wig or Haida her dark hair under a blonde wig, the Bsupergirl persona looks too much like the Danvers one. Too obviously like the same character.

Maybe this was done so as not to confuse the pre-10 year old watchers.

While Superman.s strength was really super, Supergirl tires far too often. That, and the neo-Zod character of her Aunt, gives too many repeats to recent.Superpolts.

It is unclear as to if this is set in the Superman (1978) universe, or some entirely different one.

When they say this is a "show about nothing" they mean it. There is nothing here, nothing at all.

The facts from previous episodes are ignored and contradicted not just once, but often. It has no internal consistency.

It gets plaudits and awards, despite wholly predictable and stereotyped characters, nonsensical plot lines, poor performances and humor that isn't actually funny.

This is a show about living in New York, aimed at New Yorkers, but largely ignoring the fact that most Americans aren't from New York, don't actually care about New York and would not be seriously concerned about New York.

It has always been said that Data was more or less very mechanical and became more human over the next 7 years.

But if Data had been in Starfleet for 15 years before this, why didn't he show more growth before?

Of course there is also no reasonable answer to the question as to why a rest was the only barrier to promotion for Troi, since Data could easily pass any test (and while she had to reach the rank of Commander to be a "bridge officer" while Data was already a bridge officer as a Lt. Commander.

Further, it is also never explained why Data wasn't the Science Officer, or a Command officer, etc.

So Eve goes from a hardcore goal of West Point and a military career to no college and a career in music?

How is this a consistent character?

She never explored alternatives such as a different military academy, ROTC, etc. She could have joined the Army Reserves, as there are paths to West Point or OCS from these, all of which kept her in the Denver area so the character would be able to stay on the show.

But the questionable "floors your dreams and the money will come" concept is inconsistent with how she has responded to others and interacted with others in all of the past.

The actions of Mike were generally consistent in term of his support for his daughter, but even he would have had more "concrete" alternatives than her suddenly falling into music after four years of pursuing a military career.

From the very obvious laugh track to the applause whenever Jennifer Coolidge comes in, this show is just one predicable gag line after another.

Season one was fair, but it has been sliding.ever since.

There are shows that grow and characters that expand, neither is true here. The show is shrinking and the characters are going flat.

Talk about breaking through the wall! Most of the jokes are directed at the audience, are in poor taste and lack that one thing essential to comedy: Humor.

If CBS cancels it, it would be a mercy killing.

I want to feel sorry for David Klein, but I can't.

He created a fantastic product: The Jelly Belly jellybean, but he seems purely unsuited to either running a business or even getting decent advice.

Had this man (who attended law school) simply hired a lawyer, he could have probably retained a small minority share in what is Jelly Belly today and been rich. He didn't. At every turn, when confronted with a situation, he seems to have taken the quick but easy way.

To be honest, David Klein invented the Jelly Belly, but then he more or less stopped. He is NOT responsible for the massive success of the company, but wants to be treated as if he was.

He wanted his contract manufacturing company to expand -- with them taking all the risk -- and was surprised when they turned the tables on him.

Since the story is one-sided and still doesn't make him out to be much of a sympathetic character.

I had seen many stage productions of Evita before this film version came out and was delighted by Madonna's performance, because she captured Eva Peron so well.

However the changes from the stage to the screen were horrific. I have heard many of these were to gain the approval of the Argentine government for location filming. If so, they should have shot it elsewhere.

Gone was the "Che" character (which was merely a chorus anyway as Guevara has no real connection to the Perons) but the replacement by Antonio Bandaras made no sense as he had to be coached. His voice was "okay" but fell in comparison to Madonna.

Lyrics were changed, "softened" to make Eva less of a self-serving type, more approachable. Peron was not cast so much as a fascist (which he was) and Eva was less power-mad.

It probably mirrors better the way Argentina would LIKE Evita to have been, but not what she was.

While (as another reviewer pointed out) California judges are elected, most of them are appointed when there is a vacancy and face only a re-election where they are rarely opposed.

But Kate Walsh's character goes WAY over the line. Putting a fire ax into a tire would have been a criminal act -- the sort of thing that gets a judge up before the review board, probably dismissed if not disbarred as well.

The worst part is Kate Walsh has generally played beautiful, classy women and this character is a tramp.

The show has a judge routinely getting drunk (borderline alcoholic), breaking laws and abusing authority.

If you can suspend disbelief, you can enjoy it.

"Cristela" is a poorly researched litany of old stereotypes: Latino men don't respect women, Latino women defer to their husbands, people won't accept a Latino as a lawyers, the head of a law firm is a greedy white male who cares only about money but will give his kid a pass on everything...

Need I go on? For a show where a woman works as an intern at a law firm, the producers don't realize that private companies must PAY interns ("for profit" entities cannot have "free" labor -- that would violate the laws of the US.

The show is a disconnect from reality. It should have been set in the 1970s or 1980s not the 21st Century.