Posted: 9/23/16 at 9:12pm
Just caught up with this tonight.....thought it was pretty terrific.
Posted: 9/23/16 at 9:22pm
Caught up? One show right? You're a goof ball Drama. I have one show I have ever started in years, or ever watched, and this is meh after one episode.
Posted: 9/23/16 at 11:10pm
I loved it. I thought that it was a brilliant, interesting concept that stems away from our current repertoire of political dramas, and it was incredibly well executed. I'm very much looking forward to the rest of the season.
Posted: 9/24/16 at 8:08am
I thought it was excellent. Very interesting, new & different. Very curious to see where this show goes.
Posted: 9/24/16 at 4:06pm
Yes, South Florida, caught up. As in: it aired several days before I watched it. (Although I assume I didn't mean to type the "up".) The rest of your post makes little sense to me.
To everyone else: I agree. Smart, well done. I was surprised how moved I was about a number of things....even when its part of the premise. I thought the direction, camera work and acting were top notch, although I felt the writing dropped the ball -- but just a few times, maybe that's why they stood out to me when it faltered.
My son and I were talking about it today and wondered what the LONG term outlook might be for this, after he is (assuming) respected by the "other" powers that be, or at least the public.
Posted: 9/28/16 at 11:14pm
My second favorite new show, This Is Us being my first....
Posted: 9/29/16 at 12:37pm
Ratings have been strong. Glad to hear there are some bright spots for the networks on their Fall schedules.
Posted: 9/29/16 at 4:12pm
Watched the pilot last night and was underwhelmed. I think the premise is interesting, but much of the writing and direction really let it down for me (the war-hungry general was so eye-rollingly cliched, I felt like I was watching a meller drammer with a mustache-twisting villian). The whole thing seemed like a mash-up of political dramas and thrillers. I wasn't quite sure what the focus was supposed to be. And that stuff with his son...ugh. I was really looking forward to it, but I actually found it kind of hokey and tedious in the ways that led me to give up on Scandal.
Posted: 9/29/16 at 5:13pm
What I meant Drama was that I don't watch TV series and I tried this one because it seemed interesting, after 2 episodes I'm still waiting. I will watch the next episode. I have noticed that the women on this show would all probably pass the Donald Trump standard of hotness, but that's TV I guess.
Posted: 9/30/16 at 12:31pm
If this ever happened it would be nice if you could substitute every member of Congress with whomever there opponent was in the last election. Imagine 535 Democrats and Republicans in office accountable to their constituents who would be mostly made up of the party opposite to them. Congress might actually get things done under those circumstances.
Posted: 10/1/16 at 7:40am
Interesting premise, but I didn't think the pilot made a good case for it. The second episode was marginally better -- largely due to the appearance of Virginia Madsen's character, who seems to have something up her sleeve -- but the writing is sophomoric. I'm in for now, but I'm not sure I'll stick with it.
Posted: 10/1/16 at 11:46am
I was intrigued enough that I'll keep watching to see where they go with it. Some of the characters are far more interesting than others. Some of them are just cliches, like the aforementioned "lets nuke 'em!" general.
Posted: 10/1/16 at 3:17pm
I agree with the negative comments on here, but I'm still enjoying it. I mean, it's very "network TV," but there's lot of potential here, and it's never boring. Plus I've always liked Kiefer Sutherland and Kal Penn, and I've pretty much been in love with Natascha McElhone since her first movie, Surviving Picasso, so the cast alone keeps me watching.
Posted: 10/1/16 at 5:22pm
I think the show has a lot of relevance, the current political climate, racism as well as world order. I do think the writing could be better. There has been a trend the last couple of years to find a very strong lead actor or actress to carry a passable script, How To Get Away With Murder as an example. Without the lead I probably would not watch it.
Posted: 10/2/16 at 4:09am
Yeah, I like the cast better than the writing. The cliched hawk general, racist governor, and lawyer wife. But I'll keep watching for now. Premise is intriguing, plus I do like the cast, including Maggie Q.
I really got annoyed with the protect-the-daughter-and-keep-her-away-from-TV thing. Like she's so stupid not to realize that some really bad things have gone down and now she's living in the White House with Secret Service everywhere. I wanted to shout, "Quit babying her!"
Posted: 10/2/16 at 7:09am
Isn't the kid supposed to be 7 or 8? Everyone in the country that outranks her dad was just blown up. I think keeping her somewhat sheltered in the first 24 hours when neither parent has the time to really sit down and help her process what has happened is a smart move.
I never considered the concept of a designated survivor until The West Wing brought it up. This idea of that person being suddenly in charge has intrigued me ever since, so I was excited to hear about this. I am in, so far. I think the next couple of episodes will make or break it.
Posted: 10/2/16 at 8:17am
But the child was shuttled away at night (from her sleep), deposited in a new place, her parents and brother must have exhibited some level of anxiety, she obviously would not be allowed to roam in the White House and if she opened the door to leave the living quarters, she would run into Secret Service and who knows who else (possibly armed with guns), and she is shut away from the TV. I don't know about anyone else, but as a child, that would have made me more curious than ever. She's disconnected from her surroundings, her friends, her electronics, maybe even her own cell phone. That would raise the level of curiosity and anxiety in a child, let alone anger if not being told the truth.
The mother should have had the opportunity to ease the child into the situation, and I don't see why the mother didn't make that time. She didn't have to hit the child over the head with a sledgehammer about the whole government getting killed. Better that a parent ease the child into the situation and assure her that she is safe, than risk the child learning it on her own. Keep her away from the TV? Pfft. There must be numerous TVs in the living quarters. Of course the child would turn one on. Even if they removed every TV, she just had to look out the window to see chaos, police, firearms, smoke, destruction.
Posted: 10/2/16 at 10:50am
She DOES know some things as evidenced by the first convo we catch with the brother in the White House (1st episode, I think.) What's she's being shielded from is the IMAGES of the horrific act. All children of this age should be shielded from that if possible.
Posted: 10/2/16 at 7:57pm
The show's writing does need work. But this show really can go far with a lot of options. Keifer is amazing so far. I'll keep watching with the hope it gets better.
.jpg?format=auto&width=365)
