We're moving Forums to the Community pages. Click here for more information and updates.

Revolution "Soul Train" Review: On Track Then Back Off Track

Revolution S01E05: "Soul Train"

First, let's just all agree that "Soul Train" is the worst title ever for a TV episode and will sweep the Worst Title Awards when someone makes them up. Yes, there was a train, I get that. But if they just added "Soul" because the focus was on the he-of-darker-pigment Tom Neville (Gus Fring), well then shame on Mr. Episode Titler. If Snoop Dogg and Godfrey were the train's engineers, it would've been a different thing. That's the BAD NEWS. The not-as-bad-but-still-kinda-bad news is that this episode wasn't terrible for most of the hour, and that's because it gave us a glimmer of hope that the hunt for Danny would end and it showed a semblance of improved structure. Hey, I'm trying to look at the positives here.

Revolution's series premiere veered off in the wrong direction in the first 15 minutes, when it immediately separated the show's main characters into two stories. As an audience, we like to take in our on-screen surroundings and get to know the characters together for a few episodes before everyone starts doing their own thing. What Revolution did was invite us to a party taking place in two different party pads. And we never got a sense of the party because we were too busy being pushed around from house to house.

Since splitting up Charlie and her group from Danny and Neville in the first episode, Revolution has felt like two different shows. Sure, the separation gave the characters something to do (find Danny!), but I sure as heck didn't care that Danny and Charlie were apart from each other because I never got a sense of a kinship between the two (unless you count having an asthma attack as sibling bonding). The early separation also forced lame storylines like running away from a storm cloud or mean old dogs, but most of all, it meant we had to suffer through episode after episode of one group finding the other while knowing that the reunion wouldn't get us any closer to solving the main mystery of the show (Why dem lights turned off?), which is why we're all watching in the first place. It almost feels like we're still waiting for the series to start. Remember that show Lost? Remember how it made that gigantic ensemble cast stay together early on and how well that worked? And if the writers needed character isolation they sent someone on a task or did the flashback thing but always brought them back to the group in the first season? Yeah, me too.

So how exciting and Show 101 was it to see these Revolution characters (except for Monroe and Rachel) all together in the same time zone for once? Charlie getting strangled by Monroe! Miles knife-fighting with Monroe! Danny and Charlie being held as human shields just feet away from each other! It sure beats going off on side quests. But just as we thought we might finally reach an end to the suffering search for Danny, Revolution separated everyone again at the end episode and we're back to where we were before. But for a fleeting moment, it seemed as though Revolution was going somewhere.

"Soul Train" took another step in the right direction with its flashback structure. Total Lost rip-off, I know, but it's a story device that isn't old and that's very applicable to a show like this given how much the world and its characters have changed (except in looks, because no one on Revolution has aged in 15 years except the kids). In Revolution's attempt at recreating Lost's excellent "Walkabout" (it's even the fifth hour of the show) (wrong-o, Tim, it was hour 4), we met pre-blackout Neville, a beat-down insurance adjuster who got pushed around by his hard-partying neighbor and boss. It was a nice try to show how Neville has become a hardened man since the blackout, but the condensed story needed a lot more meat on its bones because it didn't really resonate with what was going on in present time, something Lost excelled at. Unfortunately, Revolution's flashbacks didn't tell us anything we didn't already know and gave us very little insight into the character. I am a strong proponent of keeping flashbacks limited to one character per episode, though, so congrats on that, Revolution. Baby steps!

But with that said, this baby is going to have to take a lot of steps before Revolution can be called watchable. Charlie continued to be a good-looking idiot way out of her league as she disobeyed Miles' orders and got into dangerous situations... AGAIN. How many times will Charlie be held at knifepoint or tied to a chair before Miles says, "You know what? Why don't you sit this one out?" Someone is constantly needing to save her ass, and that's not a good trait for a show's heroine. No wonder Miles keeps snapping at her. She's a liability.

Nora is also deadweight; she's basically the worst team player in the history of team playing. In her me-first desire to blow up the Soul Train, she jeopardized everything by putting her vengeance ahead of everyone else's lives and throwing her log bomb onto the train before Danny was extracted. Crossing your fingers and hoping Miles does his job before your random bomb explodes is just plain selfish, girl! Hey, at least she felt bad about it later. And how many times is this chick gonna get stabbed in the gut? She still has the bandage on from the last time she got shanked in the tummy. She's a human pin cushion who loves to strip down to her bra whenever she can.

"Soul Train" slowed down Revolution's precipitous downward trajectory by a teeny-tiny bit when it momentarily brought the show's main characters back together, but then it quickly extinguished hope when it reset things at the end of the episode. And it doesn't look like the moderate improvement will be sustained: The previews for next week's episode (Nora is sick and Charlie and Miles must reenact Indecent Proposal for medicine) indicate that the show is headed toward an even worse place than before.



NOTES

– Okay, so steam power works. It's 15 years later and this is the first we're seeing of this? How about a bicycle? Wouldn't those be all over the place? I'll even take a unicycle at this point.

– LOG BOMB. It's a bomb stuffed inside a log!

– Excellent gratuitous pervy camera work when Nora was getting dressed, as the shot panned up from her supple ankles to the upstairs goods. Give that cameraman a raise and a restraining order!

– Neville's son is the character formerly known as Nate! Is there any bigger of a fizzle-out reveal than learning that two characters are related? Especially when it's obvious at one point? At least "Nate" finally has a name: Jason.

– Hey Aaron you stupid dumbf*** why are you playing with the power amulet RIGHT in front of the Monroe Militia prisoner you moron you know you're just going to do something stupid like knock the table with your clumsy belly you G-D buffoon and it's going to end up in the prisoner's hands and now he has a good look at it and can tell Monroe that he saw it and you're a moron. Idiot. It should have been you and not Maggie.

– I can't believe I haven't mentioned this before in these write-ups, but you do know that Danny is the State Farm "CAN I GET A HOT TUB?" guy, right?

– Hello, Kim Raver as Neville's wife! Sorry about your new job.

– Nothing makes your men more loyal than holding bare-knuckle boxing matches and calling them wimps, Neville. Great leadership.

– Next week: Charlie is forced into PROSTITUTION! Woowoo! Finally, a good use for her!

– And here's the map of New America, divided into six gigantic city-states:

Comments (682)
Submit
Sort: Latest | Popular
Looking at that map, as soon as the group is together they should just sack off the power thing and high-tail it to Cali... or Vegas!
Reply
Flag
Forget bicycles! How about some wind mills or aquaducts?? Basic engineering that has served mankind for thousands of years or maybe even an old diesel engine that runs on bio-fuel? You'd think in fifteen years time somebody would have done at least one of those things....
Reply
Flag
Yes, it would have been nice to see. But just because any of that has appeared in the show yet, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist in that universe. It seems some people want a "how stuff works" documentary on boats, trains, diesel cars, bikes, aqueducts, etc, etc, instead of a story.
Reply
Flag
We're not getting a good story, either. In fact, a good story might include more of how life manages and perseveres, ie. Windmills, aqueducts. And yes, they're shoeing some in slowly, but the overall picture isn't very convincing as it stands.
Reply
Flag
the thing is if they showed everything people are asking (steamships, steam trains, steam cars, steam machines in general, diesel cars, diesel chips, windmills, aqueducts, bicycles, bullet making, weapons making - gosh, have I missed anything?) in just 5 episodes, the show would be mostly exposition and people would certainly complain about that. Regardless of how the story is going now, that wouldn't work.
Reply
Flag
"(except for Monroe and Rachel) all together in the same time zone for once? Charlie getting strangled by Monroe! Miles knife-fighting with Monroe!"



I think you may have gotten Neville and Monroe confused here...
1
Reply
Flag
Love the loads of comments and I've read bunches of them, but it's a little much to read through them all at this point in time... so... I keep hearing some defenders of the show accusing Tim and others of lying and the like about what happens (so as to fit their agenda of disliking the show), and I was wondering if anyone would be willing to rehash those accusations.
Reply
Flag
The arguments boil down to this statement: If you don't agree with how I feel about this show, you're an idiot and you're hateful.
Reply
Flag
Haha, well it does seem like most arguments in the world boil down to that after all the substance is removed.
Reply
Flag
Well, if you start reading them all, you might get through them by the time the next episode airs...
Reply
Flag
If there's an agenda, you can infer who has it for yourself from the following:

Many were nitpicking about steam trains not being on the show. Now that's out of the way, Tim is trying to say there were no bicycles on the show. There were plenty of them in Noblesville.

How exactly was Jason being related to Neville a 'reveal'! Even if you haven't seen the fifth episode, you could have deduced that by all the clues the writers left us along the way since the first episode. That scene was supposed to make sure those who missed the subtleties realize who he was. Saying that it was a reveal, as if that was a fact is plain wrong.

Why don't you talk about the big oversight and ask why is there no mention of the 12 pendants anywhere in the review? Isn't that what a review should convey - Your opinion and the major plot lines in the story! Apparently the prostitution stuff is way more important to him.

The new map scene showed us the various territories and the fights that were taking place in spurts along the border of the Monroe Republic which will be a major arc in the future. If you can rant about how Lost was so good in so many areas, the least you can do is say one line about that scene instead of ignoring it by making a drawing.

Neville's flashback: I disagree. It showed us that he empathized with regular people before even with all his inbuilt frustration, but now he willfully punches a kid to unconsciousness in cold blood and even revels in it. Killing men in one stroke is different than hitting and abusing a kid over and over again, especially when said kid is his own son's age. (Of course, this point is subject to one's own views.)

These were just some of the glaring inconsistencies in the review. Like I said before, I like Tim's reviews, but not when he does an entire piece based on oversight.
More +
Reply
Flag
Thanks for the reply. Not to defend Tim or anyone else, but I thought I'd give my hand at some replies to your points (which, for the most part don't seem like accusations of lying so much as oversight and poor focus in a review), though note it's been a while now since I watched the most recent episode.

This is a valid point - people griped about no ships, then the writers mentioned ships (whether people choose to accept their explanation or not), and so too now with steam trains. That being said, I think there is still a valid question/critique/comment to be made about the singular presence of a steam engine. That is, they are relatively simple machines and would be very useful in this world, but from we've seen nobody has even a basic one performing a basic task (except a massive one propelling a train). This is a similar point about bicycles - yes, we saw them in the background of one shot (and there seemed to be a bunch lined up), but the relative basicness-to-usefulness ratio of them would make you think that they would have a larger presence. Understandably, we have seen only a small portion of the world and story and particularly (except for some scenes in Chicago and now noblesville) the unpopulated areas, so maybe these things are in wider use elsewhere. (And yes, bicycles might be less useful based on their terrain and I imagine the militia is staking out the major roads and highways - though to what extent given how many road there is a question in and of itself).

I'm not sure why calling it a reveal is "plain wrong." It seems like that is exactly what it was. A portion of someone's identity is hidden (fake names, mystery background, etc.) that would have informed the story and interactions better had it been known, hinted at various moments, and then revealed in a single, otherwise normal moment ("Hello, mother"). In fact, I think the very way they presented the "reveal scene" with Jason saying "hello" followed by no other comments, shows the reveal-intent (they made it a punctuation mark rather than just another part of the ongoing dialogue of the show). In addition, the whole episode focuses on the relationship of Jason/Neville without mentioning until the end their familiar connection. Also, Tim does write, "Is there any bigger of a fizzle-out reveal than learning that two characters are related? Especially when it's obvious at one point?" We all saw it coming and it wasn't that big of a deal, but they still tried to hide it from us for a while.

Fair point - he probably should've mentioned that Rachel revealed to Monroe that there are 12 pendants/amulets and gave him a drawing. That being said, there isn't much to say.

On the map, again fair point, he probably should've mentioned it a wee-bit more, but again there isn't a whole lot to say beyond: we now see a map with 6 territories in N.A. that exist with some uneasy tension/peace and the some new skirmishes brought on by sensed weakness (oh, and a mentioned of the power of that blackhawk helicopter we saw in Ep.2).

On Neville's flashback, I agree that we now understand something slightly new about him (that he was weak and picked on pre-blackout, and then found strength during, and is reveling in his new-found power post-blackout). However, I also kind of agree with Tim's point, and it's what that is hard to articulate and, as you said, is opinion based, but is basically that the flashback seemed slightly forced, unrelated, and un-resonant (new word!). In fact, it seemed like the opening scene with Neville fighting his men and Danny was stuck in there for the sole purpose of saying "Look how he is now! Now look at this flashback!" It wasn't very organic or pertinent to me.



More +
Reply
Flag
Yes, it would've been cool to see people riding small steam cars like in the novel "Bring the Juliblee" by Ward Moore. In fact i'd like to see the whole society changed like in the book I mentioned. However I'm not sure this kind of detail would be feasible in a network drama budget. Notice that the pilot has much richer sceneries, lots and lots of extras, and once they get past that, most subsequent episodes were basically the main characters walking in the woods, something much cheaper to show. Now they showed a train, a train station, more extras, so there's bigger expenditure. But I understand costs have to be cut tight. Ironically, what is spent in a single episode in a TV show like this might be much higher than the cost of entire movies in my country. North American audiences are used to a lot of money being thrown in and don't get happy with simplifications anymore.

The Jason situation seemed like a confirmation, not a "reveal" per se. But it might be a review if you were oblivious of the clues until then. Once he said "Hello mother" there really wasn't any point in proceeding with the scene. He could have said "I met this interesting girl, but I don't know if I turn her in or ask her on a date," or something, though.

The fact that Monroe knows about the 2-pendant information is a BIG reveal for him. that means he's going to start chasing them, will find some and will start getting close to solving his powoer issue. Time will be of the essence. The fact Tim ignored that was a big No-No.

the map was a preparation for some future event in another season perhaps, when they meet enter in a possible conflict with one of the other "countries." Not much for now, but a potential storyline for the future.

Neville's background story is in consonance with all the other backstories. Basically what they are saying is that the Blackout changed people in deeper ways than we think. Basically everyone changed with the fall of the old society, and I'm curious to know how this process affected each of the characters. I think that's great for character development. If Neville had been a bully from the beginning, his position in the new World Order would be much more predictable.

The fact that Neville was fighting with his men was perfectly in consonance with this new world order. I was a bit skeptical as of how a man of his age would be able to overcome so many other much younger men. And perhaps he couldn't and they were just afraid what would happen to them in case they would beat Neville in a fist fight. Or not, it's just a guess.
More +
Reply
Flag
Just to help out: gasoline engines require a spark to combust, this is what we use spark plugs for. Diesel engines use compression to combust. With the appropriate starter (you have to get the pistons compressing the gas in the first place) and flywheel design you wouldn't need electricity but you would need a starter motor of some kind, crank shaft or steam engine or something. But most cars have much more than just the engine that use electricity, such as for mixing and regulating gas and air mixture (what we used to use carburetors for) or most of your internal controls are computerized and no longer mechanical linkages.

Steam cars were actually invented pre-gas-powered cars, but they were too heavy. You had to build special roads to carry them, that's why they morphed into trains and we went a different direction for personal passenger vehicles.

Planes most certainly require electricity, and not just for the engines, but also the navigation and flight control systems.
Flag
@Res_Dog: I don't know much (read: anything) about cars and such, but I believe "normal cars" require a spark plug for the combustion engine to work. Diesel cars, on the other hand, I agree would not. May be that we see one or two of these down the road in Philadelphia or some such.

(Also, remember the Blackhawk that the Militia was recovering? I'm wondering if that is for "just in case the power comes back on" or if Monroe et al. think they can get it to work - the dialogue by the good guys seemed like the latter).
Flag
Why the hell would the use Steam Cars? Normal cars with combustion engines DO NOT REQUIRE ELECTRICITY. Hell, short of some planes like the Eurofighter who need computers to function you could even use most aircraft without electricity. Jesus Christ...
Flag
Without a doubt it would make things more expensive the more they introduced steam engines. But there also easy ways to show small machines working in an inexpensive manners (say back in their village). It's not like they need to build an actual steam engine or steam car (they can use electricity!). But yes, we are spoiled with absurdly high budgets compared to most countries.

From what I remember there is no other dialogue or happening in that scene (I believe Neville just hugs her) - if the writers really didn't want it to act as a reveal, they wouldn't have made the only or any dialogue include that followed by letting it hang in the air. I'm not saying it was particularly good or particularly shocking (I saw it before too), but to me, that is a CLEAR attempt at a reveal. I'm not really sure why it is a point of contention though.

As I said, I completely understand his backstory and how it fits and what it saying about him (Tim does too) - what I got from it though just wasn't very organic. I agree that Neville fighting his men fits in the NWO (to some extent), but it doesn't really have any bearing on this episode EXCEPT to say "See! Look how he is now! Watch this flashback!" They're trying to hard to make the connection and it doesn't come off as organic (one of the reasons it doesn't).
More +
Flag
When you see it in this way, it does come off as that way, doesn't it! Of course, all my points are fair. I see the flaws as well as the positives. From what I have seen, the show is steadily improving.

Yeah that's my point. I don't want the show to be all about showing viewers how people are using steam powered vehicles and going on about their lives. Its just for the background. Its more of a common sense than anything at this point. People know how to use it and will use it if its feasible and could be built without any hindrance.

You saw it coming in the beginning of this episode and hence you can see how it never was supposed to be a reveal. It was hinted at and clues were given in all the episodes. Many of us deduced who he was before even watching this episode. The 'Hello mother' was for the less than discerning viewers who just don't see the subtelties and nuances. They trusted you to know by now and I'm quite glad about it. You cannot hold it against the writers since that was done well.

Not probably. He SHOULD have. Its in his job description. You wouldn't be saying that if he forgot to mention that the Machine in POI gave in to Reese's demands in the first episode. That was a small moment, but it is important to the overall arc.

I thought it was very organic since it showed the true psyche of Neville and his relationship with his son. That opening scene gave me an intense adrenaline rush and I fear his character now. He only showed his meek side to the outside world before and withheld his anger inside him. That doesn't necessarily mean he was a coward or truly weak.
More +
Reply
Flag
I agree that now we know the writers realize steam engines and bicycles and gas lamps can exist without electricity, it puts a lot of the skepticism and arguments to rest. However, I still think the question of the ubiquity (or lack thereof) pertains. I think many people feel that if electricity stopped working for 15 years and people started life anew, things would start becoming a lot more steam-punky. Yes, steam engines can be used for trains and cars, but they can also be used simply for much more minor conveniences that weren't shown at all.

As I have written, there is no doubt in my mind that it was supposed to be a reveal. It doesn't matter that it was predictable to some (myself included) or created for the less nuance-discerning viewers. It may not be shocking at the end or clever, but that doesn't mean it isn't a reveal. It was a piece of his identity that remained hidden, that was pertinent to the story, that was explored throughout the episode, that was eventually revealed at the end in a stand-alone scene where the only dialogue or moment of interest was the revealing two words that tied everything together. Heck, they changed his name - what was the point of that? Again, it doesn't matter that you saw it coming or that it was built for less discerning, it was a reveal.

I'm not really sure what his job description is, nor do I really care (nor have I watched Person of Interest). I don't read reviews to get a summary of the show, I read them for another perspective on what I just watched. Should he have mentioned them, yes. Will he in the future when they become more important, yes. Does the review collapse on itself without them, no.

Again, this is opinion, but just because it revealed the truth about Neville doesn't suddenly make it feel Organic. We could have a cut scene of Peter Griffin standing against a white screen and summarizing what we saw in the flashback, and that would reveal the true psyche of Neville, but it wouldn't be organic at all. Nor I do fear his character any more now than before - he had already done enough in prior episodes to build up that credibility. My summary of the flashback isn't really important - whether or not he was "truly weak" or "cowardly" before, he was certainly getting shafted from all sides and now is the one sticking it to people.
More +
Flag
Wow, there are an awful lot of comments for and against this show. Shame the show does not stick up for itself in the way its fans do...



I reeeeaally wanted this show to be good. After the epic disappointment of the way Lost ended and the botched attempt that was Terra Nova this intrigued me, but despite having a really interesting premise it has yet to offer anything remotely novel. The girl playing Charlie is bad guys - really bad. I presume Tim's point was that perhaps she would be better at something else (anything else, prostitution just happens to be the next plot point) other than acting, at which she clearly struggles. That said I have loved the actors playing Monroe and Neville in other things but haven't seen much from them that has drawn me in thus far (though Neville's flashbacks helped in this one).







I agree with Tim about the split story from the off as it has been hard to appreciate the strong relationship bonds that are spoken about by the characters without seeing them established for more than a brief scene. This show needs to step up and give us a hint at what the payoff might be for sticking with it as, at the moment, I'm unconvinced.
More+
Reply
Flag
We're a passionate bunch! :)
Reply
Flag
That does it for me ... I'm not watching another episode. This show is too illogical for my tastes.

Can't believe it .. I've only made it to 5 episodes. Even Terra Nova made it to 6! (Though this show is not as bad as that piece of turd).

Goodbye.
Reply
Flag
Early content for this week's FTW/WTF:

FTW 1: Attitudes toward Revolution improved this week when people realized that a presidential debate was the alternative.

FTW 2: If the lights ever do go out, no more televised debates, political ads, or robocalling from campaigns. Maybe Charlie's dad got one too many phone calls asking for campaign contributions and said, "SCREW IT! WE'RE GOING DARK!"
Reply
Flag
I finally watched this one. I save them for indoor biking workouts, because I don't want to waste a good show on a workout, and the writing/acting is often so awful it pisses me off, which is good for biking harder.



This episode didn't let me down. Lots more stupid, to get the adrenaline flowing for a good workout.



Google boy from the previous episode who doesn't want to tell anyone about the amulet, plays with it in front of the enemy. That's some real consistent writing there.



The Woman playing Charlie is such a terrible actress. She spent nearly the whole episode with a look on her face somewhere between stunned and weepy. Before watching this I ran it through a commercial deletion program on my HTPC. I check the cuts to make sure they are OK, and every cut she had the same stupid-weepy look on here face.



What was with Jason's "Hello Mother" at the end. That looked so forced and faked.



I am stunned this one is pulling an audience. It is easily as bad as Terra Nova, but it is good workout fodder.
Reply
Flag
Since they're all subjective and I agree on two counts, I won't argue with you on anything, but your last statement.
Reply
Flag
An opinion obviously, and I'm hesitating as I write this, because Revolution suffers many of the same faults of Terra Nova, but I think I actually enjoyed the latter more. I found the world and potential more intriguing, and despite some (similarly) poor writing, acting, logic, stories, arc, etc., its main fault lay in its directed attempt to appeal to the whole family audience, which inevitably leads to a lack of interest from nearly everybody.
Reply
Flag
There's more of a parallel between old adventure movies and Revolution which I find refreshing. I hate the monstrosity that was TN. I see no parallels between the two in any area. Even if the writing was poor in the first couple of episodes, it was better than anything that was ever done on TN. If you enjoyed the illogical mess, groan worthy acting, and writing on that show, then I have nothing to say. Its your taste. I ditched after the 4-episode test and kept abreast of things only through Tim's reviews.
Reply
Flag
Lets agree to disagree. Even I had my reservations, but I see the show improving and all the hating is illogical for the most part,
Flag
Well I think I've shown some of the larger parallels below (which I'll not is not so much the story like your old adventure movies, so much as the premise, mystery, etc.), though I'm sure more would present themselves on close examination.

Interesting though to read someone who I take to be a defender of Revolution dismiss TN so easily on poor writing/acting/story grounds (which I agree with), when that is what many people are arguing about Revolution (which I also agree with).

As I said, neither is a good show in my opinion, but so far I was at least more intrigued by the world and potential of TN (despite all the badness going on around it). So far in the Rat Race that is Revolution, I am just not really intrigued by anything (the world, story, characters, story, etc.).
Flag
Unfortunately I haven't seen a minute of Terra Nova. I read Tim's reviews first and he had such a vile impression of the show, I figured I wouldn't like the show, then I gave up watching it right then.

Which makes me wonder why some people keep comparing Revolution and Terra Nova if they enjoy neither.
Reply
Flag
@BobbyK12 - To me the greatest difficulty about writing a review is selecting what to include and what not to, since I tend to talk about too many details, and a text can't be too long. Also, to choose when to recap and when to give an opinion is something hard to decide as well. Technical issues.
Flag
@Mad-Pac: It's definitely harder than it looks. It all seems so clear in one's head, but when you have to put down in words in a sensible way your feelings and reactions to something you saw, it becomes much more difficult.

Would agree about Charlie not being Katniss - in fact, I'm not sure they could be further apart as people while remaining the prototypical hero (besides the obvious laziness of comparing bow-skills in a wild environment). Katniss is definitely more reserved and just wants to do what it takes to win and get back to her family, though over time let's her emotions seep through such as with Rue and eventually Peeta. Charlie on the other hand is very much the naive do-gooder who wants the world to be good, but I think we're seeing over time the more pragmatic, realistic side developing.

Sorry, didn't mean to imply there was a formula or only one way to build emotional connections. Rather that there are certain ways to not build emotional connections and certain aspects that are just generally not enough to build them.

Not that Peter is a dick, so much as his first impression was dickish with his intentional attempts at screwing with a crazy person. He's definitely the unconventional, roguish wit - great at his job, but he'll sass you up if he can.
More +
Flag
@BobbyK12 - I have observed that some reviews are mostly recapitulations of what happened in the show (such as in Grimm), while others are more of an opinion piece (such as anything Tim writes). I'm used to both. Normally I would prefer opinion pieces, but in some cases in which we have little to agree with about the review, the opinion becomes a burden and there's very little you get from the review. I've been thinking of collaborating with a few local websites that cover American television and i'm finding this craft of writing reviews harder than I'd expected.

Again emotion connection. That can be a result of something unexpected. Somehow I relate to several characters in Revolution. I like the way Miles has changed from the Big Kahuna in Monroe's militia to disinterested freedom fighter. Neville's change is not such a surprise anymore, but since once he was a "decent" guy who would abide to social rules, maybe at some point his conscience will catch up with him and he'll question what he's been doing for Monroe.

As for Charlie, I know many people don't like her. Personally I like her innocence and enthusiasm, and how emotional she gets facing the situations that are all new to her. Some people call her the "Katniss factor," but she couldn't be more different from Katnisss who, at least in the movie, had an introspective and seemingly unemotional behavior. Charlie is a bit extravagant and that's a nice contrast to other characters.

But what I think I disagree with you is when you try to explain why people emotionally connect with a story. I think the reasons are many, and it's not like there's a sure recipe for that.

Funny, I never saw Peter Quinn as a dick. He seemed confident and unconventional. He tried pressing Carrie's buttons to see if she would react (and reveal to be a liability) as when he said, "Crazy? Interesting choice of words." But then complimented Carrie for her good work. And he also showed to be sympathetic to Carrie's reasons to want revenge against Brody. the ER nurse thing came up when Carrie asked him who he was having sex with, perhaps in the hopes of embarrassing him and deflecting the focus on her problems. But he was open and gave a smart-ass reply showing he had nothing to hide.

Again, as I said, Homeland has great writing, so there's no argument there.
More +
Flag
Hi @BobbyK12, Sorry I'm jumping in, but I am one of those people. :) Movie and book reviews are one-offs--is it good, analyze it, should I watch it. I think those would be analogous to pilot reviews or if you want to review an entire season. But the week-in/week-out recapping reviews have a different intent and different audience. The readers have both already decided to watch and they've *already watched.* These are after the fact...so while critical analysis is still part of it, we are recapping and expanding on the previously existing viewing experience and hopefully examining it in a constructive and/or thought-provoking way. It's the car ride home from the theater not the reading through the reviews before you pick a flick.
Flag
@Mad-Pac: I was merely mentioning how other people on this board (not you) seem to think these TV reviews should be different than movie/book reviews. They act as if they more summary than opinion piece, which I think is incorrect and less interesting (and something I wouldn't read, especially before watching a show).

The real problem for me probably is that my consumption of television is larger than the supply of good shows (that appeal to me).

(Episodes is Showtime, but a funny and witty show nonetheless). I think these are definitely the issues, but I refuse to believe that if you make content the HBO-way, it would somehow fail on Networks. I just have this arrogant belief that Networks think there is only one way to make a show that will get them the proper ratings/revenue and that they are wrong.

Definitely agree on the emotional connection point - and I think the best way to do this is to create characters/actors with charisma (positive or negative) rather than put them in tortured situations. Some people try to load the horse in backwards - I'm not going to care for a character just because s/he is in peril or is sticking their neck on the line for X. That should be the payoff after I like a character because of their personality, charisma, etc. Example, Homeland's Ep.4 with Peter Quinn - guy hasn't done much in the show and comes off as a dick, yet he is immediately compelling to watch with little quips like the E.R. Nurse and liking olives. Unfortunately I'm about as far from connected to these Rev characters as possible.
More +
Flag
@BobbyK12 - As for me I don't expect from a reviewer that "ALL details of a show be mentioned in the review, unlike say a book or movie review," but I expect the important ones to be addressed, especially if they are likely to have major consequences in the future. The 12 pendants, the fact Rachel drew one for Monroe is an example of such, much more then the preview for the next episode, which many people don't see.

As for radars, all I can say is that I normally get to watch the shows I like and hardly ever watch something I don't. That's how I roll. But sometimes I miss good things and only catch them much later, which is always a nice surprise.

As for networks, vs. cable, I don't know how this works. I'm not even American, so I don't get to experience the situation first hand like a regular TV watcher/cable subscriber. I'm one of the pirates, har, har harrr! I don't know why things are better at cable, and shows like Homeland and others are unlike any other.

Perhaps an interesting and funny illustration of why that happens can be seen in Matt LeBlanc's new HBO (I think) comedy, "Episodes," where writers are constantly at the mercy of producers and ratings, and the result is a mess.

I think you raise lots of valid points. I just think Revolution is entertaining, but far from perfect. Entertaining with an interesting premise and central mystery, cute female lead, and I'm curious to see where it's going.

Personally I have the theory that a show catches us because it shows a determined element that makes us emotionally connect with it. If you find that element, you get hooked, and disregard more visible problems. If you don't find this element, excellent writing, perfect logic, and all won't make you watch it. This is entertaining after all, and essentially you should feel entertained. The rest is secondary. But please feel free to throw all the tantrums you want. 8^D I've seen much worse and unmentionable even in this board.
More +
Flag
@Mad-Pac - It is, isn't it. Wish the message-board was constructed better. I'll respond to both together.



I'm not sure it's a better radar (plus I enjoy watching a show when it comes out and before I read a review of it, especially when people demand that all of the details be mentioned in the review, unlike say a book or movie review), so much as that I don't "not enjoy" them (yes, double negative). There is enough in these shows that I like and want to watch even when they disappoint me (or maybe it's just the mark of a tv-hungry, obsessive brain). If I only watched shows I loved every moment of, the list would be very short (for dramas, maybe: Lost, West Wing 1-4, BSG, Firefly, GOT (though the books are better still), and Rome). That is also not say I have never watched a pilot or part thereof and then stopped, so much as once I've decided to watch a show, I watch it through (and for most shows that I've done ample reading up on before hand, I know that I'll watch through).

I rarely enter a show with no or little knowledge about it. When I find a show I think is interesting or see the future production of one, I tend to start scouring the web. I read about it, I listen to interviews and watch panels. And as I said, I generally wouldn't do any of that or start watching if I wasn't interested, BUT execution is a-whole-nother story. That can't really be determined until the show is aired. And I'm not asking for Shakespeare and Olivier, but I don't think an intelligent level of writing and experienced level of acting is too much to ask for from networks that shell out millions of dollars for these shows.

(As an aside, I have spent a bunch of time on a show premiering in 2013 on Starz called "Da Vinci's Demons." The premise is great and directly appealing to me, I see the potential and have a vision of how it could be beautifully done, and all I await is the execution. (Which I assume will be pretty good as it is on premium cable)).

We'll have to agree to disagree on the acting being average to good (I'm saying average to not good), but I don't understand why suddenly Network television is the dregs of TV. How, with all of their money and power, can they not get exciting shows, with smart writers, good acting, and great overall production? I understand that HBO et al. has an advantage in that it doesn't have to listen to ratings for advertising, and it can show more adult themes and scenes, but certainly the actors and writers themselves shouldn't be any different.

I agree that writers have a difficult job (moreso on Networks) in that they have to appeal, and quickly, to a large audience that competes directly with three others shows airing at the same time on the other Networks, but it also seems like the same ol', same ol' hasn't really been working in terms of these genre shows either. And I might mention again that I think some shows (e.g. Terra Nova) make the mistake of trying to appeal to the entire audience and then end up appealing to nobody. I hate to use Lost as an example because as you noted it is more than exception than the rule, but there was no attempt to make it a family show that hit every demo... and yet it did!



Maybe I'm just throwing a tantrum - but it seems like my gripe comes down to this (and it's probably a digression from everything I've said before): At this point in television history, I have almost completely lost my faith in the Networks and I don't understand it (well I guess I do: people enjoy pablum so the spoon keeps digging the bottom of the can). Premium cable is just light years better now at drama and regular cable is miles ahead of the Networks. Either this show wouldn't have been made on HBO or it would've been made better.
More +
Flag
@BobbyK12 - Replying to comments at this level is getting pretty messy in this message board. This is about your message down below.

I think you've made a good classification of show categories, and yes, those would interest me at first sight, but I'd try and get more information about them to know if they were worth it. And I wouldn't expect constant logic, superb writing and acting. If that comes it's a bonus.

Of course there are shows with fantastic drama, writing and acting, such as in Homeland, Breaking Bad, and (occasionally, perhaps mostly - that's open to discussion) The Walking Dead. But those are premium cable shows with short seasons, the fillet mignon of television. If you compare everything else to them, they'll lose, in these categories, but we might still watch these other shows for the sci-fi premise.

Nowadays any network drama has a very professional crew, which implies a minimal level of acting and production, and I'd say those in Revolutio9n have been average to good, the exception being Esposito, who excels, he's a TV veteran and an asset. Writing is another story, since writers don't necessarily write things to be good, they write to surprise, entice and get the story going, trying to find a balance of new things and more of the same, because basically the public will reject what is way too unusual.

In this category, for example, I would place Pushing Daisies, with very curious and creative writing, but it was just too unusual to captivate more than a cult following.

Sci-fi shows like Falling Skies, The Event, Flashforward, and in some ways Alcatraz are criticized for outlandish stories and examples of Lost replacements that didn't work. Well, I think the examples are becoming so many that they no longer are exceptions or failed experiments. This is what TV makes these days for sci-fi shows. These were not wonderful shows (well, Falling Skies is still on), but were entertaining enough (for network TV) in my opinion (except for Alcatraz which was too much of a procedural). Their biggest problem is that they didn't conquer higher ratings and shows don't survive without ratings.

And Lost? Lost was undefinable, a fluke, there has been nothing like it. The good things of it were excellent beyond expectations and when it disappointed, oh boy... That was a major fall.
More +
Flag
@BobbyK12 - Perhaps I have a better radar than you for shows I won't enjoy then. I sensed I wouldn't like Terra Nova specifically because Tim said there were too many teenage-oriented stories, for instance, of teenagers bickering with their parents in typical teen angst. that doesn't interest me at all. The other shows I have followed have been entertaining though. Well, the only one I remember I kept waiting it would improve and would only get worse was V. I should've bailed that sinking ship long before, I admit it.

You haven't quit on any shows. I quit on them after one episode sometimes (looking at you, Revenge and The Vampire Dairies).

That's why knowing too much about shows one doesn't like doesn't make much sense to me.

Flag
@Mad-Pac - Ah, well, I imagine there is some cognitive dissonance involved. The way I explain it to myself is something along the following:

There are three general types of shows: (a) shows I like, (b) shows I dislike (or don't watch), (c) shows that I want to like but disappoint me.

The former two I either watch and am satisfied and content or don't watch and don't care. The latter, however, because I care and want them to be better so as to have more quality (non-procedural) programming, causes my brain to race and results in posts here. As you say, there is something I like about them - the premise and potential - and I want them to be better. For a TVaholic, that's enough for me (perhaps I want to torture myself), but for the roughly 100 shows I have watched in the last half decade or so, I haven't quit on one (though in retrospect may never have seen the last few episodes of Heroes).
Flag
No argument here. But don't expect to see any thumbs up, 'cause you're about to get counter-hated on!
Reply
Flag
Never seen this level of pure blind fanboyish for anything before (especially TV). Looking at you, mad-pac and GirishStewart. To be honest, your zeal towards this show is equally disturbing and terrifying.
Reply
Flag
I'm a fan, not a fanboy since I even agreed there were a few minor faults. It should be an eye-opener to you when I responded with actual events from the show and facts to prove that the review is misleading and many of the haters haven't noticed the subtlety. You should encourage such conversation instead of blindly tagging names and hating.

P.S: You haven't been around much if you haven't even seen this much passion for a show.
Reply
Flag
I have seen passion for a show...that comment was pointless. What i haven't seen is such blind zealotry for a show that separates itself in no significant way.

And also, No. I shouldn't. You electively ignore the discussion to either bolster a weak point you already made, or push a tires subject over and over and over. I CLEARLY mentioned that regardless of noticing faults, this does nothing to distinguish the two. Normally I wouldn't care to make the distinguishment, but you are text book fan boy, made worse by the fact you damn people for the same things you're guilty of. Ie. NOT listening.
Reply
Flag
Fanboys are obsessive and ardent in their defense, whether or not they acknowledge any faults. You're a fanboy, dude. Get over it. Furthermore, you should care that someone calls you a fanboy about as much as I should care that you called me a troll.
Reply
Flag
Come on you guys, can't fanboys and trolls live peacefully in this big family of ours? Better yet, can't we get away with labels at all? It looks like you and some people are bothered by other people's passions, and the situation goes like this, "ok I recognize you may have your passions, but if you display them I reserve myself of calling you something that demeans your intelligence and taste." Which shows do you like by the way?
Reply
Flag
Honestly then it looks like to me from what you said that you're easily disturbed and terrified. After all, this is just a TV show, right? What is concerning is that some people might go from hating the show to hating and judging the people who like the show (even if they like it very much).

And for your information, I'm not a fanboy. I'm a fan. There's a difference. That means I recognize the show has faults, like any other shows, and more than better shows. But if someone chooses to focus on the problems, I'll focus on the positive aspects. Just because i'm an optimist!

Peace!
Reply
Flag
Hey, I guess mark Pellegrino was damn right. Let the haters attack the show until they run out of bullets. Then in the end the fans will have a more peaceful time talking about what they like about the show.
Reply
Flag
He could only be right because the guy with the sniper rifle was written to be such a blatant dumb ass by not observing the field, targeting the ridiculously open officer, and shooting him dead. Were people rushing the building? Yes. Did he have time after killing two or three of them? Absolutely. Just saying, Your precious Pellegrino should be dead!
Reply
Flag
I was by no means defending Pellegrino's (actually Jeremy's) tactic from a military point of view, of which I know nothing. It was a metaphor for something else. If you didn't get it, that's just OK.
Reply
Flag
No? I wasn't...no...goddamit, no! I was just saying he can't be right 'cause he should be dead. Dead, dead, dead. His military tactics have little to do with it. I took more issue with the sniper dude.
Reply
Flag
And I wasn't talking about Pellegrino's character at all! I was saying that like that hilarious situation on the show, we could just let the haters run out of "hating bullets", that is, say all they want against the show till they just run out of hating and we can get past that in more interesting discussions about the show.
Flag
In my opinion the show can go into any direction they want it is not bringing back the people they lost after the first 3 episodes. A show with an IMDB rating of 6.6 does not survive on a major network. They had the chance to create something great and connect it with current issues to make it relateable but in the end of the day it is just another show like Terra Nova with an interesting background story and boring characters doing things we all have seen thousands of times. The show is sure no revolution and people who like the show should enjoy it while it lasts.
Reply
Flag
If what you said were true, I wouldn't be watching this show, much less praise the things they did do well. I almost swore off after the third episode due to the inconsistencies, but hung in there for the 4-episode trial. The fourth episode improved drastically and the fifth was even better (the reviewer got plenty of things wrong). More than the premise, its the intriguing characters and their journey that keep me coming back for more. By the looks of things, I'm not an anomaly here.
Reply
Flag
"By the looks of things, I'm not an anomaly here."

It's enough to say that you're opinion is valid; while still wrong, but whatever...but you keep going back to this chestnut; supporting your opinions with the "popular" one. I'll reply with a chestnut of my own; quality, not quantity. Breaking Bad doesn't have nearly the regular viewership Revolution enjoys. Explain that one without commenting on time slots, marketing/funding, and network.
Reply
Flag
If you look at the front page of the site, with pictures of the Revolution review, and The Vampire Diaries review side by side, we see a picture of Neville looking very apprehensive. It's because to his right is a nasty angry vampire lady craving for murder, and she's getting very, very close.

Reply
Flag
LOL! Look at how glad Nikita is. The angry vampire lady is Nina Dobrev. If she was craving for my blood, then I'd be very happy about it. Cheer up, Neville! There are plenty more boring, horrible ways to die than this.
Reply
Flag
Indeed. Anyway, my joke was also an allusion to the fact TVD is approaching Revolution in number of comments. So let's enjoy our #1 position while we can.
Reply
Flag
You're right. We crossed 600! People should know by now that we aren't blindly defending the show. If that were the case, the first 4 episodes would have had twice the comments they have.
Reply
Flag
Wow, nearly the 600 mark. Can we just all agree to disagree because this is getting tiring. Some people like it and some people don't. Let's just leave it at that.
Reply
Flag
Well, as long as they don't hate/dislike the show due, in no little part, to the misinterpretation of the facts and the distorted truth in the review, I think we can all agree with you.
Reply
Flag
Tim Surrette,

Get over it with your overly sensitive liberal perspective. Soul Train is NOT racist. I see the episode title as a tip of the hat to the dance show. Don't read more into it.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, as Freud stated.
Reply
Flag
I'm really, really confused. Why would Revolution be tipping its hat to Soul Train? I never did watch it, but from what I understand it is a musical variety show. Unless I'm missing something, I don't see any relation to Revolution, and it is a bit (way bit) odd for a show to just randomly tip its hat at something so unrelated (it wasn't even in a witty manner).

And if it so named because the episode was supposed to be about or have "soul," then I definitely missed something else. This didn't seem like a particularly or uniquely spiritual or emotional episode compared to the others. I *guess* we saw into Neville's soul somewhat, but this seems like a stretch for the name.

I'm not sure whether to blame racism (or poor taste) or just shoddy writing, and I'm leaning from experience to the latter. I really haven't heard a good explanation (other than racism/shoddiness) for the naming.
Reply
Flag
What's there to be confused about?! Guys, they were clearly just TRYING to come up with a "clever" title having something to do with trains. Since the episode was about trains, that was the best they could do. WHO CARES!? I have to agree with Mysterv on this one..

"Why is MS Windows called Windows? It's not like they're windows that you can open or see through to the outside!" Wow.. I guess a more meaningful name would have been "Microsoft Modal Dialogs"... I highly doubt anyone would have been lining up to buy THAT..
Reply
Flag
I simply don't understand this title, honestly. I have no idea what the writers had in mind other than trying to make a pun, something so usual these days in title-making.
Reply
Flag
Agreed. Puns = very normal. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be an actual pun, play on words, double entendre, or the like. They may as well have named it "Thomas the Tank Engine" (unless they were making the race connection).
Reply
Flag
I still think it was a reference to the show.

No dancing of course in Revolution BUT the train and the back-story of Neville and his son were major plots in this episode.

It is not a stretch to get to Soul + Train for this episode. I thought the title was clever.
Reply
Flag
How on earth is it a reference to the dance show?? So, if they called it black train, it would be an obvious reference to Metallica's Black album .. obviously!

Personally I don't find it racist though, I agree with you.

I just find it stupid.
Reply
Flag
No, but if they called it "The black album", it would probably be a reference to Metallica's album.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soul_train
Reply
Flag
You missed my point .. let me make it less subtle. The episode was called soul train because there was a train aaaand .... the protagonists were 2 people of colour. Stupid title? Sure! Reference to dance show? None whatsoever (except for the coincidence in the name)
Reply
Flag
It sounds much more likely to me that they liked the name because of the show.
Flag
I hate to increase my count of posts (yes, dscape, I admit I've been exaggerating it a bit), but I had to say this:

According to Tim Surette, racism is a big NO NO.

But sexism is OK:

"Next week: Charlie is forced into PROSTITUTION! Woowoo! Finally, a good use for her!"
Reply
Flag
How's that statement sexist? It's not like he's insulting the whole female gender .. it's just a crude way of pointing out that Charlie is utterly useless.

I think people are overly quick and generalising in using words like racism or sexism.

Or maybe I'm not sensitive enough ...
Reply
Flag
How is it 'not' sexist? Haven't you read anything by him before? Tim always makes sexist jokes on the female gender the first chance he gets. Also, look below for how useless Charlie can get.
Reply
Flag
@zampognaro - That's easy to answer. First what I think is offensive doesn't really matter, since I was just comparing Tim's reaction to two things that could be considered discrimination. First he complained the title was racist and seemed shocked. Then he made a joke about a woman prostituting herself.

As for me, I think if any man is going to prostitute himself that has to be Danny. Come on, have you seen that hair? Especially considering the situation he's in right now and he asks for a hot tub... Ha, ha.

Seriously, it's not unusual for people to use double standards as to determine the thin line between what is offensive and what is funny. To me, personally, racism isn't funny, neither is forced female prostitution. For some reason, I don't feel as strongly about jokes about male prostitution. Maybe that's sexist of me to think women deserve special consideration, but I guess I think they do.

Does that satisfy your curiosity?
Flag
'd say (and did think) - SPOILER ALERT! LOL. But seriously though, I've been reading his posts for more than a year and I do like him. He mostly goes for the cheap laughs. You can see his "Call me, Daddy" X-Factor post if you like his brand of humor.
Flag
"He ALWAYS makes sexist jokes" .. that just made me lol. I'm picturing him waking up in the morning making sexist remarks now :-D How can you make a statement like that .. you don't even know the guy!

Let me ask you and mad-pac a question though ... if he said that Miles was going to prostitute himself in the next episode, would you two have gone all crazy about it or just laughed?
Flag
Maybe it's a matter of sensitiveness after all. So aren't you saying that forced prostitution is OK as long as the woman is useless?

Or let me put it this way. Say, Neville was considered useless. Then, someone said, "Next episode, Neville is forced into slavery. Finally some good use for him." Would that be considered acceptable or outrageous?
Reply
Flag
OK, if you say so...
Flag
No .. if you look at what I wrote carefully, you will see that is not what I'm saying. Well done on trying to put words into my mouth though ... kudos.
Flag
Seriously, does he think they are funny! As much as I like Tim's reviews and writing, his sexist jokes are plain unfunny and sometimes gross.
Reply
Flag
I could do without the jokes because they're completely unnecessary.
Reply
Flag
You sure do have an answer for anything. Well then, why not have the box and arrow fixed prior to? Why spend precious seconds smiling stupidly at your brother, who was in turn, stupid enough to almost give away his rescuer's. And if you say it's 'cause they hadn't seen each other in a while, slap your self.
Flag
When she broke the lock and rushed into the compartment, Neville was already running towards her. So, not enough time to take out her bow and fix an arrow.
Flag
I like how you talk about Miles in a fight with 12 guys as if it exists completely without question. The implausibility of that whole scene astounds me. But like you've said, it took you a few episodes to get into, so I'll let that one go. I only take issue with Charlie (regarding the latest episode) when trying to save her brother, she didn't pull the crossbow. I don't care how ramped up you are, you play your ace card. It's standard operating procedure.
Flag
@Kromdale: Of course it isn't. Her highly accurate shooting skill didn't help them in escaping Jeremy and the rest of the militia soldiers. Nor did the time when she feigned ignorance, rose up and killed a militia guy and got the sniper rifle. Oooh what about the time when she saved Miles' ass in that fight with the 12 guys! Of course, she was unnecessary. She should be only good for one thing. Tell me, am I right or am I Riiiiight!
Flag
Well he could counter that Charlie is unnecessary. Its definitely not her outdoor "skills".
Flag
Dear mad-pac and the rest of the fanboy crowd



There will always be people that dislike things that you like.

Get over it. Please stop ranting 24 hours a day about people not being exactly as you desire them to be. You're beginning to get a bit irritating considering you are replying to every message 24 hours a day.



Thank you.
Reply
Flag
I think your patronizing plea has been replied in kind.
Reply
Flag
People have different tastes? Really? No s**t, Sherlock!

Why do you click on this post over and over again if you don't want to see fans talking then? Most fans replied taking actual facts into account and didn't rant based on false allegations and lies like the idiotic haters. It didn't even involve subjectivity as much as facts that many, including Tim, got wrong and then reviewed the episode based on that. When people hate blindly and reply over and over again, its irritating for us as well and also showcases their ineptness which is why we reply. Get over it.

Thank you for hopefully understanding.
Reply
Flag
In his defense, the "false allegations" you keep bringing up are never actually disproven. They remain unchanged, but validated in your eyes 'cause you believe your opinion is more correct. This has no bearing on fact or fiction. The next thing you do is call them out, saying they're hating blindly. That's a logical next step, but it's based on a fallacy -- a wet-sand foundation. It's frustrating to see logic deterred, but I don't hate you for it...there's always next episode!
Reply
Flag
Wait, I did prove that. Go and read my initial comment that explained everything that was wrong with the review and also the positive stuff. Its based on things the show is actually doing rather than blind, illogical, subjective mess. The real frustrating part and fallacy is that I still keep replying to an inciter.
Reply
Flag
No. You PROVED nothing. Just because you said it, and you believe in it, doesn't validate a single thing. You propose ideas and possibilities for situations. You think for the characters as if after 5 episodes, you have some ethereal insight. I wonder why it is you don't see how your "proof" could possibly be any less illogical/subjective/blind. Yes, I've read them all, and no, I'm not as stupid as you would like me to be.
Flag
Well, since you mentioned me by name, I had to reply.

1) Calling people who simply like the show a fanboy is offensive and patronizing. I don't know you, you don't know me and I never resort to name-calling. I'd ask you to refrain from doing that on further occasions, as I believe it's wrong to underestimate other people's intelligence.

2) I'm perfectly aware people think differently and fine with it, so much so I'm keeping on my part at least things civil. I'm not here to fight with anyone and I believe I am successful at that.

3) If you read any of my posts you'll never see me ranting or being irrational. I don't know where you got that. If it's a problem you have, it's your issue, not mine.

4) I believe this is a democratic forum and we're all free to post messages when we feel like. Who elected you the moderator?
Reply
Flag
Quick question. How is calling someone a "fanboy" offensive? Seems a little over-sensitive to me.
Reply
Flag
Quick reply: "A fanboy is a male who is highly devoted and biased in opinion towards a single subject or hobby within a given field. The term itself is often used in a derogatory manner by less serious fans of the same material." Since most of us fans aren't biased or fanatic to the point of lunacy and do point out the real flaws, it is indeed an offensive term.
Reply
Flag
Why do people say fanboy is not offensive when they are clearly trying to offend? What kind of evil mind game is that?

OK, fanboy is not offensive, but before you even do it, please don't call me that, OK. Call me awesome or insightful, which are also non-offensive.
Flag
I actually do believe you're biased and fanatic. You should see how your arguments come across from our side. And in the end, fanboy is just absolutely and completely not offensive in any way, shape, or form. If you find it offensive, you're too soft.
Flag
Hmmm. Something to ponder then. It's just that English is not my first language, so on occasion I may not catch the usual connotation of the word. I checked the meaning before I wrote that and it seemed to me he was calling me something akin to overly, idiotic obsessive, which i didn't find exactly complimentary, evidently.
Reply
Flag
You don't simply 'like the show' though. You are condescending to people who have criticisms towards it, you are rude, brash and frankly quite annoying. You and several posters have been posting nonstop in defense of this show. You're the exact definion of a blind fanboy - and you're damn right it's offensive and patronizing. Time to take a look in the mirror.
Reply
Flag
I disagree with you on all counts. In fact, mad-pac has kept a cool head and been highly rational and sensitive, even when the hate was purely blind and intended to anger the people who like the show. You sound like the exact definition of a hater.
Reply
Flag
So I post nonstop, yet, people like you keep calling me back... It's very concerning when people start hating a show and end hating and judging the people who like it (no matter how strongly they like it). If somebody has a passion you should leave things at that, and that should not affect you. Do you always get so flustered with other people's passions? To what point?

What you did shows exactly what I don't do. I never singled out a specific person and attacked like you did to me. I never called anyone names. I think we can occasionally criticize the behavior, but never the person because we don't know one another.

I come to this board because it's fun. For your own sake, relax and try to have some.
Reply
Flag
Farscape Season 1 Episode 14 - Jeremiah Crichton, where advanced technology stifled power, and the citizens thought Rygel was their prophesied savior -- I'm predicting those amulets are stifling power like the one in that Farscape episode. I don't remember hearing if the rest of the world lost power too. Have they mentioned this?
Reply
Flag
Yes, all the world. They show a globe in the pilot, and the lights go out everywhere.
Reply
Flag
Thanks mad-pac!
Reply
Flag
You're welcome.
Reply
Flag
I can agree with some of the writing above, especially the last sentence. Think the show has some good stuff in it but it seems , from the next promo, that it might go downhill. To bad.

As for Charlie: if you have lost almost everyone you care for you might be desperate to keep those you have left, close to you. And that she gets into trouble all the time: if you guess she has lived most of her life in that small community, she might be a bit naive about the outside life and people. Just a thought.
Reply
Flag
Ever since the pilot I've thought it completely ridiculous how the adults haven't seemed to age in the 15 years since the blackout. Wouldn't it have been easier and a lot more believable to set the show 5 years after the black out and have Charlie be 12 or 13 in the flashbacks?
Reply
Flag
Some things would be more believable then, like clothes, glasses, age. But then would it be believable that the Monroe Republic was such a powerful force only 5 years after the Fall? Would North America have changed so much that now there would even be maps with the new countries? Obviously the writers felt a longer period of time was necessary to establish the new country with its new political rules and all.
Reply
Flag
Tim wrong...noooo
Reply
Flag
For that reason -- Miles NOT disabling the train -- this show is close to jumping the shark for me.
Reply
Flag
Okay . . . am I the only one here who wonders why Miles didn't simply DISABLE/STOP THE TRAIN when he saw Charlie get tossed off?
Reply
Flag
Yes, you are. If he had done that, the militia soldiers would have leapt off the train and arrested all of them.
Reply
Flag
I must respectfully disagree. He could have disabled the train, and immediately jumped off. He and Charlie would have been long gone before the militia figured it out. The train would have coasted to a stop, and would stand idle while it's fixed. This would have at least slowed down the militia's effort to bring Danny to Philadelphia, and would have given Miles & Charlie another opportunity to rescure Danny.
Reply
Flag
I must also respectfully disagree since that could never happen. How would he disable the train? If it was that easy, then everytime the train took a turn or slowed down, then the probability of the links coming off would be very high. Old movies just do that for more effect.
Reply
Flag
@Daddog--There could have been a storyline in which everything worked out with Miles knocking out the engineer, disabled the engine, disconnected the train and jumped away before it all blew up...I think the timing is problematic, but I'm sure they could have written it that way and fixed some of the issues or had a story next week with Miles and Co running back to Noblesville avoiding the chasing militia or had them regroup and continue to track Danny and the militia all the way to Philadelphia, but wouldn't that have been a continuation of the plot that we've already seen and wouldn't feel tedious? Both stopping the bomb and separating the train solve the primary goal of saving Danny's life...so both are valid options. That is our only point. It wasn't a ridiculous action, Miles' plan makes just as much sense as your plan does (maybe more in some cases). And this way, several of our cast groups get together, Danny and Rachel get stories together in Philadelphia, and the chasing groups gets something new to do. Instead of resetting the get Danny back story, they've added a new wrinkle. In my mind, that is a better storytelling option.
Flag
The train is being pulled by a STEAM locomotive. A small amount of explosive placed into the firebox would cause a rupture in the boiler which is the long cylindical part of the locomotive. Inside the boiler is water and high pressure steam. Lets assume there's no bomb threat and he goes ahead and smashes the vents. A small puncture and it would blow up like a balloon pierced by a pin. Similar to a steam pipe bursting under the city streets. Once the boiler explodes, its very likely that the locomotive would derail causing all the cars behind it to pile up in one massive wreck. Google steam pipe explosion or boiler explosion and watch the youtube video to see just how powerful a little bit of steam under pressure can be.
Flag
No, because they (the militia) wouldn't even know that there was a problem. Thanks to Miles, the engineer's dead (or out cold). The train would be venting steam, but would only lose power gradually. By the time the militia figured it out, or the engineer recovered, Miles and Charlie would be miles (NPI) behing them. The train would then be dead-in-the-water while the broken steam vent was repaired.
Flag
Again, I tell you that if he had done that the militia soldiers would be on their backs in no time.
Flag
It's a steam train. All the controls, gauges, etc. are there in front of Miles. Quickly bash open the steam vent, and jump. Only takes a second's thought, and another second's action. Train loses power, and is unable to proceed until the vent is repaired.
Flag
Because from the beginning of the episode he had said that they didn't have a chance going up against all of the militia on the train. If he'd stopped it, he would have had to fight them, by getting off with Charlie the militia could only watch them as the militia rode away.
Reply
Flag
In the scene where Tom is punching his neighbor.....isn't that an electric lamp on the table?....I mean WOAH! Did they not notice that sorcery!
Reply
Flag
Yeah, it's a gas lamp, but I don't think your reaction to siddharth7 is reasonable. Simply questioning something that doesn't appear consistent is neither an attempt to discredit the show (mad-pac), nor an intolerance for other peoples' happiness (GirishStewart). Take the comment at face value and not as another malicious attack from your opposition.
Reply
Flag
I wasn't necessarily talking about siddharth7, as much as others with a much more vocal illogical hatred when I said that. I was replying to a broader observation. You do understand that, right!
Reply
Flag
The usage of the term 'sorcery' and the general feeling one gets from his statement, that points to one apparent flaw in his view and none of the positives, does indeed come off as an attempt to discredit the show. It may not be the true intention, but it seems that way. I didn't know there were lines drawn and opponents here. Its just a show. Let go, stanking.
Reply
Flag
With respect, your many, many rebuttals discredit you denying lines have been drawn, and your "It's just a show. Let go" is a bit hypocritical. My point is that if "it may not be the true intention", but it comes across to you as if "it seems that way", then you may have become hyperdefensive regarding this show.
Reply
Flag
Never knew gas lamps were considered sorcery now.
Reply
Flag
Yep, it's a gas lamp. I used to have one of those. Why do people say the silliest things to try and discredit the show?
Reply
Flag
I used to have it as well. Some people have nothing better to do other than spout nonsense and lies because they can't tolerate other peoples happiness and can't believe that the show is actually getting really good.
Reply
Flag
riot (And everyone else), THERE WERE BICYCLES IN EP.5!

Granted, they were shown briefly outside a shop, but still.

And I guess TV.com can only congratulate Tim for making such a controversial review, look how many comments there are!
Reply
Flag
He might just be the next Nikki Finke if he keeps up this many inconsistencies and turns a blind eye to the facts in his reviews.
Reply
Flag
500 comments! I guess we fans should also thank the haters for this mark. Now let's see how far it'll still go!
Reply
Flag
Besides, to be honest here, I'd rather read 10 really good, _meaningful_ comments than 500 ambiguous ones regarding an episode TITLE.
Reply
Flag
Comments explicitly addressing the current comment count are kinda trollish. No offense.
Reply
Flag
Damn straight, you should. Everybody hugging each other and pressing each other's like buttons doesn't make for interesting, heated discussion. Which would also drop these reviews into obscurity. But as you can plainly see, this review remains on the front page. I'm only kind of upset about this...
Reply
Flag
Episode 5, I wasn't even going to watch it but just did. I liked it and felt like I was going to like next week episode too, but instead of moving forward it went back to square one, maybe negative a square? since Neville now knows they were that close to getting Danny.

Maybe it was the amount of GianCarlo Eposito in the episode, or the fact that Miles pointed out Charlie being over emotional and her trying not to be by the end of the episode.

The train also gave hope, although still no bicycles even when we see the large crowd at the end when it's "revealed" that Nate is actually Jason.

Also bravo to getting these child actors to look so much like their older selves.

I found myself nitpicking a lot less for the first time, though getting glasses this week made me wonder how Aaroon mamanged to keep u with a pair of glasses for 15yrs and not need a new prescription.

The one thing I really wish could happen, is they slowly(actually really quickly) start spending more and more time in the flashbacks of each episode.

Reply
Flag
Good call on the issue of the glasses. That would be a hell for me. Also, ever since episode 1 all they've been doing is walk in and out of Chicago. That's more than any fat computer geek like Aaron would do in a lifetime. I guess he'll lose weight and get in shape by the end of the season.
Reply
Flag
It is plausible it hasn't worsened for Aaron. My eyesight has stabilized and is at the same level for the past 5 years. I'm just surprised he has maintained the same glasses for 15 years (if they're the same ones)
Reply
Flag
Probably he needs new glasses by now, but he had to stick to his old model for lack of option. At least with me, I always need to recheck my eyesight with a doctor every four or five years at least because it changes.

A bit of an unlikely situation, though, that his glasses would remain in one piece after all this time. Mine always need fixing and entire replacing after a few years.

But losing oneself in this kind of detail is annoying and useless. I don't watch a show for tips on how to preserve glasses.
Reply
Flag
Well, my friend, wait until you're 49... Maybe you'll be luckier.
Flag
LOL. Pretty sure I didn't hear any crackling. I'm 23. My eyesight has remained constant since I was 18.
Flag
Just a little non-judgmental curiosity concerning glasses. How old are you? Because I'm close Aaron's age (better yet, Zak Orth's) and there's no way my eye sight is the same it was when I was 30. And from now on I feel it's only gonna get worse. Oh, do you hear my joints crakling too?
Flag
I go to the doc to check my eyesight every year and it has stayed the same. Yeah, the glasses are a minor issue anyway and its annoying to harp on them.
Flag
Stop being a moron, Child. I know you get pissed when you're wrong.
Reply
Flag
How direct of you. I didn't mean to get in the way of you and your Revolution masturbation. Should I leave the door open? You seem to enjoy the audience.
Flag
Please don't give the writers so much credit to consider the glasses. I know you want to, it might get you excited in your guy parts, but resist.
Reply
Flag
Agreed. The child actors resemble the adult counterparts so well. The show deserves an applause for that. Jason being Tom's son was no 'reveal' though because there were plenty of clues in the last few episodes and they trusted us to know by now. There were also many bicycles in Noblesville.
Reply
Flag
I want more flashbacks on how the Monroe Militia was built! Acutally, the whole show should be about that! Some characters with balls and Miles before he got a conscience.



The train is pretty stupid. I don't know how it is in the US, but here we have hundreds of steam trains sitting in one museum or the other, many are still in use as tourist attractions.



And what about Charlie? Aren't there any actresses left in Hollywood? Did they have to pick up some waitress who never acted before? Also, anyone think she looks closer to 30 than 20?
Reply
Flag
By showing the station, they implied that there were plenty of steam trains to Pennsylvania and Noblesville just got a new one for Neville. Charlie (Tracy) plays 23-25 on the show, looks real, beautiful and expressive. Atleast she doesn't have a doll face like the rest.
Reply
Flag
Well, she IS 30, despite trying to hide her age (her Winnipeg secondary schools accidentally disclosed that).
Reply
Flag
Well, the web is full of unsubstantiated claims. I guess this was just another one of them. I shouldn't be surprised.
Reply
Flag
Really? Where did you find that information? Just curious.
Reply
Flag
If you look for Tracy Spiridakos on IMDB you'll see that she has 20 credit entries, so she's not exactly a waitress who never acted before. Get your facts straight before you say something silly. I think she has an interesting, expressive face.
Reply
Flag
She's done some work before, but really not much. She IS inexperienced. Michael Mosley (the militia guy who beat Danny - he was in Pan-Am too) had like 5 lines but was still able to convey a larger set of emotions. I mention him because I saw him in Last Resort too.
Reply
Flag
Well, so you promoted her from "waitress who has never acted before" to "inexperienced professional actress who has done some acting work before." Admit it, she's growing on you!

As for her range, just observe the scene when she meets Neville, puts on a happy face to greet him, then, after he leaves, almost pukes with disgust knowing she shook the hand of the man that is making her family so miserable. And then observe the scene in which Miles tells her she screwed up because they lost the element of surprise. A variety of emotions in such a short period of time.

She has shown all the emotions required by the character: sadness when Maggie passed, anger when facing the militia, joy when meeting her brother, etc.
Reply
Flag
Ok, so the train has me excited. Yeah this show is still a little slow getting off the ground, but it seems to be getter not worse so I might stick around for a while. Especially if they start bringing in a bit of steam-punk! Screw electricity, I want them to rebuild society that way for a while. See how that turns out!
Reply
Flag
Oh I totally love Monroetion! Eric Monroe and JJ Monroe really did the job on this one.

Remember when Monroe knifefighted Monroe? And the bareknuckle fights Monroe held for his crew? What a douche this Monroe is! And I do have to appreciate the casting choices on the younger Monroes. They really look like the older ones. Young Monroe was great but Monroe's son was clearly the militia dude with the bow on his back following the other Monroes. Did they film these scenes 15 years ago?
Reply
Flag
Wow Tim Surette,

Do you even know how to enjoy a show?

You think you are criticising a show makes you a smart one who keep digging for the faults you can find ,,, you are wrong dude. Come on, you are doing the same stuff since the show started.



OMG why do I even care of reading your review. Don't this website have a better reviewer than Tim Surette . I mean if I was a detective like this guy, it would be easy.
Reply
Flag
Maybe he isn't digging for faults, maybe he sees them clearly without nitpicking. Should he still ignore them?

You're offended when he points out the flaws. I would be offended if he would ignore them and it would feel like he's kissing the show's ass. So why should it be your way and not my way?..
Reply
Flag
That would have been a fine argument, if not for the fact that so many of his supposed flaws in the show weren't even flaws in the first place. He is plain lying. Also every reviewer knows they have to talk about the main plot and he never even touched upon the big reveal of 12 pendants, but thought Jason being Tom's son was a 'reveal' when it clearly wasn't! He's kissing the haters ass by the looks of things.
Reply
Flag
This isn't his first review. If you've read the other reviews, and I am assuming you have, and you don't like his reviews, then why do you keep reading his reviews?
Reply
Flag
I thought we were talking about technical facts and not our 'feelings'. Anyway, I like most of his reviews and hate to see him miss stuff and lie so blatantly, if that makes you feel any better.
Flag
I think I got a head ache after "reading" your comment.
Reply
Flag
Sooo...Miles wraps a thick piece of leather that's conveniently lying there around his arm, reaches into the fire and grabs the bomb log? Really?



And for those people who saw young Jason and immediately knew it was Nate, you're WAY better than me. Even up to the moment where he and Neville were face to face and he threw Charlie off the train I didn't see it. Primarily because young Jason was obviously a mixed race kid and Nate is clearly Hispanic...why on earth would I assume these two are the same person?
Reply
Flag
And how can you say somebody is "clearly" Hispanic just by looking at them? Look at this definition of Hispanic from thefreedictionary.com

1. Of or relating to Spain or Spanish-speaking Latin America.

2. Of or relating to a Spanish-speaking people or culture.

For your information, there are people of all ethnic backgrounds from Spanish-speaking Latin America. For all I know, even Charlie could be Hispanic. Do you know actress Julie Gonzalo (a gorgeous blonde)? She was born in Argentina.

Reply
Flag
Also, for example, Louis CK is part Mexican. But he doesn't even remotely look Mexican.
Reply
Flag
Again... How does someone look Mexican? I mean, what is a Mexican supposed to look like? Or let me put this way, what is an American supposed to look like? Mexican, American are just nationalities. Would you believe Victoria Secrets model Gisele Bundchen is Brazilian? Well, she is. Does she look "Brazilian"?
Reply
Flag
I think you should visit different regions of Mexico instead of Las Vegas or San Diego. A country like Mexico has people of different ethnic backgrounds. The predominant is of Amerindians, and that's what you're actually referring to, the Amerindian look. It's the predominant ethnic background in Mexico and a few other Latin American countries, but by no means the only one. Mexicans also descend from Spaniards, Africans and other European countries. It so happens that Amerindian descendents (not just "Mexicans") in great part occupy the less favored social classes, and it's those who immigrate, legally or illegally, to the USA.

I've lived in Mexico, I studied in a rather expensive private school for the time I was there and met people of different ethnic backgrounds. All Mexicans.
Flag
Example: A white ginger does, in no way, look like a Mexican. Trust me and Bicells when we say, Mexicans do look a certain way. You can fudge the lines with Brazilians, Spaniards, Italians, Dominicans, Puerto Ricans, and Nicaraguans all you want, but there is a distinction. Try living in San Diego for a while, or even Las Vegas. For whatever reason, a Mexican is easy to spot.
Flag
Side note: Wasn't Giancarlo Esposito supposed to be Chilean or Argentinian on Breaking Bad?
Reply
Flag
Chilean. He could be. These countries have great ethnic diversity, so not everybody would look like him.
Reply
Flag
I had exactly the same impression about Esposito's Spanish pronunciation in Breaking Bad. He evidently speaks the language, but his speech was carefully rehearsed. I'm not a native speaker of Spanish but I know enough of the language to tell that. And just for the record, I've seen actors doing much worse when playing native speakers.

As for his looks, many Chileans have a European background, so anyone can play one basically. Of course if you cast a dark-skinned actor, that better matches what American audiences expect a South American to look like.
Flag
Thanks. I couldn't remember which one. I wasn't bugged by him "not looking hispanic." His overly precise diction while speaking Spanish confused me for a bit because I thought he wasn't supposed to be playing a native speaker, but once they made it clear, I jumped on board. But I"m not as hard to please for realism as some people around here. Although in my cynicism I do think they probably didn't complain about it then as they are now with Jason. :)
Flag
I didn't even read Tim's review. Sorry I can't trust you. :-(

Reply
Flag
@Tim: How about you change a small 'detail' in your review? Charlie wasn't getting strangled by Monroe. And the knife-fight Miles was in? Same thing. You're talking about Neville. The moment I saw Neville's son in the flashback, I knew it was 'Nate'. I can't believe how this show tries to sell these 'revelations'. And I agree with the rest of your review. They should really do something about the fact that the flashbacks are more interesting than the main story.
Reply
Flag
Many people deduced who Jason was by the third or fourth episode since there were clues in all the episodes. There are even more faults in his review and all of them have to do with facts and details he didn't pay attention to. This review is basically a con job.
Reply
Flag
GameofFringe, I am very passionate about Revolution. I want this to be a good show. You are only here to do your job. Be honest :-(

Reply
Flag
Wow, I didn't know pointing out all the flawed thinking and attention disorder of the haters and nitpickers constituted as us fans doing a 'job'.
Reply
Flag
Lol! Do tell me what I said that wasn't true. Revolution is killing it in the ratings and doesn't need any fake press to boost it. I'll be honest, no its not my 'job'. You sound like you have no conviction of your own to truly support something you like with all you can.
Reply
Flag
Never get into a logical argument with TWD fanboys. Lets agree to disagree. I know a bad show from a good one when I see it.
Flag
I can't argue that. I've definitely said a word or two on the TWD boards. The only parallel I was drawing was the passion from each show. On the one hand, we have a show that's only run 5 episodes, and for whatever reason, has a staunch support group despite any follow-through to demand it (not yet, anyway.) On the other, we have a show starting its third season, and a comic series that already cemented its fan base pre-pilot. The many flaws I pointed out on those boards were always met with intense contradiction, which I expected. But they were incredibly stupid nonetheless.

Anyway, yes, the issues you bring up are valid. TWD suffers from poor character choices. And maybe now you can understand my view on story-telling; that is, when a story is written for the story's sake, characters do stupid things. This isn't the case when the character writes the story. Disagree all you want, Revolution has this issue in spades.
Flag
@Child: Since you haven't read my comment on TWD, I can see how you came to that conclusion. I see the faults in every show I watch and when the same reviewer overlooks them in one show and not the other, that reeks of hypocrisy.

The radical killing didn't bother me. The team going in that awful formation inside the prison; Hershel walking directly into the zombie without checking or going around where there was plenty of space; the group not knowing how to kill those slow-moving armored zombies until Maggie showed them and it seemed like a huge revelation to them, were all huge missteps. Also, why not objectify and talk about Beth having makeup on while none of the others did. How about Lori's laughable pregnant stomach. They make enough money to apply good prosthetic on that bump. I'm sure there were others I forgot (Haven't had the time to watch the second episode yet).

Point being, there is far more stupidity involved in many shows and just harping on Revolution's mostly imaginary flaws (in this episode alone) isn't right. I understand tv does things for dramatic effect and I can move on as long as the shows are good and entertaining, which Revolution certainly is.
More +
Flag
@Girish -- regarding The Walking Dead; "but you have to accept there were some scenes with terrible stupidity on display there."

I hope you're being sarcastic, 'cause this reads as blatant hypocrisy. You're a cookie-cutter fan boy, and it's only been a few episodes to TWD's season +. I agree that it's stupid to run at zombies when all you have to do is spend a night stabbing through a chain-link fence. Seriously? Why open anything you can poke a bitch through? Just keep stabbing!

As far as Mac is concerned, I haven't been on TWD's comment boards. I should, cause the show is also littered with silliness. Maybe I should take a gander?
Flag
I understand that. GOT is trickier than TWD since the spoilers from the books directly affect the show, unlike TWD. I give grief on TWD reviews. Most are a bunch of fanboys/girls who excuse all the faults. I loved the premiere, but you have to accept there were some scenes with terrible stupidity on display there.
Flag
@DinChild - True, as McCoy would say to Spock, not everything has to be logical, damn it!

@GirishStewart - I often don't comment on the shows I like either because I don't have the time for the shows I like, much less the ones I don't. But I comment here because I like controversy. It's very boring to post on the Walking Dead board to read 300 times that the episode was great, but in the comics, they... or the Game Of Thrones board where they say the episode was fantastic, but in the book they say that...
Flag
There isn't much logic you do understand *ZING!*
Flag
@Mad-pac: I don't even leave comments on the shows I like sometimes. LOL. I don't understand the haters logic as well.
Flag
I didn't know we simple folk who leave comments had "jobs" to fulfill here. LOL. Why I don't understand is why haters leave so many comments. Don't they have anything better to do? I don't comment on shows I hate, as I don't watch them.
Flag
Now I know you're lying, Dan. Good day. Have fun.
Flag
To suble. You can hardly make out if it are horses or cows. Why all the restraints? That's why the characters and us, viewers just go thru the motions. Spice this show up, and not the easy way like adding 'Nora'.
Reply
Flag
That doesn't really matter since they could use both. Traditionally, its always been cows and bulls which were used for pulling carts and plying the fields. So, its not a stretch to use your own imagination, rather than wanting them to bombard every little thing in your face.

Your obsession with Nora on so many comments brings an old story to mind: Two priests crossed a river and one helped a young woman by carrying her over to the other side of the bank. The second priest was agitated throughout the rest of the journey and after a few miles blurted out his disgust at the other priest for touching and carrying the young woman across the river. The first priest kindly replied: "I only carried her over a stretch of the river and parted ways, while you've been carrying her in your mind all this time since that moment." I assume you can infer the moral of the story.
Reply
Flag
Hate to admit but have to agree with the reviewer completely on this one. Charlie's whinny teen followed all of a sudden by "get tough" just didn't fly as real at all. She knows how dangerous the Militia is, yet chooses to tail him anyway? Bad writing! Worse, they've got me cheering for the bad guys! The whole playing with the pendant was beyond a lame set-up. Better he would have seen it in passing or something. Worse, HE'S MILITIA and you're playing with a key component right in front of him? Really!? I'm going to keep watching because I'm curious to know what happened but unless they start writing smarter characters the season finally will be the series finally.
Reply
Flag
We can argue about Revolution's quality for 500 more comments, but that one scene where Aaron plays with the pendant in front of Nate is so bad that it would be justifiable to turn off the TV at that moment and never watch Revolution again.
Reply
Flag
I've been so intrigued by the concept and expected so much from a JJ Abrams production. But I'm giving up.,, until they get rid of Charlie and Danny. The characters are poorly written, and the acting just makes it worse. This could have been a great series, but it's laying a big egg so far and is not worth anybody's time.
Reply
Flag
It is really sad to see all this potential and talent go to waste. Those big name producers probably sat around a table, pointing at each other : he'll do it. And nothing get's done. No fresh ideas, no decent supervising, just amateur hour on every level. All the ingredients are here, the cooks have lost the recipe.
Reply
Flag
1 name: Gus Fring.
Reply
Flag
I'm seriously thinking that Tim was late to the meeting where they were deciding who was going to be reviewing this show.
Reply
Flag
443 comments. I have the feeling it's going to get at least to 500!
Reply
Flag
Almost there! I didn't expect it to touch anywhere near this number going by all the previous episode comments.
Reply
Flag
It might match up to the number of comments of the latest TVD recap!
Reply
Flag
With the difference, I suppose that TVD doesn't attract so many haters, I think. Not that it's not a show one could hate, but I'm assuming people who don't like it (such as me) have the good sense of not watching it.
Reply
Flag
I agree. I like TVD and hated the premiere episode. Price has become a big fanboy to see the flaws, but I did mention all that was wrong in that in one comment and left. No need to keep on inciting everyone else who liked it. At the very least, I didn't make false allegations unlike most of the haters and the review here.
Reply
Flag
Yeah, if it depended on Price TVD and Teen Wolf would get a bunch of Emmys.
Flag
Did anybody see the car moving at the train station?
Reply
Flag
Yes, and my immedate thought was : that symbolises what's wrong with this show. Who in his right mind would use such an elaborate set up instead of just hopping on a [carrier]-bike? I want to much realism? OK, I certainly don't mind the possible 'dinotopian' alternative. But they don't do that either! If you want to have bovine pulled cars, then don't be afraid to clearly show it and use them to their fullest potential. Make Jeff Fahey's caracter the driver or something. Revolution never goes all the way. Don't tell me the series is still developing and they'll do that later. It will be to late... :-(
Reply
Flag
They wouldn't need to use bovine-pulled cars in full effect when the main characters quest doesn't hinge on that. If the people in that car wanted to ride a bicycle, they would have bought them. That scene subtly showed the way the world had changed where bullock carts, cycles and bovine-cars all co-existed alongside each other.
Reply
Flag
It was being pulled by cows/bulls, not horses. I thought that was hilarious in a good way.
Reply
Flag
It was being pulled by horses.
Reply
Flag
I can't believe this show gets to stay and FlashForward which was a fantastic premise and story got the boot :(
Reply
Flag
FlashForward ran on a different network, in a different year! Besides, it did get a full season order, but failed to be renewed to a second one. Revolution, on the other hand, also got a season-long order. It might just as well be cancelled just like FlashForward and not get a second season. Or it might get one. We don't know yet. What happened to one has absolutely no connection with what happens to the other. Apples and oranges, man! Apples and oranges.
Reply
Flag
Yes but the viewing public had access to both yet this show is pulling in the ratings that FF didn't. Does that just speak to marketing or the level of intelligence of those that consume the content? FF was a much more intelligent show imho.
Reply
Flag
FF was a mess. I still remember there were only 5 really good episodes on the show (premiere, finale and three episodes in the middle). The rest were contrived and boring. I didn't care for any of the characters either.
Reply
Flag
They are different shows, but I agree with you FlashForward deserved a second season. I was enjoying it.
Reply
Flag
Flashforward had a good premise, but ended up being terrible. Revolution is bad, but has something FF didn't - Katniss appeal.
Reply
Flag
You are confusing malarkey with cleverness there. FF started out really great, but then descended into garbage. One thing it wasn't was intelligent, nor did it have, among its abundance of characters, anyone you cared for over its entire run (even the lead was horrid. Mark Benford was no Jack Shephard). The overarching plotline never congealed satisfyingly. It reeked of a series that was being made up as it went along, with plot twists coming further and further from the left field. Revolution has made its characters do stupid things sometimes in the previous episodes, but its gradually improving every episode with flashes of greatness and a clear storyline, unlike FF where the stupidity increased exponentially and even when they knew the show wasn't going to last, they ended with a cliffhanger with the same regurgitated premise. I say good riddance.
Reply
Flag
Oh, and not to mention that the reviewer Tim Surette spends an entire paragraph blasting the title of the episode. Come on! If you're going to levy criticism, then do it to something more substantial. It seems like you're just criticizing the nitty gritty (including the flashback sequences with regards to how they still look the same age. It's make believe. If I'm being led to believe that all the power on the world has gone out and descended into a state of anarchy, I can believe the flashbacks)
Reply
Flag
I agree with the OP and all those who replied here. I sometimes wonder if Tim isn't real and is just some tv.com bot that writes for suits at the top.

Don't get me wrong, he's a very _talented_ writer, but his articles seem to be super hit-or-miss in the "biased" department. I think he should reply to someone here and prove that he's real haha.
Reply
Flag
If you're weren't going to mention it, your post would have been much shorter. And I don't think "nitty gritty" means what you meant.
Reply
Flag
Also, don't forget blatantly feeding false information in his reviews. He goofs up with the facts and criticizes them.
Reply
Flag
Totally agree! I mean it's just an episode title!
Reply
Flag
Yeah, I was reading a comment thread a few scrolls up from this one about the title. People are attempting to have some pseudo-existential discussion about whether or not "Soul Train" is in reference to some dance or whatever. Really? I mean, I thought it was painfully obvious that it was a mere attempt at coming up with a witty title alluding to trains*.

I don't know about _you_ guys, but I'm pretty sure the episode _title_ is among the absolute LEAST important attributes of a television show's episode... I could be wrong though.
Reply
Flag
I was just wondering, how would they age or de-age people convincingly in a network TV budget exactly? If the actor is a child, they cast an older actor. But if the guy is 45, how would Tim expect the production crew to make him look 30, and not look like a joke? What did Tim even expect?
Reply
Flag
I don't know what's with the hate with Revolution. I think it's a pretty good show. It's certainly better than Terra Nova was but the story isn't as developed as Falling Skies. I think it's more than just passable television. It has a good story premise and a good mix of dialogue and action. I think the characters need to be fleshed out more and while I think that Charlie was poorly cast, I think the other actors are doing a good job with their characters. I'm sure as the episodes roll out, we'll start getting a better feel for the direction of the show.
Reply
Flag
Couldn't agree more!
Reply
Flag
"Charlie getting strangled by Monroe! Miles knife-fighting with Monroe! "



Tim if you're going to bitch about the show could you at least pay a tiny bit of attention. Monroe was in Philly the whole episode, Miles and Charile were a train ride away; so unless all the characters have really,really long arms......
Reply
Flag
That's not the only thing he messed up.
Reply
Flag
Although i agree with this review i stil think revolution is a fun action packed ride.
Reply
Flag
I agree with some of the earlier posts: This show is really misrepresented with these reviews. Although the show has flaws, it is still enjoyable and definitely "watchable". And there are much worse shows that get better reviews on tv.com.

I mean, even though there are weird characterizations or bad storylines, you still watch them for fun, right? I somehow have the impression that Tim is forced to watch them, with someone standing behind him with a whip.

I don't mind mocking tv shows, but in a review one should at least try to understand why anyone would watch it (and of course, also why not - the good and the bad parts). It's somehow unfair when you only point out the bad parts.



And yeah, that train was awesome. And more actors from Lost, please!
Reply
Flag
Tim, buddy, I'd advise you to sift through the comments and recheck your facts before pointing it out as a fault and bashing the show. I can see that you generally liked the episode, but half the things you have a problem with stem from your lack of attention to detail and I'm not even talking about one's subjectivity here. Your review is based on the fabrication of proceedings and thereby deceives the general readers into believing that it was inferior.

My personal take: The show is improving steadily. No matter how hideous the title was, the episode was awesome. How cool was it to see the train scene on a tv show! Good stuff.
Reply
Flag
A man speaks the truth.
Reply
Flag
Cracked posted an article about Revolution today that more or less sums up my opinion on this show.



www.cracked.com/blog/the-10-dumbest-things-tv-so-far-this-season
Reply
Flag
This is worse then Terra Nova. Yes I went there. By the end of Terra Nova I was only watching to come tv.com after and see the review ripping it apart, but I don't know if even that will keep me watching Revolution.
Reply
Flag
worse than*
Reply
Flag
worser than (LOL!)
Reply
Flag
After already failing miserably once this episode, Charlie decides to rush at Neville with a knife instead of using the crossbow... /facepalm
Reply
Flag
Well she couldnt shoot him. He was "Nates" dad and that would cause a bit of tension if she was to shoot him later with the love story part so by writing 101 she has to do something totally braindead like charging a soldier who probably has hand to hand training.
Reply
Flag
That was better than the previous episodes but still just meh. I actually stopped doing four of the seven things I was doing and glanced at the screen more than twice. I think the focus on Giancarlo made it so much better, and the fact that they finally came face to face. The Nate reveal was as anti-climatic as it can get...it shouldn't even be considered a reveal because it was so obvious and so uninteresting. Nora officially became a pain the arse for me. I thought she'd have a shot but the whole bomb on train and getting stabbed thing...she lost me. Charlie finally put on her big girl pants by the end and claimed she'd be logical and pragmatic for a change...I don't buy that she will but at least she kinda acknowledged how much she sucks...sort of. I was kinda thinking, maybe they could finally be getting somewhere and then I seen the previews. I can't even put into words how irritated I was when I seen them. It's bad enough I mentioned that she reminds me a little of Brooke Shields back in the day but this pimping out a relative, prostitution, body selling thing...it's getting too close to being an accurate comparasion.
More+
Reply
Flag
I'm just quoting here since that claim has been refuted over and over. It was quite easy to deduce who the guy was since the beginning.

"'Nate' was leading an entire team to capture Miles. Then he told Charlie his name wasn't what he had told her before. Add to that the fact that Neville spoke to Danny about his boy who was his age and yet never bringing him up when he told he wanted to get back to his wife (not family). So, tell me, how exactly is that a 'reveal'? They expected you to find out for yourself. "
Reply
Flag
Well, if it was an Easter egg hunt as you suggest, it's the one they set out for toddlers, where the eggs are just laid out on the ground with no attempt at hiding. Childish, no craft to it, and vaguely insulting.
Reply
Flag
I actually found the fact that they are trusting you to figure out the basic twists yourself to be nice. They haven't done any major reveals, there are subtle confirmations, but not "you should think this is a twist" big buildups. They joked all the way through the Miles founded the republic scene, they put Rachel in the promos so you wouldn't think they were trying to be clever and failing. The Jason thing was pretty obvious because the casting on the kid was spot on! And Neville visibly cared about the captured militia member. So, I don't think the end was a pie in the face for viewers, it was just confirming it and letting the family dynamic (cold as it was) sink in for a moment.

They've shown a good amount of understanding of how people watch TV and playing a bit with your expectations (for me). Like when Charlie fell onto the highway and whined about her ankle. I was so annoyed, and then they flipped it and it was a trap. That only worked because as an audience we expected one thing. The same with why Nora joined the militia--they showed you the groan-worthy oh she did it for a guy angle, and then nope, j/k he's a priest. So I don't think they are insulting their audience, I think they are trying to tell a story and they know that some things have to be the way they have to be and as viewers we know those same things too.
More +
Reply
Flag
Everything doesn't need to be a big Easter egg hunting game. But they did do the son thing cleverly by spreading the clues over several episodes. It may not be the biggest or the best clue hunting you're after, but it was satisfyingly done. What I gather by your reply is that you hadn't deduced it on your own before the show made it clear and hence you find that insulting and can't bring yourself to give credit where credit is due. I sense a case of sour grapes.
Reply
Flag
You are naive.
Reply
Flag
Figuring out who 'Nate' was as the show gave us clues along the way doesn't show naivety, but your attention to the subtleties.
Reply
Flag
312 comments already. Revolution is surely a popular show. How can you even think of discontinuing the reviews, Tim?
Reply
Flag
Most of us watching to nitpick aren't counted in the ratings, only those magic Nielsen unicorns matter.
Reply
Flag
Watchers and commenters (fans or nitpickers) matter as far as the show's popularity in this website, Besides, the Nielsen families represent the larger group of (American) society. That probably means that many of the Nielsen families are also watching to nitpick. that's OK, as long as they watch and increase the show's ratings. And hatings too...
Reply
Flag
Agreed. So many futile claims of non-existential faults, for the most part. Its been rather fun systematically dismantling them.
Reply
Flag
Be careful not to confuse stubborn naivete with systematic dismantling ;-). While this was, on the whole, a better entry than the previous episodes, it was still rife with faults.
Reply
Flag
I did mention 'for the most part', which means even I acknowledge the faults. But they have been blown out of proportion and frankly, many can be logically disproved. I've to ask the same of you since people who generally hate/dislike something do not see any of the positive aspects and are stubbornly set in their ways.
Reply
Flag
All right. I guess I overreacted about the racism thing then. This reminds me of the time I called a guy "paleface" on this board and he accused me of using a racial slant, when it wasn't intended that way.
Flag
Nitpicking and commenting is a sporty way of watching.

However, it will not boost DVD sales later on.
Flag
It's a joke from an earlier thread I joined him in regarding generalizations and racism.
Flag
Racist? Oh, my God! When did GameofFringe even hint on anything even remotely connected to race??? Is that the way in North America now? Some people seem so eager to pull the "racist" card to win an argument that they do it even when it doesn't make sense.
Flag
Some people are watching to nitpick, apparently. But ratings can't tell the difference. Meanwhile ratings go up and the sponsors are thankful .
Flag
And I did mention this episode was, "on the whole" better. I haven't really responded to comments regarding specific events in the show because, to be honest, it's either a waste of my time, or there wasn't a whole lot to be truly nit-picky about. When something stands out to me, I call bullshit. But just because I don't like the show like many others on this board, doesn't mean I'm immune to any of its potential charm. That's a generalization, you racist.
Flag
Load More Comments

Like TV.com on Facebook