Wow, I've watched this show from the beginning, but I confused a little last week I saw a show maybe 99th Episode didn't Sgt. Gormley make Lieutenant. I'm sure of it, so why do they still refer to him as Sgt. Gormley? Someone needs to notify the writers
I have watched Blue Bloods from the start but often ask myself why. The plots are predictable and no one else in NY seems able to solve any crimes plus the constant plot developing coincidences leave me screaming at the telly some times.
Tonight episode is a classic example, only Danny in a population the size of NY could find himself in a bank just as it gets robbed and lay on the floor repeatedly fumbling for his gun without the robbers seeing him. Then instead of being treated as a witness and providing statements or even being given some time off to get over the trauma he immediately starts working the case. The bit where they found a cigarette but and his sister fast tracked the dna test and he went to the house of the suspect on their own baring in mind this is a suspected armed robber, spoke to him without any caution and didn't even arrest him was a total joke.
The final insult was the fact that the crew was all given lighter sentences because it was for a good cause. And lastly the episode before Fridays show Frank promoting the Sergeant that he brought in to advise him to lieutenant but all through this episode they kept calling him Sergeant still.
First off , how do the ages of the Reagans add up? The Great Grandfather looks to be roughly the same age as the Police Commissioner.
2. If Danny is such a tough guy why are his two boys so soft , and annoying?
3. Where is the black sheep of the family ? There is no family in the world without some misguided soul. I'm not talking about Danny bending the rules while he clears 100 percent of his cases , I'm talking about a jobless drug dealing brother , or some punk emo kid who hates the family dinners and would rather smoke dope and get drunk.
Blue Bloods is not very credible. Tom Selleck has a constant scowl on his face, does not seem to be happy in his job, and he swills scotch by the gallon. Not a gray hair on his head or stache (Just for Men, black shoe polish???). I always liked him in earlier TV series, and in movies.
Donny Wahlberg's character does things as a detective (threatening to kill or shoot suspects, physical brutality, rudeness) which would put him in jail, get killed, or cause a lawsuit against the department. His dad (Selleck) warns him over and over that he will not always get away with what he does, but Danny is an inconsiderate dolt. It is humorous that he and his wife have New York accents, but no one else in their family does.
Sunday dinner is a good touch, and the scenes of New York are pretty cool. The arrogance that the Reagan family has in solving every crime in NYC is not believable, especially when Danny pushes his sister to take shortcuts. Erin is touted as being tough, but looks like she is about to break down crying any moment. For all of the religious praise for this program, the characters drink constantly, and Danny does not set a good example as a human being. I can appreciate that people in law enforcement need support and faith, due to what they deal with on a daily basis.
Law and Order was/is definitely more credible, and NYPD Blue was gritty and realistic, without the nepotism..
One of my favorite shows out there. Many of the reviews here take issue with the faith on the show, but to me its about family. Growing up I sat down to dinner every night of the week with immediate family and regularly with extended family, sometimes it was great and sometimes it was tense. But for better or worse it was is a show about people who are trying to be better and it inspires me to try to be a better person even when it's hard.
Great story line it has great actors, plots and writing.
I lobe the fact the shows creator(s) aren't afraid to mention hard topics like religon. Our culture is losing our faith & I absolutely love that the show involves faith and the family dinners are great it's an amazing show. One of my favorites! Keep it up!
I hope the show will continue. I don't want it to be a realistic show. The news is always showing that ,most bad guys get away with crimes. I want pretend where the good guys always win and act with integrity. Tom Selleck could be bald or all grey hair he's likeable and all the actors play a great part. Just give me a show to watch that don't have to be politically correct and I can forget all the crap I see or hear in one day. Just enjoy.
I was hoping she would go across the country for college! What a false can't afford to send Nicky to an expensive college. Solution: Pick a less expensive school! Did the show really imply that Columbia might not be good enough? If she goes to school in NYC, why can't she live at home? And how come this wonder kid is not flooded with scholarship offers?
Don't know what happened to Blue Bloods this the writer's are new, or they were told to "take it up a notch" but whatever happened, it was to its demise. This was a good show. A little different from the other cop/CSI shows. I am not a Catholic or a conservative, although my roots were that, so maybe that was the appeal, but it was real and it portrayed a decent family who show respect and love for each other. Now, this season, most of the dialogue is rude and combative and totally out of character. The plots are staged and stereotypical, but hardly believable. I will miss The Reagan's, as the actors in these roles had a good chemistry. The writing has gotten so bad, the show is unwatchable. Major error.
My wife and I are ardent fans of Blue Bloods to the extent that we have not missed a single episode. We have marveled at the show's fidelity to conservative and Catholic values in a Hollywood that has a virulent bias against both.
Unfortunately, in the October 10 episode, Hollywood successfully attacked those values. The script had Frank Reagan saying something to the effect that the Catholic Church was behind the times in not recognizing homosexuality and changes had to be made, particularly in light of the recent clergy sex-abuse scandals.
That speech was wrong on many levels.
The scandals were not recent; the majority of awful occurrences happened decades ago in the 60s and the 70s.
A devout Catholic family, as the Reagans are portrayed, would know that the Catholic Church preaches "respect, compassion, and sensitivity" to people with homosexual attractions. The Church forbids homosexual acts, not homosexuality, a distinction the Commissioner should have made in his response to the press conference question. [Not content with that, the script also makes a Cardinal unaware of the distinction and, for good measure, depicts the Cardinal as arrogant, hypocritical, duplicitous and vengeful a Hollywood grand
And it became more absurd. Frank Reagan's script urges that the alleged change in the Church position should be made because of the sex-abuse scandals. That makes no sense at all. The only significant change the Church could make would be to lift the prohibition of homosexual acts. But the sex-abuse scandals were in fact mostly homosexual acts. An investigation produced a report, the John Jay study, which revealed:
"four out of five (80%) alleged victims were male," and "the majority of alleged victims were post-pubescent (87.4%), with only a small percentage of priests receiving allegations of abusing young
In 2004, the National Review Board stated that while the sex abuse crisis had no single cause, "an understanding of the crisis is not possible" without reference to "the presence of homosexually oriented The board cited the data: "eighty percent of the abuse at issue was of a homosexual
In an August 25, 2006, National Catholic Register editorial, Dr. Paul McHugh, a former psychiatrist-in-chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital and a member of the National Review Board, observed that the John Jay study had revealed a crisis of "homosexual predation on American Catholic
In other words, the scandals were compelling reasons not to change the prohibition on homosexual acts.
In sum, Hollywood successfully inserted its biased propaganda to destroy the essence of Blue Bloods, its Catholic values. In crime parlance, it was murder.
I pray for a miracle: that somehow the writers will be able to undo the crime and resurrect the series' integrity.
I had all the Catholicism cramped down my throat I can stand, I am not watching this show anymore. There is so much wrong with this show I can't believe that I have watched it for this long, but last week's episode soiled me on ever watching it again. So what is wrong with it? Frank kissing the ring of the Cardinal dude was worse than kissing your sister when you were young. Is Danny really the only person in the entire NYC police department that is solving every crime that great city has? The real actor for Grandpa is only 6 years older than Tom Selleck is for Frank, it doesn't work, they look too close in age. Even though the father Frank is almost 70, he still does not have a single gray hair? Tom Selleck's glasses are too small for his face and are so 90's. Does Frank really wear his rain coat everywhere he goes, even in July? Family dinner together every single Sunday, with everyone sitting in the same place, giving the same prayer and no one ever misses? Really? Get real. The show would be so much more interesting if one of the characters were to disagree with their faith and the Sunday mandatory dinners, say someone like Jamie. Give us some variety. What if Jamie were to live with his girlfriend openly and give no apologies to the family or the Catholic church and not feel one iota bad about it and he was still a nice person that did good things for people? What if Nicky were gay? How would this staunchly religious family handle that? Hmmm, that might resemble more of the American family than this show's version of one. This show has become so preachy every week that I am bailing out of it. This show should be on the Hallmark channel where all the other sugary versions of family life exist.
Blue Bloods is (was) one of my top favorite shows. However last night they made a huge blunder and are obviously supporting the pro gay agenda pushed by media and actor community. The Catholic Church can't change God's Law. The Pope will not change the position to love all people even those in sin (pretty much all of us) but hate the sin. This supposedly catholic family needs to go back to class they are in grave error. And if the show continues down this path they lose me and anyone I will talk with as viewers. What a shame to sell out like this.
How Do You Solve A Problem Like Maria? That song rings in my ears as I consider how to respond to Tom Sellick's comment that the church is behind on the issue of homosexuality! BB used to be the highlight of Friday night TV for this tea totaling family despite it emphasis on alcohol. The program usually venerates the church and family with subtle yet powerful images. Even to Southern conservative Baptists this was a welcome relief from most stereotypical programs which laud extramarital sex and demean traditional moral values. How Do You Solve A Problem Like the Church's Prohibition against wrong? You copy the behavior of Hollywood in the 1930s. You slash, edit and create films to prevent offending the prevailing powerful political lobbies, and you write scripts and dialogue that call into question the righteousness of The Church and it's Holy Book! This first BB film of the 2014 season was a culmination of a creeping political correctness that began to seep into the show last year. It's was a far cry from the purity, the epitome of goodness, and the quality of moral absolutes presented in The Sound of Music. We are sorely disappointed with the direction your show has taken!
As others have said here the show was totally disappointing. It was beginning to be one of my favorites. NO MORE! I also liked the family and the fact the show was not afraid to blend in Catholicism. But for Tom Sellick to make the comment that the church should be more up to date on homosexuals is totally untrue. The life style may be wrong but NOT the person.
October 10th's Blue Blood show bombed in our house! In the past, we always looked forward to
watching Blue Bloods even though the last few shows did not seen to be up to par with previous episodes. However, last night's insulting episode involving the Catholic Church's teachings both in the comments by Tom Selleck and then the hard to believe comment made by the nun at the end of the show made me realize I don't really want to watch it anymore. In the past, after a Blue Blood show ended, someone in the house would usually remark "that was a good one". Couldn't say that for this one, I regretted even watching it.
What a disappointment and game changer for the viewers!
Our family has been fans of the CBS show Blue Bloods for several years, chiefly because of the strong family values and somewhat conservative traditional values portrayed, as well as Tom Selleck and the quality acting of the cast.
Last night's episode was a terrible betrayal of those who have watched the series because of these strengths. It is disgraceful enough to attack the Catholic church for its strong moral position that homosexuality is a Biblical sinwhich it has been for a few thousand years in fact. But to have Mr. Selleck be the one to undermine the legitimacy of that position in his own church was against everything we were led to believe this character stands for. By not supporting the legitimate choice of the Catholic church to not sanction gays and their lifestyle, and to 'lead the charge' of this view in his dialogue in the episode, and then to throw in a gay nun to boot is just too much.
We will not be watching BlueBloods any longer and will advise all our friends to take the same steps. We are tired of Hollywood and the Courts condemning those who have a moral and religious right to not support homosexuality.
It is a sad day when the Blue Bloods scriptwriters decided to change from a strong anti-crime police show to become yet another politically correct arm of the liberals, and support scripts that promote strongly the socialist agenda in this country.
In last nights episode the cardinal suggested sending the school proposal to his Jewish brokers to decide if the school is viable. Please... In this day and age, give me a break! Can't the writers be more original!
Last nights episode, please, could we try any harder at representing fringe Catholicism and misrepresenting the Church?? Sellick kissing the Cardinals ring, as if hearkening back to some archaic time when his eminence would have next sold our good officer an indulgence? And the nun who holds dear to her lesbian past, as if Sellick and this nun somehow represent mainstream catholics and religious-- all closeted anarchists to an outdated church, waiting patiently for the 'Vatican' to come around? The misrepresentation of moral teaching, confusing judgement of the sin versus judgement of the sinner, and the Insinuation that pope Francis is breaking new ground, 'moving the needle' as they said in the show, on this issue? Francis for all who are just now tuning in because popular media is covering it (and have likely not picked up a bible or catechism ever or since 1st grade communion prep) is representing the unchanged teachings of the church that say that while homosexual behavior is a sin, God reserves judgement on homosexuals for himself--that's not our job (either to judge or presume to know the judgement), and we are all called to love because regardless of our orientation, each of us has his own sins (and please don't confuse today's PC/'tolerance'/pizza version of love with how Jesus lived and spoke about love). And for the record, God reserves judgement on heterosexuals for himself as well-- we all have sin, we all get the same treatment. Goodness, what a propaganda/smear piece of media.
I just started watching the show a few weeks ago. I am so surprised to see a family that has dinner together and pray This is amazing. I can't wait to catch up on all the older shows. It is a little strange they drink so much. Wine every time they eat and a drink after or before bed. They spend more on drinking than I make a month.
I know it wasn't planned this way but I appreciate the fact that Tom Selleck played a commissioner who
said and did the right thing. Officers do make split second decisions. The question is would a prudent officer do the same thing if they were placed in the same situation. Many times people react without knowing the whole situation. We still don't know all that happened in Furgeson, MO. Yet people react and demand the officer was wrong. I am a police officer. I wasn't there but if I was attacked by someone outside the car, someone who was just involved in a robbery. If they hit me though an open window while I was in my car and tried to take my weapon. If the raised both hands up and then charged me, I think I might be in fear of my life and I would defend myself. This whole story will unfold and if this is the case. I believe even ordinary citizens would react in the same way. The idea social media and stir up opinion without the facts is scary. I hope everyone would look at facts before drawing conclusions and reacting. When you just have part of the story and form an opinion that opinion may indeed be wrong.
Last night's episode (8/29/2014) has some lessons that can make your own life better. There were two scenario's that demonstrated how our brains do not show us an actual fixed reality and one that highlighted that the more stressed we are, the less accurate the reality we perceive becomes.
In one case, a mentally challenged man unsuccessfully tried to stop a teenage girl from committing suicide and was caught on video, where his actions were initially perceived as pushing her to her death. It would have been so easy for him to be convicted of murder for his attempted good deed because the viewers of the video initially perceived him as a killer. Their brains interpreted the video in line with their expectations, even after being told he was not the type of person to ever do that sort of thing.
The second scenario involved a young cop whose report of her first felony arrest differed slightly from a video a citizen sent in. There was nothing wrong with the arrest, no excessive force, etc. But when she filed her report there was a factual error about where stolen property was recovered from that differed from the video. I won't tell you how Frank got the DA's office to agree not to fire her and come over to his viewpoint by demonstrating that the brain's recollection of events may not be 100% accurate, especially when a life or death situation but I thought it was brilliant.
I loved that the show brought this aspect of our brain's into the show--the inaccurate ways we perceive reality. Researchers have long shown that eyewitness reports are the least reliable type of evidence but most people assume this is because of dishonesty on the part of witnesses with ulterior motives, but the truth is that our brains are not designed to show us They show us a filtered reality and the filters determine how we perceive every given situation. The filters can be adjusted and how they are set can make the difference between a good life and a crummy life.
I teach how to people about these filters and how to adjust them so they can thrive more but the biggest hurdle most people face is they believe their brains show us reality so I am delighted to see the fallacy of this demonstrated so well on Blue Bloods.
I also love this show. I turned my TV off in 1995 and did not watch TV again until 2013. I still watch very little but this show draws me back again and again. I love how strong the family is even when they disagree with one another. I love Tom Selleck in this roll. I wish I could talk to the detective because I know I could help him (I realize he is just a character, but his war wounds represent a lot who are suffering I also love that they show the Sunday dinners every week because that is one of the things that makes the family so strong and connected with one another.
Please read the following before uploading
Do not upload anything which you do not own or are fully licensed to upload. The images should not contain any sexually explicit content, race hatred material or other offensive symbols or images. Remember: Abuse of the TV.com image system may result in you being banned from uploading images or from the entire site – so, play nice and respect the rules!