MacGyver (TV Series 2016– ) Poster

(2016– )

User Reviews

Review this title
320 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Mucked-Gyver
Wizard-824 September 2016
When I was a teenager, the original "MacGyver" was one of my favorite TV series. So you may think that when I first heard they were rebooting the series I was pumped. Actually, my first thought was, "Uh... I'm not sure about this." That's because I have found reboots and remakes overwhelmingly are greatly inferior to the originals. But when I found that key people from the original series (like series creator Lee David Zlotoff and executive producer Henry Winkler) were returning, a little hope sprung in me.

Well, I watched the pilot episode. I admit it wasn't without merit; the action and stuntwork was fairly well done. But for the most part, I was very disappointed with what I watched. I could make a list of a number of things of what I didn't like about what I saw, but I'll stick with the two biggest beefs I had:

(1) In the original series, MacGyver was a very likable guy. He was smart, but he always remained humble with his abilities to make gizmos and get out of tight situations. However, in this remake, MacGyver is a real turn-off for the most part. His annoying narration and his brash attitude in almost every situation makes him an irritating braggart. There is precious little warmth and humanity in this guy. I don't really blame the actor playing this new MacGyver for this - he is playing MacGyver as dictated by the script and the direction, and when he's given a quieter moment he does come off in an okay fashion. But as I said, the direction and writing for the most part do him no favors.

(2) In the original series, when MacGyver got to work making a homemade gizmo or thinking out of a bad situation, the show took the time for him to go step by step with this. This technique built some compelling mystery, making viewers think while this was going on, "What is MacGyver pulling off?" Then when MacGyver pulled it off, it was a satisfying payoff. In this reboot, however, MacGyver pulls off his gizmos and escapes from bad situations in just a few seconds! No suspense, no mystery, no interest.

Look, I understand that a good reboot (if there is such a thing) will put its own spin on things. But at the same time, you should not destroy the core of the concept that made the original popular in the first place. This is the main flaw of this reboot.

It's possible that things will improve in the next few episodes. More than one TV show has improved over time. So I will watch the next few episodes. Though I'm not getting my hopes up too much.
187 out of 223 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
This is definitely NOT MacGyver...
Dr_Sagan24 September 2016
I used to watch the original series back in the 80s so it is unavoidable to compare that series with its 2016 reboot.

80s Macgyver was a secret agent with a difference! He was quiet, modest, mild mannered, deeply principled and refused to carry a gun on his missions.

2016's MacGyver is more like a caricature of 007 and Mission Impossible.

The pilot episode starts ridiculously: "Here's my assistant Nikki. She has 156 science awards from MIT and NASA. 50 companies including Google, Apple, SpaceX, Samsung and PepsiCo offered her a gazillion dollars to work for them but she refused, so to work for $200/week in my secret organization. Did I mention she is 25 y.o. and smokin' hot? Oh, Yes she is! and I bone her over some fake computers we have in this series as props!".

"And here is my other friend Johnny Rambo. He saved my life in Algeria, Angola, Liberia, Djibouti, Burundi, Malaysia, Bangladesh but please...please DO NOT talk to him about that time in Cairo."

"And this other smoking hot woman, tall and exotic and super-duper top secret spy, that you never heard of, is my ...boss".

"And who am I, you ask? Well, most certainly I'M NOT Angus Macgyver."

Honestly, I can't believe the writers. Are they idiots? Have they ever saw the original series?

And what about the Cast. I'm thinking of the charismatic Richard Dean Anderson with nostalgia right now.

Overall: A totally generic sub-par TV series for its own shake, but a total disgrace for baring the name of one of the most iconic heroes on TV.
310 out of 385 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Yet another second rate retread......
s327616924 September 2016
Retreads seem to be the "thing to do" as of late. Studio's who seem to be out of ideas, visiting the past for inspiration.

Sad fact is, most of the retreads are "second rate" and MacGyver is no exception. The word that another reviewer used to describe this retread is the same one I would choose, "tiresome".

The original MacGyver worked because it had a fresh and different message. That science "not" violence can be used to peacefully resolve threatening situations. The original Macyver was very much an anti war figure.

By contrast, the retread MacGyver, is a poster boy for "mainstream" values, including, the US military. He's also smug, over confident, a womanizer and frankly, a throughly unlikable jerk. Its tiresome stuff, that in many ways is the complete anti-thesis of the original series. There's no sense of hope and inspiration, as found in Richard Dean Anderson's character.

All in all, a BORE FEST. If you have not seen MacGyver before, my advice, take a look at the original series, it wont disappoint. Two out of ten from me.
179 out of 232 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
This show is unadulterated crap
ialeksandrovna25 September 2016
Five minutes into the show, I wanted to throat punch the arrogant, millennial twerp in the title role. Painfully bad. Horrible writing. Horrible acting. Hackneyed plot. Predictable dialogue. Assumes audience consists of morons. And anyone who continues to watch this probably lives up to that assumption.

The stupid super spy schtick is SO bad!

It's like the writers decided to make a MacGyver for dumb millennials who are unfamiliar with the US government, with foreign policy, with anything resembling the intelligence community!

Make it go away!
191 out of 266 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Nothing is sacred
DoNotTrustImdb23 September 2016
I grew up watching the original Mac and as much as it was soft viewing added with a small dose of make believe, the original series is part of TV history in a good way! Well some one in Hollywood land just had to rape my childhood memories!

I just think a geeky metro sexual vegan type in the role of Mac is just not right, but hey at least the producers went with the times! I think if you are from the WIFI gen than yeah you might think it's great.

The supporting cast is all wrong as well, why cast that dude from CSI? He is just so typecast it ain't funny, and I stopped viewing this when Vinny showed his face.

And again take a look at the ratings, so many paid for 10 out of 10 votes, IMDb come on, it's way overdue for you lot to do something about fake votes.

Anyway, give it a go as we all have different needs in life, but this is not something I will need in a hurry, rubbish is the best I can come up with without using profanity.

Big fat 0 (1 for awful) for me! And I really hope other will vote this rubbish into forgotten history as this program needs to be canned!
221 out of 310 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Worst Reboot in History
jarrettcdunn27 September 2016
Sorry, but I can't get how ANYONE can say they like this show. I'm not expecting Richard Dean Anderson or anything, but the only thing the show is about is the 'cliche's of MacGyver, not the actual story, Opening Gambit or challenge of the week. Yes, the original MacGyver has voice overs, short voice overs explaining either why he was doing something or where he was to set the stage. It seems over half of the episode is voice over though.

Also the updating it of him being a 'ladies' man so destroys the whole personality of him. He was a ladies man in the original and has girls falling over him not because he was smoking hot and buff (as he is in this) but rather because he was a genuinely good guy. He was an intelligent, modest individual that felt anything could be overcome if one just put some thought into it, and dealt with people with genuine fore thought instead of acting like a bull in a chine closet (see the original's 'Trumbo's World' episode for a perfect example). This MacGyver is a loud mouthed 'bro' vs a soft spoken man with charisma who approaches things with an open mind.

But basically they took all the ancillary parts of the original series and made the new series all about those while throwing out everything that made the original so charming. Instead of it being about story development and slowly learning more and more about the main character it is in your face constant bludgeoning over the head of how smart he is and how he is the most awesome dude ever. Neither of which are MacGyver traits.

All in all don't waste your time. The acting is horrible, the writing is horrible, and the show runners have no idea what made MacGyver episodes so great. You'll just wish you had that part of your life back.
120 out of 170 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Please, god, No!
henrik15069325 September 2016
Almost cried cause it was so bad. Downplaying the audience like we're stupid. Guess target is 13 year old, but that's really stupid when the fact is that the high ratings come from nostalgic grown ups.

I was really excited. that died fast. you know its bad withing first 30 sec. Will not recommend any friends. Will not see next episode. They didn't even keep the whole soundtrack which is 33% of macgyver 33% is his charm (which he has 50% of). 33% is the clever macgyverness (50% again). 1% is "well that was just stupid" which it has 100% of..

Dialog: horrible Actors: poor Plot: horrible Reboot: too much bling MacGyverness: poor

They really made no effort making this good, so it's a bigger disappointment than the last Godzilla movie.

Kill it before it lays eggs.
122 out of 173 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Tiresome beyond belief.
gs2023 September 2016
If you were going to produce a show that was as uninteresting as say, Hawaii Five O, you could not do any better than this mess. The frenetic action is almost laughable in as much as the the completely unknown pig eyed hero "star" has absolutely none of the grace of the original Richard Dean Anderson. Sometimes no matter how much money one spends the result may still be crap. Poorly directed, poorly written, it is a total mess. Don't waste your time. It will, I predict, not last more than a season. Boring beyond belief. I suggest you turn your attention to British cop shows. At least they know how to develop a character. I think it's sad that George Eads thought he would do better here than with CSI ...... An astonishing miscalculation on his part.
149 out of 219 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
VERY Disappointing
Man9920423 September 2016
Angus MacGuyver is one of the most beloved TV characters from the 1980s. This is not the prequel that devoted fans were hoping to see.

It appears that no one connected with the new version has ever seen the classic programs - they totally ignore the established characters. They totally ignore all the endearing quirks that made us want to watch the series.

Sadly, no matter how much he tries, Lucas Til is simply NOT a young Richard Dean Anderson. He is far too bland and lacking in personality to play this character.

The plot of the pilot seemed very "recycled".Nothing was new. Nothing was innovative.
121 out of 176 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
It's a thriller/ detective/ james bondesque mishmash
jonnithomas24 September 2016
for children of around 12. however that may be an insult to some 12 years olds.

it's poorly written, badly acted and so false and glitzy it goes totally beyond any form of reality or belief.

I really couldn't watch a whole episode as it was totally cringe worthy.

if you want characters and realism don't really don't watch this.

anyone think it will get a second series ???? I would rather walk home in a blizzard than watch this fiasco.

well the issue is that I have to write ten lines about this rubbish. so how do I say it in a different way ?

it is bad, so bad really bad. trust me Jason borne it is not.
109 out of 164 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
How Bad can it be?
langolera26 September 2016
First it started out like a Mission Impossible episode. Then it got worse. Totally miscast. Who wrote this crap??? Has literally nothing to do with the original. Including the show's theme music. Maybe next time, keep with the original concept. And since when does he have a team??? They should have had Henry Winkler do the show. Just then, it might be worth watching. As it stands now, no way am I going to watch another episode. If you are expecting a show like the original, this isn't it. Very disappointed. I was hoping for another good show and it didn't happen. Why does Hollywood insist on doing their own thing still? It isn't working. This show is not going to make it.
43 out of 61 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Episode 1 - OMG - this is NOT 1985 Wargames or 1995 Hackers or MI - Spoilers
shamimislam-669935 October 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Really? REALLY? Who writes this crap? Spoiler alert!!!!

1. The hairpin/paperclip handcuff trick gets old really fast 2. The tray as a Frisbee to knock out the guard - stupid? 3. The guard shoots directly at the tray and not the exposed knees of the target 4. Borrowed glasses from Mission Impossible and Person of Interest 5. All these stupid references to Cairo - if you're not going to tell the story, don't tell the story 6. Thornton as a woman just doesn't work - she's not enough of an asshole 7. Nikki escapes from custody in a moving vehicle - REALLY? And she fakes her death but never gets picked up on a camera? 8. The plane landing gear does not go up at all even though the plane is clearly high enough 9. The boat was going straight as it hit the bad guys even though Macgyver set the steering wheel to turn 10. The thing with the camera search and the ex-con was just too much. It doesn't work that way - and facial recognition TAKES HOURS!!!!!! 11. AND THE WORST OF ALL:

WE DO NOT HAVE LOGIC BOMBS in 2016. That was 1985 with Wargames and 1995 with Hackers. Magnetic disks do not have LOGIC BOMBS. Logic bombs do not exist on magnetic disks. Only in firmware. We have encryption in 2016 on hard drives. And booby-traps. And shredders. Not logic bombs. That's insane.

And the creme de la creme: She CRACKED OPEN a magnetic hard drive with a hammer. First, you can't crack it open - it has 5 screws. Second, if you try to crack it open with a hammer, you could scratch the platters. And THIRD but most significant - if you want to prevent data loss, you do NOT expose the disks outside a clean room. And lastly, if Nikki was as an expert like she said she was, it would have been an SSD - in which case, using a hammer would have broken the transistors inside.

Who writes this crap!!!!!!

I am SO HAPPY RICHARD DEAN ANDERSON declined to participate in this trash.
44 out of 63 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Underrated and fun to watch
irevah12 November 2018
It's not as bad as the reviews says. It's a funny cool silly action show. Fun to watch
24 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Please give me a paperclip so I can escape this series
jcorreia197725 September 2016
Warning: Spoilers
I'm pretty sure we all grew up watching the original McGyver series back in the mid 80's, so I assume we were all looking forward to see what the pilot looked like. What sad day it turned out to be.

Let's start at basics: everyone in the series is top of their field, be it at MIT or Delta Force; so far, a bit of a cliché, but OK, fair enough. However, it's impressive how McGyver smashes the typical misconcepts about the average MIT student - forget nerdiness, the general MIT student is an efficient fighting machine (damn, he's more aggressive than the Delta guy) that can solve a clue by remembering an obscure poem written in1907. Seems like the average MIT guy, alright.

Then, everything's everywhere at the same time - if he needs to know something, one of his team mates figures it out in 2 seconds. The part where he enters the party where the biological agent is is nothing short of horrible - a kid, dressed as a waiter, surpasses at least 4 obstacles to get what should be a heavily guarded weapon for sale, and yet he still gets to it.

If it's not that, no problem, he'll just disarm a biological warfare device and fight like a seasoned MMA fighter against one of the terrorists in the end. The only good thing out of this is that lately my time was short as I'm watching so many series at the same time. Well, this one's helping me out, as I won't see an episode past the pilot.
35 out of 51 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
this disgrace burns MacGyver for all future references
gant-1106730 September 2016
Warning: Spoilers
I grew up watching the original series back in the 80s.

Everything(!) is off in the new show. Where is the modest, cautious, reasonable and charismatic Richard-Dean-Anderson-MacGyver? This one is James Bond with a PhD and an 80s haircut (because he had to look something like the old Mac?). It doesn't stop there, there is no character that remotely resembles its counterpart of the original series. Everyone is an overachiever. This time, Jack Dalton is young, strong, fast, attractive and has a haircut.

And of-course they messed up the tech stuff ranging from ridiculous to plain wrong. (You cannot disrupt wireless communication with a "strong" DC-powered electromagnet).

What this show already achieved: it burned MacGyver for future references (as in using the common verb "to macgyver sth."): Where you might have dwelled in fond memories of the 80s and RDA solving the problem at hand with chocolate and baking soda, you now picture that new guy doing something ridiculous employing wrong science). Keep in mind: Younger generations will associate MacGyver references with the new show.
36 out of 53 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Love this show
godsdesign16 October 2018
I don't understand the complaints on this show. I grew up watching the original one. This one does a good job in it's own way. A reboot isn't supposed to be an exact replica. One of the main reasons I like this show is because it follows the same format as the original one but updated for 2018...not 1987: funny moments, still drama focused, well-rounded supporting cast, stuff blowing up and Macgyver inventions.

Watch this reboot from the beginning with an open mind and without comparing it to the original. Give it a chance and you'll see that it's actually a really good show.
18 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Old vs new
yrefanid19 February 2019
Original Macgyver was my favorite series. The new Macgyver is the favorite series of my son. He does not like the original one. I cannot like the new one as the original, but I am watching it together with my son and I find it acceptable. What I cannot afford however is the new soundtrack, I am always expecting to hear the original one and I am always disappointed.
9 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Stop comparing guys...
pimpstress-16-96942214 January 2019
People should really stop comparing this to the 80s macgyver. Its different! Of course it is, cause its not the same. Its never with remakes. But i bet if the show would have been given another name, people would give it a chance and love it as much as i do! But some refuse to new things and just keep being stuck in old stuff.... Unfortunately
21 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
fire the one who decided this reboot was a good idea.
andfhood-762-3747216 February 2017
One is better off watching MeTV and catching reruns of the original show. This show is an embarrassment. This show feels more like a CSI/ cop drama. There are time during this show I'm thinking to myself, "where did MacGyver go. " since when did Mac play second fiddle to his partner? This show is nothing more than a bunch of kids running around unable to act.
27 out of 42 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Give it a try
erink19839 November 2018
Forget the original. Take that off the table. This show is actually pretty good. Great cast that work well off each other. Great chemistry. First season was a bit slow. Second season was great and continues. Couple episodes I teared up. Every episode I enjoy. Give it a go again people!
17 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Thank you
rodrigues-lisa11 February 2017
I remember the original Macgyver. I couldn't stomach the milquetoast performance of Richard Dean Anderson - he will always be the timid, Dr. Jeff Weber from General Hospital to me.

That being said, I enjoy the science behind the reboot and the idea that Mac has a team and isn't a one-trick-pony who rushes in with a paper clip and bubble gum to save the world.

The new cast - especially George Eads - brings energy to what used to be a drearily executed good idea. Lucas Till is a fresh face and makes Mac more believable Mac as a young war vet. He is in his 20's and looks it. Anderson was already in his 30's when he started in the original.

Anderson said he holds no ill-feelings toward ABC because they pulled the plug on MacGyver. He said it really was a mutual decision. "I was physically exhausted," Anderson said, "really in trouble. We were working 15-hour days and spending four years (on location) in Vancouver really took its toll. The network wanted to try something else."
17 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
I Love the 2016 Macgyver Show!
marymurban1 March 2017
All these people trying to compare the two MacGuyvers. I am 68 years old and like both of them. The times they are a changing. I just want a show that is interesting and relaxing. And I think the 2016 MacGuyver has done that. If you want the original then watch the repeats. I love the new cast and I think they do a good job. I just like to watch him figure out ingenious ways to solve problems. I like the story lines. And I like the "family" connection with his co-workers/friends. So all you vitriolic people it must be difficult to live in the past and not appreciate the present shows. I feel sorry for you.
27 out of 43 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Oh... so bad, really really bad
tzviroimdb3 October 2016
OK, let me start by saying that I've watched the original series as a kid and I was very excited hearing about its reboot. That said, I left the first episode (and the second) with a grave face. There is nothing in this new series that made MacGyver so great - he was a kind, generous and modest person. Someone that may serve as a role model for the viewer.

This new MacGyver is an arrogant, cocky, full of himself, ultra-confident person. I would automatically dislike any person behaving that way, let alone the main character. If that's not enough, then his team mates repeatedly boast his skills, which he accepts with fake humility, as someone grown tired of hearing it.

He's never worried, or afraid that he might fail or die - he throws himself into danger with a confident and cheerful smile. That just can't feel real. Real people don't behave that way. Richard Dean Andersen was always thoughtful and concerned when he tried something - that's real. This infinite fountain of confidence feels sooooo fake. What made the original MacGyver so good, is that he felt real, like someone you might want to become some day. The new one on the other hand, is like a cross between Mission Impossible and some of the Pierce Brunson James Bond movies.

OK, so we explained why the main character is not likable, why it fails where the original character had. Now lets get to the story and acting. I've listened the dialogs carefully, and again, real people just don't speak that way, these simple dialogs written portray very flat and limited characters, which actually feel like they're reciting the dialog rather than acting it. I had palm-faced myself so many times while observing these dialogs. I just couldn't believe that something like this made it through the screening process.

While the episode lasts almost an hour, it has very little content. It focuses mainly on action - such as fights, chases, explosions - whereas the story is no longer front and center. I'm concerned that this is a result of movie targeted for younger generations where the pace of the movies has been sped up so much at the expense of a good and round story and whose attention span is very short. For me, that's a disappointment.

The attempts at humor are pretty bad and just not funny - with one exception, George Eads (as Jack Dalton - who was a funny character in the original series too) brings some light humor into an otherwise dull story.

Last, but not least are the scenes where MacGyver actually performs his cool feats. In the original series, you could see him study the scene, focusing on certain elements and actually see the plan forming - then you'd see him construct the solution to the problem he's facing. In the new series these scenes last maybe five seconds, and you are left dazzled and pondering - what had just happened? How was it solved - instead of teaching the viewer and treating him like an equal partner in that feat, the feat has actually become an insignificant part of the movie (compared to explosion, chases, fight scenes etc)

Let me summarize. There is nothing in the new series that made the hero so likable and his feats so interesting. On the other hand, the main character has a lot of traits that make him unlikable, and make the scientific feats, that made MacGyver so famous, into a secondary item for yet-another- action-series-that-only-borrowed-the-name-from-the-old-series.

I arrived with many expectations and left very disappointed. There is nothing I could elate to in the new series, and that's a shame.
15 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Creators Cash Grab, Cinematic Slaughter.
daylight-231-9641124 September 2016
As the majority here I was a fan of the original series. While viewing the pilot i expected a low budget series.

Sadly the i feel deceived. The reboot takes the handyman idea of the original series then goes proper James Bond/Jumps of a cliff. Exploding all over the first episode. After removing the realism its trying to build, hacks your living room, enhances a pixel to perfect images, ends up dodging bullet, explode even more so they can walk away looking cool...

In essence after half the episode it forgets its "MacGyver" stomps on the name & dives in to storytelling hoping it will rescue the series. Sadly there are good moments in the episode, the build up of a villein & characters, still the story ends up resolving close to everything to start on a blank page for the next episode, Its for the better.

The script writing is lazy & a money grab feeling. The acting ranges from poor "MacGyver" to very good "Tech & Villain". Sadly this MacGyver is no longer a one-man show like the original was. This will bad as guest actors makes MacGyver shine. The action sequences are the worst part makes American movies look bad.

In summary: Old compared to New, the original is better. Its character are more likable, the action is a CGI Nightmare, some moments the new series reminds of "Burn Notice" done badly. However, there's close to everything about the show that's downright bad, the Creators should be out-write FINED making MacGyver a "Panic Cash Grab".

This series could still develop & slow down its phase, develop guest characters, Fine tune its narration to become "Burn Notice" with out James Bond, Just a personal developing Civilian called MacGyver drinking beer on the deck & working on a car engine until someone needs unexpected help. a Peoples MacGyver
26 out of 42 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Mindless monkeys re-aranging plots
mirco-wilhelm25 September 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Let's face it. The original was a cheesy 80s TV show. It wasn't really that good, but it had an interesting angle about how it works. More or less a one man A-Team without the guns, but with the construction scenes.

This series starts of with a whole team supporting this one-man show. Enter: Bond, James Bond in a beautiful Mercedes Gullwing.. oh wait, that's just a kid with his dad's car. This is your MacGyver? Seriously?

About 10 or something minutes, our "hero" get's tricked to hand over some glowy virus thingy (why do they always glow?). He and the girl get shot, he survives, the girl goes missing.

At this point my Cluedo skills start kicking in. Theory: Girl hired bad guys, staged death to sell off the item.

Now our hero is in remorse mode. The comic relief fast talking black best friend, who doesn't know about his real job, tries to cheer him up while he and his team chose a replacement for the lost girl.

At this point the series mashed plot point from so many bad recent TV shows together, I can't stand to watch any more having to test my theory... skipping 20 minutes, ... yeah, I was right.

  • Predictable as hell - Boring beyond belief - Uninspired like another Mission Impossible movie - Written by a preschooler


-> unwatchable
29 out of 48 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed