ehknal Reviews

Castle (2009–2016)

This show has everything

[10/10 · 25 August 2015]

One of the many things I like about Castle is the fact that the writers understand the importance of humor. There's ALWAYS room for humor and it's so great that they get that.

A lot of "crime/drama" serials take themselves far too seriously and I loose interest in them after a short time. If I'm going to watch a show it has to make me laugh.

The characters in Castle are very well written, and the writers don't dumb them down just to suit their agenda. It's great to see a show where the characters commonly refer to instances from previous episodes, thus adding to the realism of the show.

The characters are about as real as they can be, given that it is a TV show. The show runners, writers, and actors really know how to make you feel connected to the characters in the show.

The writers are really good about hiding "the reveal" until the last moment. There has only been a handful of episodes where I was able to pick out the "villain" ahead of time. Most of the other shows that I watch are the opposite. I can almost always pick out the "villain" the moment they appear in the show.

CSI: Cyber (2015–2016)

This show could be better

[6/10 · 13 August 2015]

If you are going to write anything that has to do with technology you have to get the terminology right. As an example; Season 1 Episode 7: Supposed hacker/computer genius "Daniel Krumitz" refers to a desktop computer as a "hard drive tower". Anyone with basic working knowledge of computers knows that it's just a tower. When I'm watching any show, mistakes like this really jump out at me, and this show has tons of examples.

How this show could be better. research, research, and more research... refer to someone who actually knows what they are talking about.

If you want to invent non-existent technology for a show like CSI: at least make it believable. Or call it Science Fiction and you can call things whatever you want, and you can make stuff up.

The Walking Dead: Live Bait (2013) Season 4, Episode 6

Flawed reasoning

[4/10 · 12 August 2015]

This episode scores low for me because, When "The Governor" is sneaking through the old folks home and encounters a walker instead of killing each one as he came across it, he leaves them alone.

Someone who survived this long, in the walking dead world should know better than to leave a walker moving. You see a walker you kill it.

Point two

Tara was supposedly a police academy attendant yet, in all the time that has passed she never thought to shoot a walker in the head. This is an enormous flaw in this character.

Without the fore mentioned, this episode would have been at least a 7.

For me any episode that focuses on "The Governor" automatically looses 3 points.

The Walking Dead (2010–2022)

This show could easily be better

[7/10 · 9 August 2015]

The makeup is Excellent, the blood and gore effects are well done. I like how the zombies fall realistically when they are shot.

however

In order for me to really get into a show I need to be able to relate to at least one character and I can't. I understand how certain aspects of a show become slave to the progression of the story line but that doesn't mean that you have to dumb down your characters. It also doesn't mean that they have to make really stupid decisions.

Characters should ALWAYS remember what they have been through, and learn from their experiences. It really bothers me when I am watching a show and a character or group of characters completely disregard something that happened to them in a previous episode.

This show could easily be a 10 for me if the characters were more adept in their situation.

It's OK to have some people that act like morons from time and it's OK to add some humor. In a real zombie apocalypse the intelligent and resourceful people would survive.