arthurscheen
Nov. 2024 ist beigetreten
Willkommen auf neuen Profil
Unsere Aktualisierungen befinden sich noch in der Entwicklung. Die vorherige Version Profils ist zwar nicht mehr zugänglich, aber wir arbeiten aktiv an Verbesserungen und einige der fehlenden Funktionen werden bald wieder verfügbar sein! Bleibe dran, bis sie wieder verfügbar sind. In der Zwischenzeit ist Bewertungsanalyse weiterhin in unseren iOS- und Android-Apps verfügbar, die auf deiner Profilseite findest. Damit deine Bewertungsverteilung nach Jahr und Genre angezeigt wird, beziehe dich bitte auf unsere neue Hilfeleitfaden.
Abzeichen2
Wie du dir Kennzeichnungen verdienen kannst, erfährst du unter Hilfeseite für Kennzeichnungen.
Bewertungen1
Bewertung von arthurscheen
Rezensionen1
Bewertung von arthurscheen
I watched the first episode, and I couldn't bring myself to continue further.
The show suffers from a lack of character development. The focus on the race, sexual orientation, and inclusivity of the main characters feels prioritized over crafting a genuinely thrilling and complex character. This often detracts from what could be a compelling narrative, but unfortunately, this seems to be a recurring theme in modern Disney productions.
The storytelling feels heavy-handed, exemplified by a spouse who leaks information or perhaps a judge whose loyalties are unclear. The whistleblower passing on crucial intelligence to a prosecutor who fails to grasp the importance and lets the whistleblower die while sipping wine at home adds to the feeling of disconnection. This same character is credited as an exceptional DA, yet the portrayal lacks the depth to support that claim. What the audience gets is the image of a housewife dressed up as a DA, which does no justice to the role's complexity. The result is a lack of tension and a plot that struggles to ground itself in reality, offering instead an incoherent blend of scenes that feel superficial and contrived.
The props and technical details further detract from the experience. The documents the character searches through appear random, as does the screen a colleague pretends to analyze. It reminds me of the unrealistic depictions in hacker movies, where poorly researched props become distractions. Accurate details could have provided a sense of believability but were sorely lacking.
A particularly jarring moment was when an entire operation is abruptly called off by a phone call. This breaks any illusion of realism. In actual high-stakes operations, like those led by the FIOT, once they are set in motion, a simple phone call wouldn't halt progress. And for a covert mission, sharing too many details with a large group rather than limiting it to essential personnel only adds to the implausibility. These oversights pulled me out of the story and highlighted how far removed the show is from reality, making it difficult to become immersed.
However, it is worth acknowledging that these shortcomings do not solely reflect the work of the cast or crew. Their performances and technical contributions may still hold merit, but they are let down by writing that leans more on broad strokes than on meticulous world-building. The potential for a gripping story is buried under an array of missteps that overshadow what could have been an engaging narrative.
In the end, it feels like an opportunity wasted-entertainment that doesn't invite you to believe in its world but instead leaves you questioning its authenticity.
The show suffers from a lack of character development. The focus on the race, sexual orientation, and inclusivity of the main characters feels prioritized over crafting a genuinely thrilling and complex character. This often detracts from what could be a compelling narrative, but unfortunately, this seems to be a recurring theme in modern Disney productions.
The storytelling feels heavy-handed, exemplified by a spouse who leaks information or perhaps a judge whose loyalties are unclear. The whistleblower passing on crucial intelligence to a prosecutor who fails to grasp the importance and lets the whistleblower die while sipping wine at home adds to the feeling of disconnection. This same character is credited as an exceptional DA, yet the portrayal lacks the depth to support that claim. What the audience gets is the image of a housewife dressed up as a DA, which does no justice to the role's complexity. The result is a lack of tension and a plot that struggles to ground itself in reality, offering instead an incoherent blend of scenes that feel superficial and contrived.
The props and technical details further detract from the experience. The documents the character searches through appear random, as does the screen a colleague pretends to analyze. It reminds me of the unrealistic depictions in hacker movies, where poorly researched props become distractions. Accurate details could have provided a sense of believability but were sorely lacking.
A particularly jarring moment was when an entire operation is abruptly called off by a phone call. This breaks any illusion of realism. In actual high-stakes operations, like those led by the FIOT, once they are set in motion, a simple phone call wouldn't halt progress. And for a covert mission, sharing too many details with a large group rather than limiting it to essential personnel only adds to the implausibility. These oversights pulled me out of the story and highlighted how far removed the show is from reality, making it difficult to become immersed.
However, it is worth acknowledging that these shortcomings do not solely reflect the work of the cast or crew. Their performances and technical contributions may still hold merit, but they are let down by writing that leans more on broad strokes than on meticulous world-building. The potential for a gripping story is buried under an array of missteps that overshadow what could have been an engaging narrative.
In the end, it feels like an opportunity wasted-entertainment that doesn't invite you to believe in its world but instead leaves you questioning its authenticity.