Falling Water

So I've never written a review before so bare with me.

Falling Water's preview was intriguing. Dreams, the sub-conscious mind, connecting on another level along with the required dose of mystery and the hint of coming answers. It looked to have all of the necessary ingredients for a tasty, high intellect sci-fi drama soufflé.

So, my highly intellectual, overly dramatic sci-fi loving mind insisted that I take a bite.

Bittersweet.Or rather "sweetbitter". It swirled around in my head like a slightly old chunk of dark chocolate would on my tongue, but in reverse.

For what little you get from the first episode the idea is very sweet having most of the qualities a TV series of this genre should.

But then you get the bitter.

The writing is harsh to say the least. Cliché, dis-jointed and seemingly lacking much direction. It just didn't flow very well and that took a toll on the episode as a whole.

I'll watch a few more episodes with the hopes that this was noticed by whoever is in charge of the writing and can somehow remedy the cheesiness. Maybe have the writers watch a few old Chris Carter X-Files episodes to get a "taste" of some excellent episode writing.

So, to summarize, you should take a bite of this treat but expect the bitter taste of sub-standard writing along with the sweet aroma that the premise creates.

Bon Appetit. ;)

This show is not getting much love from the gurus at Metacritic. You don't have to watch too much to see why. It is absolutely bewildering. To say that three people are sharing the same dream, as the first reviewer did, is to put it mildly. It would be more accurate to say that elements of the dreams of each show up in the dreams of the others. Which would be tough enough. BUT . . . .

There is a dream researcher, who may or may not be a mega billionaire. There is a baby, who may or may not have been born. There is a love affair, which may or may not have happened. There is a mass suicide, which apparently DID happen, but with someone on the scene who has no apparent role in the tragedy . . . but there she is. And so on.

But with all, I like this one. There are SO many shows on television these days, you can't watch them all. And too many that are similar - small town bewildered by death/disappearance of child - mystery to be solved by detective with his/her problems of their own; people have mysteriously returned from the dead; a plague has ravaged 99% of the earth - and - my favorite - what I have named the British plot - a great terrorist plot is hatched, hero must unravel, only to discover . . . .it's . . . it's. . . . the GOVERNMENT!!!! This was original 50 years ago, guys. It's a hackneyed cliché now.

So I started the show because of the credibility of the producer, Gale Hurd, and I will stay with it, bewildering or not. It is unique, and that counts for a lot.

Season 1 was ethereal, engaging, full of promise. Season 2 was formulaic, commercial garbage. It wasn't aided by changing the production staff, and supporting characters, with a weak story.

I'd be interested in to know the backstory on why the critics have taken such a negative view of this series right off the bat. The Rotten Tomatoes consensus (dating from the very first episode) is "Falling Water attempts complexity and intrigue but churns out an unimaginative concept lacking a redeemable payoff."

The fact is the concept is highly original--I have spent my life reading and viewing science-fiction and have never come across this theme before. And how can they possibly know that it is "lacking a redeemable payoff"?

Is it possible that these reviewers receive a whole series plot development along with the copy of the first episode? I mean, if they know how the series develops and,for that reason, they know it is a dud, this should be acknowledged up-front somewhere.

Although it's eerily hard to follow, a mind boggler, the actors are very good, especially David Ajala (sexy). I am watching it for the second time so it is definitely worth it.