Accused

The first couple of episodes were ok. Overly dramatic, melodramatic I might say, and I thought the "twists" were sort of clever. However the "twists" became predictable quite quickly and are no longer twists. If you know the twist is coming, is it really a twist? The more annoying regularity in the show is the politics. Every show now has a political lecture woven into the plot, and the lecture seems the primary reason the episode was made. I am OK with a "moral to the story", but this is so in your face I feel astonished that they are not asking for money for the cause. I will deleting this from my DVR.

I love that this show isn't afraid to tackle some controversial topics. The first episode had me interested the entire time. Not once did I check my phone. And I liked that the episode wasn't afraid to talk about the "other side" of a topic that can be very sensitive in nature. I know for myself when something like what's depicted at the end of that show happens, I like a lot of people (I think) automatically express sympathy for the victims and place blame on those responsible. And if the perpetrator is a kid, I automatically want to blame his or her parents. This show depicts the point of view of the parents in that situation and what is like to know that your child could possibly cause that kind of harm. Very interesting. Acting wasn't great and the episode moved way too fast. Could've easily turned this into a movie cause there was a lot of storyline to coed.

Having not watched an entire season of a network TV show since Fringe left the airwaves in 2013, I was excited for Accused. I figured that if any show could get me back to the traditional TV dial, it would be one created by Howard Gordon (he of 24 & Homeland fame). After a promising first three episodes (7/8 star quality), however, a slate of four below-5 star episodes by my ranking led me to jump ship and not continue watching.

For a very basic overview, Accused is an anthology show that tells a different court/trial-based story every week. It is not at all serialized (no carry-over from week to week) and features new guest stars every outing.

Like I said, the first three episodes definitely held my interest and had me hoping for continued improvement. Nothing groundbreaking, to be sure, but I could tell they were produced by talent that is largely beyond what is usually glimpsed on the major networks.

Unfortunately, the quality quickly devolved instead of gradually improved. It became readily apparent that each episode was simply picking a "social cause of the week" and sketching out a thinly-constructed court case based on that concept. Pablum for the most generic audience possible, in other words. There is very little intriguing exploration of the topic-at-hand.

I also believe that the 42-minute network window does Accused a great disservice and can potentially explain a lot of the weaknesses. By the time the writers establish a theme and flesh out a whole new set of characters, there is very little time remaining for meaningful thematic or character-driven analysis. In a genre-court-where emotional backstory is everything, this is a glaring weakness week-in and week-out.

So, despite really wanting to like/follow this show, I felt it becoming a chore to watch-the surest sign of needing to find other TV pastures.

This is an anthology series based on the premise of someone being charged with a crime...someone who really meant not to "harm"...but to "help."

The premise is interesting, and so far, I've only watched the first two stories. Now I must say...the first story...the pilot...I really liked. I found it interesting and thought provoking...questioning what a parent should do in such a horrible situation. Okay...so then I progressed onto the second story, and I was sort of "turned off." Without giving away any spoilers, I found the second story to be sort of trite, sappy and stupid. The law is the law. It shouldn't change for certain people just because of stupid dumb emotional reasons. Can you imagine if the law was really that malleable? What would even be the purpose of having it? So yea....second story? I know it's supposed to make viewers all "teary eyed" in a lame Hallmark sort of way, but sorry. It just sort of sucks.

Anyway, that's the deal. I think you'll like some of these stories and dislike others. Overall, though, the show is worth a look. I'm still going to watch the third story, because I'm just curious. Like I said...the show has a really good premise. It's thought- provoking and I applaud that. It's just.... I wish the writing (especially in the courtroom) wouldn't get so sappy and emotional when it is indeed, a show about the LAW. And, the law is the law, right?

The first episode was gripping, interesting and kinda fresh. It did hook me on. Unfortunately the rest of the show, so far, is boring and predictable.

The third episode was a bit interesting as well. The stories are not new or original, the most of them we have seen in other shows and that it's weak spot.

From the point of acting, the show have some really good actors. Which does not make it any interesting to watch as writing do really lack. I would guess it is harder to put so much story into one episode, to truly make the story shine. But we have what we have.

I would say it us not worth watching, kinda mess at this point.