RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 149,535
Posts: 5,944,133
Members: 26,480
Currently online: 486
Newest member: kchage

TrekToday headlines

Abrams On Star Trek Into Darkness Flaws
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Star Trek Beyond In IMAX
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Red Shirt Diaries: The Return of The Archons
By: T'Bonz on Nov 23

Abrams Loves His Lens Flares
By: T'Bonz on Nov 23

Elba Star Trek Beyond Character Speculation
By: T'Bonz on Nov 23

Retro Review: Meld
By: Michelle Erica Green on Nov 20

Borg Cube Paper Lantern
By: T'Bonz on Nov 20

Takei Responds To Internment Comments
By: T'Bonz on Nov 19

Four New Starship Models
By: T'Bonz on Nov 18

February IDW Publishing Comics
By: T'Bonz on Nov 18

Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.

Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > TV & Media

TV & Media Non-Trek television, movies, books, music, etc.

Thread Tools
Old November 8 2010, 11:42 PM   #46
Rear Admiral
Re: Undercovers Cancelled

Starbreaker wrote: View Post
BenRoethig wrote: View Post
Honestly, its the show I desperately wanted to like...but couldn't. Basically the whole series amounts to talking about national security secrets in places that are not secure and the main character being insecure about the other guy boning his wife years ago. I like the actors, I like the productions staff, I like the premise, but something's just off and has been from the start.
I think having that guy in almost every episode really hurt the show. Once was okay, but it got really repetitive with all the jealousy.
With this I agree. He never struck me as indispensible and pretty much was redundant. What could he do really that the Blooms couldn't? It was a poor attempt at comedy that was more poor than comedy. Plus I have to wonder if it was a hedge your bets type deal by having a somewhat Alpha-male type white guy, the typical kind of person you see in spy shows. However, this guy wasn't cool or smooth enough to be that type of Bondian agent, nor was he hardcore enough to be like Jack Bauer or Jason Bourne or even Michael Westin from Burn Notice.
DarKush is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 8 2010, 11:59 PM   #47
Christopher's Avatar
Re: Undercovers Cancelled

DarKush wrote: View Post
Plus I have to wonder if it was a hedge your bets type deal by having a somewhat Alpha-male type white guy, the typical kind of person you see in spy shows.
Yeah, I wondered about that. In the pilot, Leo was treated as a one-time character, but then he was reintroduced in the second episode as a regular. That felt to me like a network-ordered change, like maybe they were uncomfortable with a cast that didn't include a young male WASP type and said, "Hey, can you make that Leo guy a regular too?"
Written Worlds -- Christopher L. Bennett's blog and webpage
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote


j.j. abrams, undercovers

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:50 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.