Reviews

They should have kept the show and get rid of the title, but instead in second season they decided to keep the tile and get rid of the show (writing) instead. I gave the first season 8/10 and felt that it was really well written but sadly misnamed show, that might end up making creators lives really hard in the future because the shows values and strong points obviously stood elsewhere then what the title promotes. The second season is 4/10. It happened. They are trying so hard to live up to the name that they forgot to write the show this time around - I guess they took the advice of the audiences who where stuck in the shows title and were left somewhat horny after first season?! The second season feels soulless and out of touch, but that's what you get when your dialogues are made of bullet points and headlines for the character. It sad that marketing killed this show.

Really enjoyed the first and the second season. Third season is a big letdown and thumbles into the fields of soap operas. Even the directing isn't true to the shows core. Last two episodes directed by Ed Bianchi are so full of awkward close ups and comical angles that I'm pretty sure he had the smallest monitor in the world on his set when he was directing. The cast was really great, but the writing and directing was ment for a different show, there was nothing that the actors could have done. The show is strong 8 stars for season 1-2 and 5 stars for season 3 - watchable, but wouldn't watch it again.

I can't deside if I should have watched it in 2020 or is the world I live in simply 25 years behind it's time in 2022. If you haven't seen the show go for it, it hits the nail on the head more than once, even 25 years later, which is as alarming as carelessly funny.

So the house that had the least practical and least cutomized or designed kitchen won!? What's the point of this show when the referee' opinion is that 'the most value' add's when you do the least, basically the closer it is to the builder grade standards the better. Why on earth we torture those poor designers by devaluing their skills on this show. Only thing I enjoy about it is the actual greative processes and the end results, all the judging and everything that the production team contriputes is missing the point, three seasons in a row.

You'll love it if you have no idea what you're going to see. But I feel that all the posters are very misleading and make people rate this movie in a contecst this movie shouldn't be viewed in.

Stephen Mercant is simply fantastic.

Class system inside a class system inside a class system without a system to support it. A depiction that in an age of information you should not no longer fake a support system mearly with a phrase 'authority'. BS is harder to hide and should be even harder, eventually to be replaced with competence. So that hopfully you don't need four corpses before a real police starts to show up. This series is a reaction to it's environment rather than entertainment.

Did not manage to finish the first episode. Reminded me too much of the scene from After Life season 3 where local lady wrote and published her own books. Somehow this show seemes to be based on those books.

The first episode is great example of lazy writing, trying too hard to stick to the formula while taking a lot of shortcuts, but maybe it gets better when the season progresses.

Just finished watching this show 14 years after it's original release. If only back then they had streaming services. Apparently it got cancelled because they were sharing viewer with 30 Rock at that time (I may be misinformed here though). If that was the case it's truley pitty we only got one season. It's one of the best thing Matthew Perry has done and Mr Sorkin operates on another level even by the standards of the most talented writers. The whole cast is fantastic and retrospectively it would have been a game changer for some of them if the show have run longer and won over more viewers that it deserves. If anyone may be wondering, then the season gives the viewer a complete story. You can tell that the writers knew that the show wasn't getting a second season anytime soon so they gave it a proper ending and didn't leave any loose ends. Just click play.

Season 16 was superb. Season 17 is hard to enjoy beacause half cooked personalities, mainly from All Stars. Ronnie and Georgia especially manage to suck all the air out of the room. Hard to appreciate a team show when the dominating mentality is 'You are either against us or under us! Your choice!?' Please cast better on season 18.

What the reunion proved is that the chemistry is still there and it would be crime to let it go to waste and just sit on the couch. The brilliance that the writers and casting team managed to put together is just to rare. I wouldn't mind watching a Friends universe expansion where we follow a modern day 20 something year old people managing their lives. The spin is that their parents are more involved then it was in the 90s and some of the kids could be even living in their parents basement or driving them around. And you guessed it, the parents are the original cast of the Friends who have moved on with their lives in the past 20 years and could have evolved into new personas, some less, some more so. The original show would be kept untouched. New show skips 20 years and looks onwards from that point on, on themes of being in your 20's and also 50s today. That way the show keeps the original chemistry and adds some energy with youngsters. We would just need one more miracle casting :)

The possibilities are endless though, some of the kids could be seeing each other which means they would be having occasional dinners with both of their parents. Some of the parents could be neighbours and so on, so on, the possibilities are endless to keep the original cast on one screen. The show shouldn't be called anything Friends though. Anyway, just putting this thought out there, you'll never know. Put mainly it's just wishful thinking.

Let's be friends forever.

IMDB thought that if I like this movie I should watch Nobody. The suggestions algorithm needs some serious improvements. If US could produce a revenge movie that was even half of what Riders for Justice stands for then I wouldn't mind giving them another go but I seriously doubt they'll ever get to the same level ever with scandinavian cinema and storytelling. So anyone out there that is fed up by John Wick mania give this one a go.

The show winner is decided by calculating who added the most value to their property. If I'm right they look at how much money was put in and how much they think(!?) it would sell and then they'll calculate the difference. So anyone who has won the shows episode challenge(s) is automatically in disadvantage because they are given as a prize an extra money they now have to put into their houses and that extra money makes their 'profit' smaller. And because every estate has their market max purchase limit, it puts them all in disadvantage, because all the houses are in the same price range. The math on this show just doesn't work.

Although I had already removed my brain to watch this movie, it still wasn't enough. I had to consume remarkable amount of alcohol before I felt comfortable sitting through this movie. It's basically an experiment if the whole society had a mental capacity of a 12 year old boy. Felt like it could have been a wild life documentary about primates. Don't bother watching it if you're older than 15. The plot is as thin as a cheapest roll of toiletpaper and low on moral as your smartphones battery that's left under direct sunlight.

I'm writing about the second season. Would been fair to see the actual final prizes that all the houses were sold for. Buying a house is driven largely on emotion and houses with a more narrow target audience can actually push the prize much higher because of the lack of options on the market for that audience. Would have been a fair finale that way. At the moment second season teaches us that design and function is overrated and you should buy a house marked down on a paper.

The cast and concept was great on second season. What was not so great was the ever so loud host and the editing made me feel like it was done under drugs. Basically the grew and the cast didn't match. Also what's up with people wearing same clothes for months. I hope it was because of editing reasons not because they think we as an audience can't recognize people in new clothes.

The negative reviews stand only on a fact that the main character is portaited by a middle age female. It's rather ironic raction from Americans.

Started great, loveable characters and suprisingly a raggedly charming american lead, but last two episodes were a let down. The antagonist characters turned into overly satureated disney villaines that made you cringe throughout the episodes (although it's ment to be a light entertainment, this was way too loose) it didn't help also that swedish police suddenly morphed into a 'first shoot, then ask questions' lunatics. It felt a bit like the last two episodes were uninspired afterthought or desperate attempt to americanize the show. You simple ended up with a very weak action episodes. But I guess thats the norm if you want to sell to an american pubisher. Look what happened to a brilliant Australian show No Activity. Either way, first 4 episodes would have been 8/9 - the down to earth struggle and banter is way more fulfilling then senceless and out of place phew-phew, rat-tat-taaa and muaha-ha-haa.

Anyway congrats to mr Musarra for pushing this show through and making it happen. I would love to see a second season.

Brilliant, watch it when you're over 35. Saw it first time when it came out and didn't thought much about it. It is truly a classic.

Art department has done a great job but the script reads like a comic book. Stopped watching after first episode, linguistically too blunt and dull.

4 worst things in a world in one movie: war, god, cancer and americans. No thank you.

I really liked the first season 8/10. It had a nice concept, a beginning, an end and somewhat ironic moral and it can be taken seriously. The second season is completly different show 5-6/10. It feels like an after thought and desperate attempt to creat something new by borrowing heavily from the first season. It's completly ignoring what made the first season special and how audience was drawn into the exciting world of Bad Banks in a first place. It's more like a really bad remix of an original song that has no idea why it is remixing it in a first place. Basiclly the second season is a soap opera.

It's entertaining, but as an European it's hard to decide in 2020 if I should laugh or cry because a lot of it seems awfully like a documentary not a comedy on US present society.

First season was very enjoyable and well written. That in mind I'm going to skip the second season. It looks like that original writer had nothing to do with the second season and reading the reviews and watching the episode scorings, it's safe to assume that this show suffers from the same faith as the Goliath. Luckily the first season was conclusive so there was really no need for the second season.

Hats off to Mr Johan Fasting and actors for the marvelous first season.

And the award for the Most Annoying Film Score goes to: Uncut Gems

(Standing ovation)