Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Yes, but . . . .

Will I watch Terriers again this week? Yes, but only to see if it improves. I liked the actors, but the show pulled out nearly every private-eye cliché you can think of. To wit:

1. The down-and-out unlicensed p. i. who's a recovering alcoholic. Oh, yeah, and he's divorced but still loves his ex.

2. The old friend who might as well have been wearing and "I'm going to be murdered" T-shirt.

3. "You might be an addled druggie, and bad men might be trying to kill you, but you are the daughter of my old friend, so I will save and protect you.

4. The rich and powerful and evil California real estate developer.

5. "You might be a rich and powerful and evil California real estate developer, but you had my old friend killed, so I will destroy you."

6. And probably others I've already forgotten.

Maybe the second show will turn all this stuff on its head. We'll see.


  1. Anonymous9:12 AM

    I think that pretty much says it all.

    If not for Donal Logue's performance I would not even give it a second chance.

    I must admit I cringed when he gave the "I'm going to destroy you" speech.

    It was embarrassing even to listen to that.


  2. It really was. I'm afraid I was rolling my eyes.

  3. Yes, I agree with all those points. But it was still a good debut if only for the chemistry between the two leads and the crisp dialogue. The main problem I had with the show was the title.


    Because they chew on stuff and won't let go? Because they live like dogs?

  4. Yeah, I liked the leads, too. And I'm still puzzled by that title. There must be a good reason for it, but I don't get it.

  5. Gotta love those rich powerful Californians, eh? I used to be one of those, but some alcoholic unlicensed P.I. destroyed me. Darn! Now I'm just an old fat book collector and blogger guy.

  6. Steve Oerkfitz4:14 PM

    They left out the old army buddy who needs help. Magnum P.I. used that one at least once a season.