MovieChat Forums > Bull (2016) Discussion > I am trying to like this show but I don'...

I am trying to like this show but I don't know how much more I can take

posted 8 years ago by silverr8c
22 replies | jump to latest

Most of the things I don't like have already been mentioned my other people. The thing that have problems with is money. Judging from the size and the qualifications and background of the staff plus the cost of equipment I have a hard time believing anyone can afford him. There must be millions of dollars worth of computers and equipment, plus the technicians to run all the fancy stuff. Then there is a lawyer on his staff, plus the cost of multiple shadow juries. Bull has to charge a few million per case to break even

Like the actors and the stories are somewhat entertaining but something is just not right about this show, it just does not seem worth my time unless it improves (that is assuming the show is fixable)

Thomas Gibson has been fired from Criminal minds now I won't watch CM, No Hotch no watch

[–] margare-09892 8 years ago

The whole jury consultant idea is intriguing, but the execution here is faulty, for reasons that have been well elucidated by other posters. What leaves a bad taste in my mouth is that it's based on that despicable phony, Dr. Phil. In an interview, Weatherly said that Dr. Phil had considerable input in series development.

[–] jptrugger-84-585771 8 years ago

Well, he is listed as a "creator" and "executive producer" so he certainly had input and still does.

But he is a big phony as already pointed out.

[–] shelmar 8 years ago

Agreed! The whole thing is a contrived mess. The recent show assembled the mock jury 5 or more times. Don't these people have jobs? It's just not a realistic premise. The equipment, the staff. Where does the money come from? Plus, where is this show going? I'm bored already. Oh yeah...he needs to shave.

[–] mstictac 8 years ago

I don't mind the scruff but I am concerned about how many times I will have to suspend my disbelief. I am a Michael Weatherly fan and I want to like this show. Unlike many here, I liked the premier a bit better than episode two. I can't quite put my finger on what it is I want to see but, whatever it is, I haven't quite seen it yet.

[–] silverr8c 8 years ago

Exactly, there are a lot of "ain't rights in this show and I do not know if this mess can be fixed.

By the way When I saw Dr Phil"s name in the first episode it turned me off from the get go.

Thomas Gibson has been fired from Criminal minds now I won't watch CM, No Hotch no watch

[–] kerryw-95-376151 8 years ago

I'm confused. You seem to be faulting the show over the use of mock trials/jurors. However, running mock trials is one of the basic jobs of a real jury consultant. One consultant's website made it clear they went through the process multiple times in order to get more accurate results like one would a science experiment. Only the mirror jury sits through the whole trial. Being on the mock jury would not be that large of a time commitment.

[–] readerf61 8 years ago

For me, it's not the *use* of mock trials/juries, it is that those mock trials, juries and mirror juries are just more expenses on top of everything else that is being shown. I read a jury consultant's take on the show, and while they were grateful to have some light shed upon their profession, they felt Bull's work space was pure Hollywood fiction. It is a fiction so unbelievable, it detracts from the show for me.

[–] seldon913 8 years ago

And unlike Criminal Minds, the real BAU does not have it's own jet, let alone a $50 million plus luxury jet. I also seriously doubt they have a 27 year old with 3 PHDs.

Crime Scene Investigators work only with forensic evidence. They do not make arrests or interrogate suspects.

NCIS does not have an office in LA.

[–] readerf61 8 years ago

And your point is?

I rarely watch those shows, for lots of reasons, but I *did* watch a few episodes before I realized I didn't want to record and watch them. How about giving me a chance to decide whether this show is engaging enough that I can overlook the unbelievable budget of this individual contractor or not?

I'm so pleased for all of you viewers who have decided on viewing 2 episodes that this show is perfect for you. That rarely happens to me; you don't know how lucky you are. I'm down to 1-2 shows that I record regularly, and, believe it or not, I wanted to add this one.

[–] silverr8c 8 years ago

I usually takes me between one and there episodes to make up my mind. So far I am not impressed but I am willing to try the third and forth episode before I make a final decision.

I guess we differ I do not understand how anyone would need a whole season to decide and you do not understand how a person could make up their mind in a few episodes.

Thomas Gibson has been fired from Criminal minds now I won't watch CM, No Hotch no watch

[–] readerf61 8 years ago

I don't need a whole season to decide, and it has happened to me that I've watched a pilot and thought, oh, my, I really want to watch more of this. Just rarely.

I feel like I'm being pushed to *love* this show or I'm a hater. The reality is, I'm still not decided. But because I have a problem with some of the writing--and trust me, they could have solved the whole "how can anyone pay for this?" problem with any one of the really good suggestions made on this board--then I'm not allowed to wait and see if the writing improves.

This doesn't happen on any other IMDb board I've been on. Viewers are allowed to discuss both what they enjoy and what they have problems with without judgement.

[–] seldon913 8 years ago

I don't think it should be an absolute love or hate thing. For myself, the current status is 'good enough to continue watching' and the status is open to changing. Heck, Castle was in the love status for the first few seasons, was definitely down at least to like for season 7, and in season 8 I found myself skipping parts of the episodes then stopped watching completely about halfway through even though I knew it was the final season.

[–] nasloranger 8 years ago

I don't think it should be an absolute love or hate thing. ...

for the record, I've decided to not watch Bull (after watching the first 2 episodes), but out of curiosity I'm still reading the Message Boards for both Bull - - and NCIS (old habits die hard)...

and you know what I "hate"? (I don't use that word often, ya' know)...

the die-hard fans of Michael Weatherly who are so determined that his show be a success, that they are basically telling those posters who don't love the show - or who are as yet undecided - to "get the hell off the board if you can't say anything nice about it!"
to paraphrase that old bumper sticker about America, "Bull - love it or leave it!"

for those people, this is not a board for pro/con discussion; it's a "Bull/MW Fan Club Board" - - others need not reply!

wow! so much for freedom of expression... 

My motto:
Live long and Pester!


[–] silverr8c 8 years ago

Quite frankly I never bother visiting sites discussing shows I no longer watch (I do continue making comments about fear the walking dead without watching the show but I do watch talking dead). I have never said love it or leave it on any show discussion but I do not understand why anyone would waste their time talking about a show they do not watch.

I will concede that making an occasional visit to see if things have improved is a different matter entirely that someone who spends hours every day posting on a forum dedicated to a show they do not watch.

Thomas Gibson has been fired from Criminal minds now I won't watch CM, No Hotch no watch

[–] Byrdz 8 years ago

It is a fiction so unbelievable, it detracts from the show for me.

'Bout sums up the problems for me with this one. They need to play up the story and play down the gimmicks as far as this viewer is concerned.

As an aside ... there was (briefly) a series with Kathy Bates about a lawyer who worked out of a shoe store ... "Harry's Law". Silly concept ? Sure ! BUT, for me, the characters and the whole set up just worked. It's this incredibly expensive jim-crackery-gadget filled "stuff" that keeps distracting .. and that really really weird jury mind meld thing.

As I've said before ... maybe week three will be better. Nothing much else on in that time slot anyway (Dancing with the Who Are These People ???) so will keep giving it "just one more" chance.

[–] kerryw-95-376151 8 years ago

But the person I replied to had a problem with the mock jurors. I was just pointing out that was not something made up by the show. Is the office crazy expensive? Yes, but I disagree with you that it makes the story so unbelievable. To me, it's not a factor at all. It's just pretty scenery.
Some of the negative reactions people are expressing about the show are actually about the practice of using jury consultants, what they do in the course of a trial and who can afford them. It is making people uncomfortable. That's what I find interesting about the show. It's peeling back different layers of a court proceeding and I'm not sure I'm always going to like what is being exposed.

[–] readerf61 8 years ago

Thank you for a very civil and informative response! I hadn't thought about approaching the show as an intimate view into what happens behind the scenes of a trial. I honestly kept getting gobsmacked at the office, and was sorta unable to move past that.

It will be interesting to watch episode 3 from a different perspective.

[–] mstictac 8 years ago

I guess it's easy to resent the rich who have often been let off the hook for what a less advantaged person has his/her life ruined for doing. However, the rich kid in episode was actually innocent so the conclusion was fine for me. I found the idea that the pilot was the sole survivor hard to get past in the second one. Since trial consultants most likely service those who can afford them (the rich or corporations) it seems that the stories will need to unfold accordingly in order to have some credibility. That's the other thing that I found hard to swallow about the second episode. When the pilot fired the airline's lawyer, did Bull's firm take her on pro bono?

I get that it's just a tv show but these kinds of glaring details are hard for me to take in stride.

[–] margare-09892 8 years ago

I noticed that the credits read "Dr. Phillip T. McGraw". Remember the Fat Albert credit for "Dr. William H. Cosby"? A creepy parallel, no?

[–] AnonGuest33 8 years ago

Like or hate Phil McGraw he earned a Ph.D and there has never been any whispers of him raping and drugging anyone. On the other hand there had been whispers of Bill Cosby doing just that for years before it finally blew up a couple of years ago. And by years, I mean years. I remember reading a story about it at least 15 years ago and then it just went away.

[–] graceb103 8 years ago

I am a Michael Weatherly fan and enjoy seeing him every week. I want to like this show, but it is coming across as too slick. The high tech offices, mirror jurors who even look like the actual ones and Dr Bull sizing people up in less than ten seconds!. Requires a good bit bit of suspension of disbelief to watch!. BUT, quite a few of my favorite show didnt grab me in the first couple of episodes. So im going to give it a bit longer.

[–] mstictac 8 years ago

I just finally got to watch last weeks DVRed episode but I'm liking it more and more. I like how the characters are being fleshed out little by little and am very excited about seeing Bull's past revealed. I'm becoming excited about this show.