MovieChat Forums > Jericho (2006) Discussion > This show needed better acting

This show needed better acting


I really quite liked the show but it really did lack in the acting department. The script and premise would be amazing yet the acting would simply be average. Could really have been truly special if it was well acted out.

Zach Braff - "I'm not anti-gun. But what does one hunt with an Assault Weapon? Dragons?"

reply

Really? I thought the acting was very good!

reply

[deleted]

The actors are very good. They have to be because they have to work with dialogue that is terrible.

reply

I had a problem with Skeet Ulrich's eyes which always seemed to be looking in opposite directions, which kept giving me a headache.

''I'm fortunate the pylons were not set to a lethal level."

reply

The acting was superb excluding blond-i-locks.


Open Earth Chakra
www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xfqSDpE5vw

reply

I thought it was decent, not terrible not great just decent. It doesn't really help with any half devastating/shocking thing they cut to Skeet Ulrich/Jake's shocked face over and over. Unfortunately none of the cast was really able to portray the look of devastation or sadness that came with the whole disaster vibe that is meant to be associated with the show.

You say the acting is superb but i don't see what basis you could make it on. Not one person really sold themselves as the character they were meant to portray. Hugh Laurie made himself Dr House, Bryan Cranston - Walter White, Kevin Spacey - Francis Underwood etc etc. Nobody was convincing enough to make their characters truly believable.

I do find the show very enjoyable but unfortunately it fell short of what it really could have become.

reply

The acting was one of the better things about it.

---
"Pride is not the opposite of shame, but its source. True humility is the antidote to shame."

reply

The acting, was at best average. really only a few people stood out as having any depth to them.

The absolute worse and really horrible part of this show is the removal of the show from the premise. That is the production was crap.

Why was the source of alcohol never endangered yet the bar was always full?

Why did people constantly meander around the town when they knew they had been under a nuclear attack?

Why were kids, play as if they had not a care in the world?

Why were there always people walking about but nothing getting organized or cleaned up?
Why was every building in that small town always full of people?

Unless it was a story plot...

Why didn't this reflect and actual Civil Defense preparedness that would be going on?

A great premise but horrible production and writing and half assed acting.

"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day." -Douglas Noel Adams

reply

[deleted]

The acting is spotty (at best)---but, it hits a high point (comprehensively) there at the end of Season 1 when they have the flashback to the wedding. Now we finally are able to see the trough of rancor twixt family members and the production/acting fleshes it out in it's own time. It is not hurried. Now we see. The disappointment that the parents show "Jake" is palpable. The rage the brothers hold for one another is at the brink. They're at their limit, especially "mom." As "Jake" delivers his "mother's" best man speech the parents (raise in their seats just a bit) and track him because they've lost faith & trust in their son that he'll do the right thing. (Love) is still there, as it is in all families, but, integrity has been suspended. When father & grandfather head to the river to drink & bond Jake abandons them for spare tail. The grandfather understands, but, this egregious act is not missed by Johnston and it rankles him, almost as an afterthought with clarity.

I thought it a wonderful (idea) executed flawlessly.

reply