KevinLB I missed this one when it was first released, no great loss, I'm afraid! Apparently, I've fallen into the same trap as others here who have felt compelled to spend some time and write a review.For a show that has so few positives, it's been hard to turn off. I believe that if it hadn't been based on a classic, Crusoe might have stood a chance. But it's impossible to watch this and not compare it to the source material.The location and cinematography are pretty darned good. Plus, the tree-house is outstanding!. More than once I felt as if I was seeing a 17th century MacGyver. Instead of duck-tape and a Swiss army knife, it was vines and bamboo.I mostly agree with the other people about the scripts and acting. It's not very hard to find fault with this one. It does tho, have something that's kept me watching. Judging by the length and quality of the reviews. I'm not the only one!I won't be searching high and low to find the dvd's for Crusoe. One viewing is enough. In fact, I haven't watched the last episode and I'm not sure that I will. Who knows, with the current revival trend, someone might make a stab at this one again.If so, keep the tree-house and trash the rest!

kirkdzsimi As a lifelong Robinson Crusoe fan I was excited to find this show. The drama flits between excellent period drama driven by Sam Neill's conniving Jeremiah Blackthorne and the absurd and twee politically correct world on the island.Robinson Crusoe has set up an Ewok style village in the trees with Ichabod Crane style ingenuity that, just as in Sleepy Hollow, is designed to amuse a modern audience. Phillip Winchester plays a decent role as Robinson Crusoe for the most part but is so much lighter in countenance than Defoe's Crusoe or anyone else marooned on an island for years and is reminiscent of Michael Praed's Robin Hood but Praed's romantically brooding sadness has been replaced with a slightly smug confidence in his own ability and 21st century values.I am also confused at the choice of Tongayi Chirisa as "Friday", a rescued sacrificial victim. He looks and sounds African which would have made no sense for a South American tribesman in the 17th century. Also why he would speak English to his father when the Spanish sailors speak Spanish to each other is a mystery of modern screen writing.The dialogue between Crusoe and Friday is often trite and primarily involves Crusoe being right about more or less everything yet telling everyone how much he respects Friday as an equal - yet he admits on several occasions that he only calls him "Friday" because he couldn't pronounce his real name, which slightly smacks of racism "a l'indifference".Crusoe's biggest problem as television is patchy writing and while the finale ticks all the boxes and is genuinely exciting, huge chunks of the show seem to just feature Robinson and Friday playing around and this is not only wasted story time but ultimately meant that ratings dropped beneath the recommissioning level. I would have been far more interested in both characters' backstories in a more detailed way than the barely satisfactory flashback sequences we are given and also just a little bit less smiling and a bit more grit.Also it drives me crazy how when fighting bloodthirsty cannibals or pirates that Robinson and Friday are happier to kick their foe in the head than kill them...very "A-Team" I am afraid. Also despite Friday being lauded constantly by Crusoe for his warrior skills and intelligence, Friday twice allows captives to play dead and then take him prisoner and fails to realise that when he has his own hands chained that he could easily throttle his captor with his foot long manacle chain.Visually superb however and a great show for kids, I wanted this to be so much better than it was and it had the cast, crew and writers (based on the bits filmed in England at least) to do so. Sadly not surprised it didn't get a second season. Too bad!

quantum_tronics "Crusoe" is a TV show that incorporates imagination, adventure, suspense with high moral character traits prevalent in the main characters. I admire NBC's willingness to try an older formula for TV value. The main characters themselves are noble, unselfish, seek the greater good of others, and resolve the need for conflict in a reasoned and personal moral manner. As a viewer, I understand that no individual is perfect and do not feel that the writers have taken advantage of this sentiment. The back drops are impressive, may be considered over the top by the "realist" viewers, but I don't find it condescending at all. Look...a show that is about being on a warm and sunny remote island, with one's best "mate" along for the ride,living off the land, no taxes to pay, bills to pay, money to earn, living off one's wits, living a life of adventure and challenge every moment. I look beyond the minor flaws of which are too minor to mention, and prefer to look to the entertainment intent of the show. Congratulations NBC, the show writers and the actors, for bringing a "Peter Pan" type adventure back into regular TV for families.

mysticnox If you like this kind of thing, you'll like Crusoe but you have to get over the "cheese".Its predictable, and the acting isn't the greatest.The sets are incredible.All of these things can be said exactly the same for Hercules: The Legendary Journeys (which I own the first season on DVD so I obviously like it) and Xena: Warrior Princess.Since I liked both those shows, I guess it remains to be seen whether I'll like it for this one.I find the show passable, and amusing if you're looking for something light and fluffy thats obviously not meant for anything serious.