Didireaux So funny that this show has been over for nearly five years and 2 of us here stumbled across it (Hulu) just this week. I did like it enough that I wish it had pulled itself out of its aggravating, self-destructive Will they/won't they? trajectory and become something more, with more episodes to provide the quite diverting qualities that the show did have going for it. Loved the male lead; thought Rashida Jones was miscast (at least opposite Stephen Moyer). Loved Michael's supporting cast: sister, nephew, Indian friends, sister-in-law. Edie's friends not so much (may say something about my own social milieu) as they seemed much younger, phonier, grungier and a bit hopeless. Good soundtrack. Lastly, speaking of music, I could never believe that Rashida's Edie would be seriously into rock music, while I would easily believe that the Michael character would be, while he was evidently music clueless. So--close, but a miss, as statistically most shows are more likely to be. Think the US version that's been done but never released, would probably be not as good, but more successful, like The Office.

joyncali Unlike the other review... I think this show is innovative and very interesting...I have gotten my friends into the show and can't wait to see more episodes..Everyone who I know that watches the show finds it entertaining and well worth searching for it..It is a TV show not an Oscar winning documentary... So I find the 1st review very brutal.Tivo it and make up your own mind about it..The characters are interesting and multi-faceted.

franabanana Charming leads, interesting location shoots, and a boppy soundtrack make for a pretty mini-series, but one lacking in much backbone or substance.The production hinges on the two leads: Edie, the poor but lovable social-worker-record-store-worker, and Michael, the bad-boy-banker-with-a-heart-of-gold. Yes, they are types and stock characters. They meet by chance when Edie visits London and needs to borrow some money from a bloke in a pub. He gets her number, and the hijinks ensue.They begin a tentative transatlantic romance, with complications of former lovers, jobs, friends and family, as well as their own cautious natures, standing in the way of True Love. So should you spend 7 hours watching this series? I was utterly charmed, but recognize some drawbacks: wooden dialogue (and acting), silly situations worthy of a bedroom farce (mistaken identities and the like), and a lack of realism (how does poor Edie manage to buy those tickets to London? Guess she has good credit!)I chalk up my enjoyment of the series to the leads, especially to Stephen Moyer, who brings an edge and a sly wit to Michael. Despite tragically misguided sideburns, he is a strong presence, and manages to overcome the limitations of the dialogue and trite situations. Rashida Jones fares less well. She is certainly beautiful (Peggy Lipton + the "Q" = gorgeous), but is more shaky in her command of the character and dialogue. I haven't seen Ms. Jones in other roles, so no harm, no foul. I'm not sure how many actors could pull this character off. All I can say is I enjoyed watching her struggle, and she did OK with a tough assignment.The last characters worth mentioning are the cities of London and New York. Nicely done exterior shots provide more realism than the story itself. Add in great soundtrack, and I was happily diverted.

Robin Harrison Right, this programme was quite simply terrible. I mean, just so bad. The leads were totally wooden, had no chemistry and were totally unsympathetic, so the whole will-they-won't-they dynamic never really seemed to matter; these people are so uninteresting and didn't even seem to like each other, so why the hell would any viewer want them to get together? The bloke, however, was at least fairly entertaining to watch, due to the fact that with his abnormally large head, he was obviously a Thunderbird puppet, whose Pinocchio-like wish to become a real boy had been granted... In fact, all the characters are fairly uninspiring, especially the Thunderbird puppet's nephew, who is in the film solely to allow other characters to reveal their sensitive sides. Perhaps if he'd been a baby seal, who made eyes at the camera (with a studio audience obediently 'awww-ing') he would've been more bearable. There were only three characters who actually came across as anything more than insubstantial twats: Macaulay Culkin's ex-wife, who gets her bits out on several occasions; Thunderbird's sister, who actually seems human, rather than a hologram of a pretty person, as the rest of the cast; and Thunderbird's ethnic minority best friend, solely because he was in Teachers and is, in Teachers, a top actor. Apart from these honourable exceptions, the characters are dreadful finger puppet people, anxiously trying to be cool and do cool stuff (never before have I seen so much self-conscious smoking). You can almost imagine most of them lying in bed at night, unable to sleep, as they fret and worry: "Am I cool?" The writers made a real stab at making the people do interesting things, or utter interesting, quotable lines, but these were so obvious, almost signposted, that they just seemed to be trying too hard. Believe it or not, there were actually some small parts of the series that weren't too bad: the music is cracking, though it has obviously been picked to hammer home the fact that the characters are hip, happening, cosmopolitan bright young things. Don't watch this. No, actually do, its very funny. Shame it wasn't a comedy.