Eureka is a perfect example of what often happens in science fiction. You have an interesting idea and some fun science-fiction adventures, which are then ruined by the writers trying too hard to be "good writers".
What do I mean by "good writers". If a show has an A plot and a B plot, that are thematically linked but otherwise separate from each other, that's an acceptable show. A good example of this is any number of CSI-type shows where you have an A pair and a B pair working on separate mysteries. If those A plots and B plots are woven together into a single story, you have good writing. But if those plots are forced together into a jumbled mess, then you have a situation where the writers are trying too hard.
Eureka will often have this. A great example is the second episode, which is designed to funnel two plots with very different themes into one conclusion. The problem is the rest of the episode is bouncing back and forth between paranormal horror and psychological thriller. Either on their own would have been fun, but the two don't really pair well together.
Many episodes or season arcs kick off with an idiot plot, and/or end with some sort of deus ex machina. Again, this is the writers creating an idea that could be fun, but either not knowing how to kick off the story or not knowing how to conclude it.
Then there's the characters themselves. Some of the characters are generally fun. The main character (Sheriff Carter) and his deputy Jo are a blast. So are many of the side characters. But there are some problems with many of the others.
Allison Blake and Nathan Stark are important people in Eureka. They are both boring characters (especially Stark), who mainly serve to put Carter into a love triangle. Stark's personality is so nonexistent that the only reason we know he has a history with Blake or that he hates Carter is because he says so.
Zoe Carter could be an interesting character, except she's rarely used in the show's main plots. Her relationship with her Dad is very weird, for example not being allowed to drink caffeine. It's never established that she has a bad history when she drinks caffeine, it's just weird.
Then there's some weird side characters, such as Taggart (whose fake Australian accent is even worse than the Outback Steakhouse commercials). Or Beverly, who I'm not sure if she's an innkeeper, a psychiatrist, or an escort, but then later you find out she's also a spy and is good? Bad? Whatever the episode needs her to be.
The same problem follows Henry, who is the local handyman and probably the smartest person in town. At the start of Season 2, he is holding a grudge for emotional reasons, that he scientifically knows he shouldn't, because of a death of a person close to him. At the end of season 2, he is acting the exact opposite (based on science and logic) for someone who is directly responsible for that person's death. The problem is that while there might have been character growth during this time, you never see it, because all of it has happened off camera.
Overall, this is the show's curse. Nearly every episode has a great premise that could've been a lot of fun. But it also has something that makes you roll your eyes and groan. If the writers had taken a step back and focused on giving us fun, high-concept sci-fi misadventures, then we could have had a great show. But they tried too hard to be "good writers", and every time they failed to meet the bar they set for themselves, it shows.
What do I mean by "good writers". If a show has an A plot and a B plot, that are thematically linked but otherwise separate from each other, that's an acceptable show. A good example of this is any number of CSI-type shows where you have an A pair and a B pair working on separate mysteries. If those A plots and B plots are woven together into a single story, you have good writing. But if those plots are forced together into a jumbled mess, then you have a situation where the writers are trying too hard.
Eureka will often have this. A great example is the second episode, which is designed to funnel two plots with very different themes into one conclusion. The problem is the rest of the episode is bouncing back and forth between paranormal horror and psychological thriller. Either on their own would have been fun, but the two don't really pair well together.
Many episodes or season arcs kick off with an idiot plot, and/or end with some sort of deus ex machina. Again, this is the writers creating an idea that could be fun, but either not knowing how to kick off the story or not knowing how to conclude it.
Then there's the characters themselves. Some of the characters are generally fun. The main character (Sheriff Carter) and his deputy Jo are a blast. So are many of the side characters. But there are some problems with many of the others.
Allison Blake and Nathan Stark are important people in Eureka. They are both boring characters (especially Stark), who mainly serve to put Carter into a love triangle. Stark's personality is so nonexistent that the only reason we know he has a history with Blake or that he hates Carter is because he says so.
Zoe Carter could be an interesting character, except she's rarely used in the show's main plots. Her relationship with her Dad is very weird, for example not being allowed to drink caffeine. It's never established that she has a bad history when she drinks caffeine, it's just weird.
Then there's some weird side characters, such as Taggart (whose fake Australian accent is even worse than the Outback Steakhouse commercials). Or Beverly, who I'm not sure if she's an innkeeper, a psychiatrist, or an escort, but then later you find out she's also a spy and is good? Bad? Whatever the episode needs her to be.
The same problem follows Henry, who is the local handyman and probably the smartest person in town. At the start of Season 2, he is holding a grudge for emotional reasons, that he scientifically knows he shouldn't, because of a death of a person close to him. At the end of season 2, he is acting the exact opposite (based on science and logic) for someone who is directly responsible for that person's death. The problem is that while there might have been character growth during this time, you never see it, because all of it has happened off camera.
Overall, this is the show's curse. Nearly every episode has a great premise that could've been a lot of fun. But it also has something that makes you roll your eyes and groan. If the writers had taken a step back and focused on giving us fun, high-concept sci-fi misadventures, then we could have had a great show. But they tried too hard to be "good writers", and every time they failed to meet the bar they set for themselves, it shows.