Weeds (TV Series 2005–2012) Poster


User Reviews

Review this title
162 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
martinbear7 October 2005
I haven't been a dedicated fan of a TV series since Moonlighting back in the 80's but I'm totally hooked on Weeds. Mary-Louise Parker plays the role of Nancy Botwin perfectly! As a widowed housewife trying to maintain an upper class lifestyle for herself and her two sons by selling weed, she obviously encounters problems maintaining her two roles....mother and drug dealer. Parker really emphasizes this "dual role" and she does it brilliantly....you'll find yourself really feeling for the character and cheering for her all the way. Elizabeth Perkins in the role of Celia, Nancy's close friend, is phenomenal. Watch her carefully in this show, her brilliant acting and her characters dry sarcastic nature provides much of the shows' comedic value but it is sometimes very subtle. I personally think Perkins deserves a supporting Emmy for this one. In short, Jenji Kohan has scored big-time with Weeds and I hope it enjoys a good long run on Showtime....I'm definitely a dedicated fan! My only suggestion....episodes should be an hour long!
162 out of 204 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
thejulia28 September 2005
Good lord, this show is good. It's thought provoking. Really, so many of the decisions made are poor, so many of the characters do fairly rancid things. But you can't help loving them and you can't help loving the plots. I've fallen in love with every member of the Botwin family. This is a smart, very funny, sexy and sophisticated show. I'm not going to summarize anything here because I'm sure people are aware of the premise.

It sounds like it could be ho-hum, but you must see it- each episode, people are dealing the characters deal with difficult decisions. Sometimes there's deliberation, sometimes there's regret- the show's smart enough where it assumes we know what the "right thing" was that one should have done. Most often, the characters don't do that right thing, and yet we love them, maybe even think "I would have done that." This is a show that basically says, beneath the normalcy, everyone is pushed to the limit in some way. It's no where near as dark as "Twin Peaks," but somehow, without the freakiness/fear, it reminds me of it because it's intelligent and it shows what lies beneath a bit.

When you watch it, watch out for Shane Botwin who is the Id of the show, and Andy, his grown up version who I personally hate yet am totally charmed by.

Ah, and yes, the acting is superb.

Here's hoping it goes to DVD!
124 out of 162 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Suburban life portrayed to the extremes in this hilarious but poignant comedy
wwm_mem22 May 2006
Mary Louise Parker plays a widowed suburban housewife forced to create new ways to generate enough income to support the lifestyle she and her family had become accustomed before her husband departed. Parker and Elizabeth Perkins are excellent representations of housewives dealing with serious problems in this unrealistic yet frighteningly realistic comedy about living in the suburbs. Unrealistic because it is doubtful that this scenario could actually take place but realistic because the actors portray real suburban characters that you might meet anywhere in the US. The PTA scenes are a scream to any mom that has attended these mundane meetings. Kevin Nealon is great as the always high accountant looking to score and Justin Kirk accurately plays Parkers outrageously screwed up brother-in-law that can't seem to stay out of trouble. Even though this is a comedy, it also examines important aspects of suburban life. Drug abuse, race relations, cancer, homosexuality, mortality and morality are all explored in a real life yet unreal setting. It kind of makes you think while you are laughing at the superb dialog.
99 out of 132 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
A daring comedy with heart
michael-lodge9 May 2006
Weeds is a hilarious comedy, following other trend-setting shows like The Sopranos and Six Feet Under that deal with real life issues (using real life language). Sometimes wonderfully dark, and sometimes very blunt, the humour seems to suit each episode's general mood.

The quickly progressing story lines provide plenty of interest and we quickly develop a sympathy for the main characters through some genuinely emotional dilemmas, especially Nancy, but this is no doubt helped by the fact that she is a gorgeous soccer mum in distress.

The small number of episodes in each series might be a little disappointing, but is easily forgiven in helping to maintain the high quality and originality of each episode. I can't wait for season 2.
71 out of 93 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Little Showtime, Happy at Last
nick rostov27 July 2005
This show is as good as it gets. As in, Six Feet Under good, without being any kind of clone: it's its own magical world, of which there will be many future clones, but nothing will ever come close to this for wit, emotion, pacing, or perfection of casting. This show says This Is Us like nothing I've seen in a long time. Showtime has done some good shows, and they've been getting better (after decades of astonishingly lazy creative thinking) but in Weeds the we-try-harder network finally has a true destination series. For one thing, Mary Louise Parker, who is always brilliant, here manages to pull it off with none of the mannerisms that have colored some of her lesser roles: she is luminescent and true in every moment. And the kids? And the son's girlfriend? You get this weird feeling there was no camera around--there couldn't have been for people to come off this completely real. Bravo bravo bravo! Can't wait to see episode 2.
156 out of 214 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Cheers to hypocrisy!
mirwais-orbit4 January 2009
For years Weeds is being the "everybody-talks-about" series but I never had the opportunity to watch it. But finally I did it, and I did it desperately because the show is addictive. So finally I could understand why it got so much attention.

First of all, the cast is amazing. Mary-Luise Parker, as Nancy Botwin, fits so well in her character and she is so charismatic and so beautiful and so subtle, gentle, comprehensive and polite that it's almost impossible dislike her. Elizabeth Perkins, as Celia Hodes, my god, that woman rocks! She's so naturally dried by the unhappy life she has built that even a spontaneous smile seems like a rock. I can't believe that Elizabeth Perkins never won an award for this character until now because every moment is an outstanding performance and I mean it! It's a shame that her character lost so much of her potentials to a point of being kicked out of the show because Celia was one of the gears of the show.

The most interesting things about the show were not the drugs, neither was Nancy living a hell each new day, nor the mistakes each character does during the episodes, but yes the social matters that it pointed. I'm Brazilian and I live in a small suburban city like the imaginary Agrestic/Magestic, so... I know a lot how is to survive in a place where you're surrounded by ignorant people that are moved just by an inexistent appearance. It's so revolting to a point that sometimes you just want to do things just to provoke them and play with their abstraction of reality, and the series shows it in a very intelligent and interesting way so you feel connected by it.

But now, after 6 years and some changes, Weeds seems to have lost most of what made it so interesting during the years becoming just another dramedy and Weeds is now just all about a woman dealing with an everyday drama that doesn't fit anymore. While the first 4 seasons were amazing and subtle in its subject, the last 2 seasons lack of the cleverness that once existed. Weeds now is being pushed to something we don't know anymore and it's showing signs of tiredness and completely losing its identity and also its characters. But that happens with every kind of show sooner or later.

But anyway... if you have the opportunity to watch at least the first 4 seasons, do it. Weeds is not about dealing with drugs, but a way to express the hypocrisy of each single person in the world.

I give 8 just for the show in a whole, but the first 4 seasons deserve 10.
70 out of 92 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Great ensemble cast scores in this dark horse series
Shapster1129 March 2006
WEEDS is the anti-Christ type show for the people lobbying for wholesome story lines. The title only begins to tell all the things about this program that would have it on a Jerry Falwell morals hit list. Maybe that is why I like the show so much.

Mary-Louise Parker leads a great cast with superb veteran performers such as Elizabeth Perkins and Kevin Nealon. The premise of the show is Nancy Botwin (Parker) has to figure out how to keep together her family in an upscale Calif. neighborhood after he early 40's husband, whom we never meet, dies of a heart attack while out running around with his youngest son. This boy now has issues and doesn't quite fit in with his peers. Her older son is discovering his hormones are raging and the brother-in-law has come to visit and he is a horrible influence on the boys, the housekeeper, and Nancy despite her attempts to keep him in check. Despite it all she really loves her brother-in-law as he is her family reminder of the husband she loved and lost.

What she does to keep the roof over her house is to sell weed...pot...marijuana. She gets the stuff from a thoroughly outrageous and hysterical black family on the poor side of town. She sells in the community of Agrestic, where she lives, and she sells to her lawyer/neighbor, a guy on the city council (Nealon), and anyone else that will take, which in this community seems to be almost everyone.

Great part for Parker as she is the consummate actress. She is always a bit understated, never overacts, has a great sly smile, does dry comedy very well, and delivers her lines convincingly. Nealon is great as the burnout councilman/accountant who can't seem to be high enough of the day yet covers his bases so as not to be discovered. But I think it is Perkins who just might steal this show. She plays a very bright yet vapid wife and mother of two girls. She is an overbearing parent who chastises and spy's on her 15 yr. old and harasses her youngest because of the poor girl's weight. Her shallow nature is shown as a defense mechanism for a woman whose own mother (Conchetta Tomei) is even more overbearing than her daughter and toward her husband whom she verbally spars with when they are together.

From the opening song, a reprise of the great Pete Seger song "Little Boxes", to the weekly dilemmas for the characters of coping in suburbia the show scores. Usually HBO has the standard for cable comedy series but this one is as good as any.
83 out of 117 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
The best television has to offer
nmoonka26 March 2006
What a clever, well written show. Immensely watchable and well acted. Mary Louise Parker is perfect in the role of a Yuppie, widowed woman making ends meet by selling Marijuana. The show highlights well the difficulties for single women not just at the upper end of the economic spectrum, but those not quite as well off. The language, although at times is strong, is realistic and appropriate.

All of the roles are interesting. Elizabeth Perkins plays the role of the acerbic friend who never quite realized her life ambitions. Her one daughter is overweight, the other just hates her, and her husband is sleeping with the Asian American tennis pro.

Every episode offers something new. I will definitely keep on looking for the next episode.
76 out of 107 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Don't keep us in suspense!
terryjo1316 October 2005
Every Monday at 9PM CST I am in front of my TV to watch one of the best shows written with the best cast on a sitcom. And I would re-watch it throughout the week. The characters, the storyline and even the opening song that you can't get out of your head. The only way to make it better is make it an hour long and use Kevin Nealon a lot more. Please don't keep us in suspense! Is it going to be renewed? I got Showtime just to watch this show and it is definitely worth it! This show does well showing part of suburbia that most people don't want to think really exists. But exist it does and not just in California. I like the plots and the passion that keep you coming back for more and hating it when the show is over. There should be a few Emmy awards waiting!
66 out of 97 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
love it!
tommy_6811 February 2009
I don't really get hooked on a TV series, i usually just watch a show if it's on or not or if I'm in the mood. But i have to say Weeds got me more hooked than a crack-addled prostitute. Every episode just wanted me to watch the next one and i ended up buying every season. Gotta say season 2 is the best if i had to choose one but its a hard decision. Every time Doug comes on screen I'm in stitches, has to be the funniest, wittiest and dopey character ever invented for TV. This is the most creative, most hilarious TV show since friends, and definitely the most addictive. Once you watch Weeds, you'll want to watch it again and again and again.
13 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
What happened to the fun characters?
yapp29 April 2013
OK. The first couple of seasons were enjoyable. Actually I give them 8. Then it started to go downhill. Season 3: 7. Season 4: 5. Season 5: 2 It ended with: 1. The total impression is: Don't spend time on this. You will only get depressed or sad.

The reason to this down-climbing is not just the fact that the characters did not develop in a "natural way", with a happy ending, so to say. The overall reason is that it started out as a plausible plot, with interesting characters, but became so totally out, way out, that you might as well watch "The hitchikers way to the galaxy" instead.

Celia, one of the main characters, funny, just disappeared in season 4 or 5. They just wrote her out, without any explain. Nancy, the main character, started as a person you could believe in, and ended up as a person so far out, that even daily dozes of crack cocaine can't bring you so far out. And she mainly drank caffeine!

The best performing actor in the series was Alanis Morisette(the others were not bad, don't misunderstand me, but Alanis' part was plausible and she vanished before it all went wrong), and she was there for just an hour.
17 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Weeds... best showtime show, ever.
crashbashflash17 August 2009
Warning: Spoilers
when I first time I ever even heard of weeds, I thought it was going to be a ridiculous show about teenage stoners and a show about evading the police. WAS I EVER WRONG! Mary-Louise Parker's character, Nancy, is an unbelievable actress, she makes the show seem extremely real and dramatic. Elizabeth Perkins's character, Celia, you love to hate her, she is pitiful and she always has a new scheme up her sleeve. As for Justin Kirk's character, Andy, oh poor Andy, he always gets the short end of the stick, and you usually feel sorry for him. Who would have thought that Alexander Gould, little nemo, would be such a rebellious, witty, and almost shockingly intelligent aspect to the show. Shane is probably one of my favorite characters. As for Hunter Parrish, Silas, he makes me ever so angry. His lack of intelligence almost makes you want to scream sometimes, but without his knowledge of growing pot, the show wouldn't be the same. I give this show an A+++++++++++. If you don't like it you have something wrong in your head.
14 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
No Stems, No Seeds
fwomp26 July 2006
Warning: Spoilers
WEEDS is a complicated series currently airing on the cable network SHOWTIME, the same corp. that brought us DEAD LIKE ME and other controversial story lines. And WEEDS certainly is wonderfully bizarre.

Mary-Louise Parker (THE WEST WING) stars as Nancy Botwin, a recent widow with two children and a cash flow problem. She lives in the fictitious town of Agrestic in Anywhere Suburbia, America. In fact, the shows lead-in goes through great pains to show us how common an area she and her family live in. This is vital since most of today's drug culture tends to live right under our proverbial noses. And the drug, as the title intends, is marijuana, often considered shameful by some to be considered "illegal" while others throw tantrums about its gateway significance. But Nancy has to feed her family and she'll do whatever it takes to ensure their survival.

In the midst of this seemingly benign town we have a troop of old and new pot smokers. The older generation is exhibited by none other than Kevin Nealon (ANGER MANAGEMENT) whose character, Doug Wilson, is a bored and immature accountant. Self-centered and completely useless in terms of assisting his neighbors, his character is absolutely fantastic. You could easily picture him still in high school if it weren't for his extremely receding hairline and the family minivan he drives. The newer generation is brought to light by Nancy Botwin's brother-in-law, Andy, played by the excellent Justin Kirk (FLANNEL PAJAMAS, 2006). He has no direction in life and is now firmly entrenched in Nancy's home. His failings at life are mirrored through his careless attitudes toward women or growing in any meaningful way. But once in a while — just occasionally — he'll make a remark of wonderful profoundness that blows Nancy away. He also is a much needed father-figure (although a VERY screwed up one) for Nancy's two boys, Shane (Alexander Gould, FINDING NEMO) and Silas (Hunter Parrish, RV). It is Silas, the high schooler, whom we get to see experiment with the emerging drug culture that surrounds his household. Although initially unaware of his mother's "business", he quickly reveals to the viewer that he's "not stupid" about what's happening under his own roof.

Nancy's friends are a mixed bag. Celia (Elizabeth Perkins, BIG), is a member of the PTA, has a child who suffers with being overweight, and recently found out her husband had an affair with the local, and beautiful, Asian tennis instructor. As the series progresses, we learn that Celia has breast cancer and this comes as devastating news for someone so infatuated with one's appearance (as seen through the mother-daughter relationships). The Shepard's, a black family that live in a "bad part of town", act as Nancy's suppliers of the green leaf. They battle finances versus keeping their business strictly business whenever Nancy comes around (which fluctuates as her business expands and contracts).

The wonderful thing about this series is that it puts a mess of moral material in the viewer's lap. What is wrong with marijuana when Percocet and other heavy narcotics are readily available via a doctor's prescription? Is it wrong for a person to support their family by dealing in something as shady as drug trafficking? Can a woman be both a loving and compassionate mother while at the same time selling something potentially addicting? Is it hypocritical for someone to sell "the stuff" while at the same time punishing their kids when they catch them doing some of it? Quite a moral quagmire, I'd say.

The other thing that makes this series work is it's sexy. Mary-Louise Parker has that ...something about her that makes her both a respectable looking woman and just a tad slutty. She's a sexual being who struggles with life in the shadow of her husband's death and has to decide what's best for her, her kids, and her husband's memory; most times these things are in direct opposition of each other. Elizabeth Perkins mirrors much of Parker's character in that she too has that respectable/slutty look but also some uppityness ...until her cancer rears up. Then she becomes more introspective and the slut takes over, for a while.

The series producers also put in a deaf and sexually promiscuous girlfriend for Nancy's son, Silas. This added an entirely new dimension to Silas' character as he's forced to grow-up without a father to guide him through this teenage sexual minefield and he finds solace with the deaf girl's household more than with his own whenever internal family problems arise.

This first season took about two episodes to get rolling, but once it did there was no stopping it. You really need to open your mind to the possibilities surrounding this show. It's not JUST about drugs. It's about the people that are shoved into this niche group for the sake of survival, and it's captivating to watch how their flawed lives intermingle. Pot smoker or not, these characters are headed for interesting days. Season two has already been purchased by SHOWTIME, which would indicate WEED might be picking up speed and continue smokin' for some time.
14 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Addictive Comedy
IndyMansOldAccount28 March 2008
Weeds is about Nancy Botwin a working mum and housewife who gets into the darkest situations when her husband unexpectedly drops dead and she is left to raise two kids, a brother-in-law and rustic area's secret addiction to home-grown weed. Using this; as a way of dealing with her emotional collapse, in return for providing for the family by dealing marijuana to neighbours and spacey school-kids. Nancy is played with perfect pokerfaced- untelling-drug-seller mum by Mary-Louise Parker, ex-West Wing star who talks on a less political and more social tasks of day to day life. She is groomed for any social eventuality. Alongside the mum of two is youngest Shane (Alexander Gould) who played the voice of Nemo in 'Finding Nemo' who is less stutter and more into the wild flights of fancy. Older bro Silas (Hunter Parrish) who is eager to get his school life on the OC-type list by doing anything or anyone possible.

Yes, selling drugs makes good TV? Weeds outshines the morally ambiguous judgement on drugs. Some of the people who do drugs are good, some are bad. But it's the person we judge, not the substance. While it seems a bit Desperate Housewives, it's got a lot more going for it. With bitchy neighbour Elizabeth Perkins who makes the typical rich mum attitude take a leap forward.


With its entwined spontaneity, this is addictive and yet bizarrely enjoyable. Like most TV shows trying today: firmly planted in reality.
31 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Getting old
cakemixed9239 September 2011
This show used to be good, but it's obviously out of ideas now. The first few seasons were interesting and the storyline definitely kept you coming back every week. But now it needs to conclude or get canceled. The characters are getting stale and to be honest, Nancy has just become annoying. Her character is so boring and sullen. You just want to yell at the screen at the end of every episode, "Get your s@#t together already". They're ruining what was a good show by dragging it out too long. The only reason I've continued to watch is because I have nothing better to do and I'm hoping they will conclude it, but I don't know how long I can keep that up as I simply have no interest in watching this show anymore. END IT!!!
26 out of 40 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Enjoyable show despite detestable main character...
Perse_phone7 April 2016
I'm currently binge-watching this show and I'm at season 5 episode 7 right now, just a fyi.

The show is pretty interesting and watchable, and binge-watch worthy -- I'm living proof of that. To be honest, I was pretty surprised how good the show is, especially considering the fact that this is a 20 min per episode TV series. And I'm very much not a fan of those, because I usually find them to be shallow and generally lacking in depth. So what I was expecting was a silly sitcom-like show with some drama... and man, was I wrong!

I'm seriously impressed by how much "goodness" can be packed into a mere 20 min episode. And also by the character and plot development.

Especially Nancy's development is very intriguing and interesting, as is Shane's.

So, not gonna lie, I slowly but surely grew to hate & detest Nancy more and more throughout the series, with each episode. She is a poisonous, narcissistic ȼǚnt who destroys and ruins everything she touches. She brings everyone down with her, but surprisingly, is always the (only) one who comes out ahead of all the shīț she rains down on everybody else. It is baffling. That woman might have been likable in the beginning of the show, but I'm beginning to reach the point where I'm starting to wonder if I can keep watching a show with a main character who became so unlikable that I find myself hoping for her to be finally killed off to end all the suffering she's causing for everybody else.

Especially in situations in which she's whining about the unfairness of it all and "why is it always her that attracts so much shīŧ", and really, "what did she ever do to deserve this"?! Boo hoo! What a self-involved, egoistic ⓑītch.

Honestly, the only characters I still like are Andy (what a lovable, stupid goof) and Silas. Can't really make up my mind about Shane, I miss the sweet kid with that intact "moral compass"--although let's be honest, with that mother the kid never stood a chance.... Hopefully he'll change for the better again... there are still 2 seasons left after all.

So, you see my dilemma. On the one hand we deal with an absolutely unlikable and intolerable main character who I couldn't care less about at this point. Who really should be dead a 100 times over by how reckless and stupid she acts. Who is a danger to her kids. Who is an grade-A aƨƨhole. On the other hand it's exactly her unpleasantness as a person that drives the show...

Nevertheless, I'd really like her to get back some redeeming quality so that I might be able to start caring about her character again... I mean, I'm not new to anti-heroes as main characters. Hell, "Filth" is my favourite movie of all times, so yes, I'm definitely not averse to MCs being total aƨƨhole. But somehow Nancy is starting to get on my nerves...

Nevertheless, this TV series is interesting, refreshingly unique, entertaining and manages to keep me intrigued. And engrossed. So, all in all an enjoyable show so far.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
The real crime: unfunny.
jjthedj25 September 2012
The show became increasingly less funny--and the finale barely provided a chuckle. The kids grew up too fast...Shane was just an arrogant douche in the end, and the Silas-deaf girl marriage was a lame attempt at being edgy by doing deaf jokes that were not funny. Bringing back a fringe character like Doug's gay son seemed like a cheap way to just get a gay character on the show. Not bringing back Celia-who was a main nemesis and storyline mainstay for several years-- was a huge oversight and/or slight. I just don't like the direction they took the characters in--but again, the main problem is that a comedy should provide laughs--and "Weeds: The Roach"..get it? The end....did not provide any ha ha. Maybe being stoned would have helped.
11 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Started fresh if not realistic. Now it's just absurd
JJonsey25 September 2007
Weeds has always been full of hyperbole and social commentary via satire. It wasn't always all that insightful but it was clever and cute at the least. Unfortunately it's disdain, detachment from reality and holier than thou attitude often show through the wit. From it's grindingly unaware and sanctimonious title song, to it's hypocrite self centered characters...once the cute wears off, it's hard to give a crap about anything deeper because the surface is so tarnished.

The ridiculous story lines not only do nothing for the point trying to be made, the absurd unbelievable plots treat the viewer like an idiot :

Don't like anti-drug laws....so the proponent of said laws is a barely functioning alcoholic whose entire life is a train wreck. How clever. Alcohol is worse than Marijuana...we get it.

The "War on Terror" sucks.... so the army randomly kills recruits with drone planes apparently driven by Gomer Pyle. To cover up they send in evil teams of black Ops LAWYERS to strong arm witnesses with magic toys that make the most ludicrous James Bond toy look like a calculator watch. I wish I was kidding. If I had to be fair, this is the scene that broke weeds for me. I forgave it's heavy handed idiocy and overlooked it's characters flaws and unrealistic reactions because to be honest...it was funny a lot of the time. I think I would have been much happier to watch them just flat out say "The war on terror is ridiculous, and we have lost respect and trust for the Armed Forces." Thats totally fine...I agree 110%. But a scene that makes Get Smart look realistic and hides behind weak attempts at humor? Cmon...what a joke.

To top it off, the writers are often too afraid to make the protagonists react in realistic ways for fear of alienating weak minded viewers. Nancy can yell at her bumbling drug addict brother in law, but when her self centered prick of a son nearly gets her killed and essentially forces her into servitude with the local drug dealer by stealing her drugs...she never mentions it. In fact no one even addresses it.

I want to like the show. Heck a lot of times I do. Mary Lousie Parker is droll and kissably cute...not to mention incredibly versatile in her role. The soundtrack is often pointed and sharp, which is in stark contrast to the ham fisted finger wagging of the actual show. Sadly, 9 times out of 10, I share Weeds outlook on the topics they address. However, the childish and unrealistic way they address them often makes me wish I didn't for fear of association with halfwits.

In the end it's just hard to tolerate preaching from a show so flawed.
19 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Not good at all
c-howard8412 February 2015
I tried. I really really tried to give this show a shot. I heard good things about it and was ready to take the journey but I just can't go on any further. I was expecting something like Californication or Orange is the New Black but it's not even close. The storyline is sub par and the acting is worse.

What they tried to do was make a heartfelt yet comedic story about a widowed mother of 2 who struggles day to day and has to rely on selling drugs to make ends meet. It failed miserably in my opinion.

Mary-Louise Parker is so not believable in this role. I feel as the story continues it shows how poorly written her character is. She goes from a weak-willed pot dealer who can't control her children and has no friends except for the people she buys her drugs from and her accountant to an even less willed pot dealer who can't control her kids.

No plot points. No story arch. Just a half hour of nonsense every episode with not one snicker or chuckle.

I struggled through 3 seasons and had to stop. I honestly can't believe I made it that far. I'm really not sure what genre they were writing for here. It's not dramatic, it's not a comedy, it's definitely not suspenseful, it's not slapstick...

The only thing remotely funny about this show is the character development.... And what I mean by that is there is NONE!

There are MUCH better shows out there to spend time on. I for one do not care how this story ends. I am just very surprised so many people love it.

The only reason it gets a 2 is because of Kevin Nealon. Without him I would've given it a 1.
12 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Dark, disturbing but whole lot of heart and funny!
jim_baclagon20 January 2010
Weeds is a show that always manages to surprise me each season. Now on Season 5 the show just gets better. It's characters are bright and realistically three dimensional. I was a little weary after the 3rd season since I grown so accustomed to "little boxes". For me, that was weeds and the suburbia aspect made it all the more satirical. But thanks to such great writers and the amazing talent of people like Mary Louise Parker the show doesn't burn out into it's new settings it flourishes! I've seen these characters grow and do horrible things to each other. Their morals may be skewered and though Dark disturbing their actions their heart manages to stay intact.
9 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
was okay, now rubbish
I have watched 7 seasons of this rubbish. It was okay for the first 2 seasons, but it has gone down hill rapidly. You can't call it a comedy and when compared to the mighty breaking bad it deserves a 1. Nancy Botwins constant smirk just annoys the hell out of me and her brother-in-law, well I haven't a clue what he's on about half the time. The character of Nancy Botwin and the Botwins as a whole have made that many stupid decisions that they have absolutely left me gob-smacked as to how crappy the writers have been with their ideas. I think that the writers themselves are the ones smoking weed . They keep changing the formula to the extent that they never seem to know whats going to happens themselves. I don't like it anymore, I only watch it because my girlfriend likes it and I personally cant wait for it to end.
13 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Weeds – not my bowl of hemp
JamieClay12 August 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I had heard (and read) so many good things about Weeds that I was looking forward to getting hooked on another great cable Series (like Entourage, Sopranos or Mad Men) but that slowly eroded away with each episode I watched from Season One. (didn't make it past the first six episodes)

The writing was unoriginal, contrived and the portrayal of Blacks embarrassing. The dialog felt forced, like the writers are trying way too hard to be clever and hip . It was a rare moment when I actually emitted an audible laugh.

The characters never developed enough for me to care about them, they were selfish and unappealing. I absolutely HATED the addition of the Brother-in-law (who should have been hauled away on To Catch A Predator) and the removal of the Hodes' daughter Quinn from the cast by sending her to boarding school in Mexico was so unoriginal and cliché, I had to conclude the writers were testing the viewer's loyalty.

Episode after episode I liked the characters less and couldn't get past many of the technical flaws in the story line.

Add to that I heard that Season Two wasn't as good, so I lost all motivation to continue to watch this play out.

If you're a fan of good casting and writing, I suspect this show will be a challenge for you to like, unless of course you're stoned and then all bets are off.
36 out of 62 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Consistently one of the best shows around.
Applejackson754 August 2008
I only subtract one point because it's only a half-hour as opposed to an hour long show. I wish it were longer every episode. I am NEVER disappointed in the quality. One liners, twists, drama, LOL moments... It hasn't mis-stepped once as far as I'm concerned. There isn't a single cast member that doesn't play their role perfectly. The writing is superb. And how hot is Mary-Louise Parker? Oh my god...

I DO miss the theme song--especially from second season when they were all covers, but the new openings are inspired as well and don't take up as much time, thus giving me a few extra seconds of show!

This is by far one of the best shows on television. Especially in these days of "reality" TV. Finally something worth watching. Please extend it to an hour per episode!
10 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
This is the greatest show ever!
oxymoron18719 December 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Oh my god! I just watched the season 2 finale and it took everything in me to keep from screaming and waking my family up. With each episode, I have gotten more excited with what was happening and what was coming up. Now that it's over I don't know if I can wait until the next season!! Every storyline comes together at once and then at the next minute, the whole thing explodes then goes black with the credits. Personally, this was THE biggest cliffhanger I've ever seen at the end of an episode, let alone the end of a season.

Kudos to the show for picking up Zooey Deschanel for the last couple episodes, and obviously the next season. I think she's a great actress and added a lot to the dynamic. The whole Doug-Celia-Celia's husband triangle was a fun distraction from the crap that is going down with the main plot. I only have one question made of three parts: what was the combination to the safe, how did Silas know it, and how did he even know where the house was in the first place? Brilliant! That is all.
10 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Weeds start off great then goes south fast
dmick2516 August 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I give this series 3 out of 10 for good writing and acting in the first four seasons only. Afterwards the series was an absolute joke. In the beginning the series was funny, dramatic and the good acting helped keep the interest/ suspense going. Then in the later seasons, especially the last three, the whole series goes to crap. In the beginning the characters were believable and in the later episodes they are not believable at all. Kevin Nealon isn't funny anymore after season 5 and neither is Andy. Celia's good acting is wasted on stupid plots, Shane becomes annoying at best and Silas is whinny as is Andy and all the good story lines fizzle after an episode or two. The acting disappears completely and the story line is all over the place. Doug's character has no purpose after season 5. Andy's character is back and forth being in love with Nancy and being in love with someone else and then they ditch the whole idea, like they were just using the story as filler. Silas's character is good throughout and even in the end ,unlike most of the characters, but like the other characters nothing comes of it at all, him having a different dad and going to college could have been good but was wasted. Shane's character is a huge mess. Not interesting, disturbing and annoying by the end. The villains are all soft and incredibly stupid. Its like an Austin powers or 007 movie, where you're wondering how many times they are going to fall for the same Nancy tricks. Nancy, to her credit, does the best she can with her roles but even her story lines are beyond saving. At the end I don't know whether to root for her or get mad that she got away with everything.

The logic of the episodes don't make sense and is somewhat insulting to the viewer. When they are on the run in season 6, in one episode they are out of money then in the next episode they have plenty of money then the following episode they are buying an RV? All the credit cards that are maxed out are no big deal, even when they withdraw 10 grand at a grocery store. Yeah OK. Then Nancy is on an amber alert, they steal like four cars, relocate several times, run into countless amounts of trouble, yet somehow they keep getting away and the gang keeps following Nancy. Fake passport no problem, even traveling outside of the country oh and then returning is no big deal either. How are they getting paid at the hotel with out SS #s and bank accounts? How many lucky drug deals can a pot dealer get? Its like the law of common sense/street smarts doesn't apply to the bot-win family. Making hash in a washer in a hotel please. They simplify every process and activity like anyone could do it and that makes in not believable. A post office guys steals a whole bag of money (from work..?) for Nancy because he is still in love with her from high school when she was 14 and yet he is the only one that gets caught in an airport? Richard Dreyfuss can only repeat stupid meaningless lines for three episodes, wow.

A journalist can find them on the run but not the FBI or the Mexican mob, even when she returns home! Half way house episode when she tests positive for drugs yet doesn't go back to prison, then they give her son back after she is convicted of manslaughter. Is this America they are in or Russia? Really how could the writing get so bad. Why not give them superpowers while you're at it, you don't give a hoot about any other details that make sense or are plausible. Seasons 1-4 were at least believable.

I knew I was done caring about the series in the seventh season when in the first episode Esteban is killed in prison, yet Nancy is fine despite killing the major mob character of the Mexican mafia. Then immediately gets weapons to trade and jumps right back into the drug trade once released in NYC, not California, to a halfway house. Not believable at all and annoying at this point. I don't understand why throughout the last four seasons kohan paints Nancy as a psychopath, a drunk, a master manipulator, a killer and a terrible mother only to glorify her and let her off the hook constantly and have a happy ending? I watch to the end of the series hoping for some redeeming episodes or maybe some explanations only to be terribly disappointed and hating myself for having show loyalty for the last four seasons. Oh and lets not forget the fact that she and her family walk through every ethnic gang and rip countless people off only to escape every time only to do it all over again with another group and return home completely unharmed by the end. I know this is fiction but its written like a old school comic book with no attention to details just hoping people will faithfully watch and forget what happened the episode before. It might work once in a while but with so many holes in it I have to chalk it up to bad writing. Maybe thats why so many main characters disappeared after the fifth season.

I compare this series with other shows like breaking bad and you can tell the difference in writing and thats what makes weeds so bad. I can't believe this series lasted eight seasons only to have a terrible ending. I'm disappointed with the series to the point where I wouldn't recommend it to people. I think this series/ story had a good idea behind it and good acting in the beginning seasons but ultimately the writing and directing eventually put this show into the gutter.
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews

Recently Viewed