MacGyver (TV Series 2016– ) Poster

(2016– )

User Reviews

Review this title
275 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Mucked-Gyver
Wizard-824 September 2016
When I was a teenager, the original "MacGyver" was one of my favorite TV series. So you may think that when I first heard they were rebooting the series I was pumped. Actually, my first thought was, "Uh... I'm not sure about this." That's because I have found reboots and remakes overwhelmingly are greatly inferior to the originals. But when I found that key people from the original series (like series creator Lee David Zlotoff and executive producer Henry Winkler) were returning, a little hope sprung in me.

Well, I watched the pilot episode. I admit it wasn't without merit; the action and stuntwork was fairly well done. But for the most part, I was very disappointed with what I watched. I could make a list of a number of things of what I didn't like about what I saw, but I'll stick with the two biggest beefs I had:

(1) In the original series, MacGyver was a very likable guy. He was smart, but he always remained humble with his abilities to make gizmos and get out of tight situations. However, in this remake, MacGyver is a real turn-off for the most part. His annoying narration and his brash attitude in almost every situation makes him an irritating braggart. There is precious little warmth and humanity in this guy. I don't really blame the actor playing this new MacGyver for this - he is playing MacGyver as dictated by the script and the direction, and when he's given a quieter moment he does come off in an okay fashion. But as I said, the direction and writing for the most part do him no favors.

(2) In the original series, when MacGyver got to work making a homemade gizmo or thinking out of a bad situation, the show took the time for him to go step by step with this. This technique built some compelling mystery, making viewers think while this was going on, "What is MacGyver pulling off?" Then when MacGyver pulled it off, it was a satisfying payoff. In this reboot, however, MacGyver pulls off his gizmos and escapes from bad situations in just a few seconds! No suspense, no mystery, no interest.

Look, I understand that a good reboot (if there is such a thing) will put its own spin on things. But at the same time, you should not destroy the core of the concept that made the original popular in the first place. This is the main flaw of this reboot.

It's possible that things will improve in the next few episodes. More than one TV show has improved over time. So I will watch the next few episodes. Though I'm not getting my hopes up too much.
153 out of 174 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
This is definitely NOT MacGyver...
Dr_Sagan24 September 2016
I used to watch the original series back in the 80s so it is unavoidable to compare that series with its 2016 reboot.

80s Macgyver was a secret agent with a difference! He was quiet, modest, mild mannered, deeply principled and refused to carry a gun on his missions.

2016's MacGyver is more like a caricature of 007 and Mission Impossible.

The pilot episode starts ridiculously: "Here's my assistant Nikki. She has 156 science awards from MIT and NASA. 50 companies including Google, Apple, SpaceX, Samsung and PepsiCo offered her a gazillion dollars to work for them but she refused, so to work for $200/week in my secret organization. Did I mention she is 25 y.o. and smokin' hot? Oh, Yes she is! and I bone her over some fake computers we have in this series as props!".

"And here is my other friend Johnny Rambo. He saved my life in Algeria, Angola, Liberia, Djibouti, Burundi, Malaysia, Bangladesh but please...please DO NOT talk to him about that time in Cairo."

"And this other smoking hot woman, tall and exotic and super-duper top secret spy, that you never heard of, is my ...boss".

"And who am I, you ask? Well, most certainly I'M NOT Angus Macgyver."

Honestly, I can't believe the writers. Are they idiots? Have they ever saw the original series?

And what about the Cast. I'm thinking of the charismatic Richard Dean Anderson with nostalgia right now.

Overall: A totally generic sub-par TV series for its own shake, but a total disgrace for baring the name of one of the most iconic heroes on TV.
285 out of 346 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Yet another second rate retread......
s327616924 September 2016
Retreads seem to be the "thing to do" as of late. Studio's who seem to be out of ideas, visiting the past for inspiration.

Sad fact is, most of the retreads are "second rate" and MacGyver is no exception. The word that another reviewer used to describe this retread is the same one I would choose, "tiresome".

The original MacGyver worked because it had a fresh and different message. That science "not" violence can be used to peacefully resolve threatening situations. The original Macyver was very much an anti war figure.

By contrast, the retread MacGyver, is a poster boy for "mainstream" values, including, the US military. He's also smug, over confident, a womanizer and frankly, a throughly unlikable jerk. Its tiresome stuff, that in many ways is the complete anti-thesis of the original series. There's no sense of hope and inspiration, as found in Richard Dean Anderson's character.

All in all, a BORE FEST. If you have not seen MacGyver before, my advice, take a look at the original series, it wont disappoint. Two out of ten from me.
157 out of 192 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Nothing is sacred
DoNotTrustImdb23 September 2016
I grew up watching the original Mac and as much as it was soft viewing added with a small dose of make believe, the original series is part of TV history in a good way! Well some one in Hollywood land just had to rape my childhood memories!

I just think a geeky metro sexual vegan type in the role of Mac is just not right, but hey at least the producers went with the times! I think if you are from the WIFI gen than yeah you might think it's great.

The supporting cast is all wrong as well, why cast that dude from CSI? He is just so typecast it ain't funny, and I stopped viewing this when Vinny showed his face.

And again take a look at the ratings, so many paid for 10 out of 10 votes, IMDb come on, it's way overdue for you lot to do something about fake votes.

Anyway, give it a go as we all have different needs in life, but this is not something I will need in a hurry, rubbish is the best I can come up with without using profanity.

Big fat 0 (1 for awful) for me! And I really hope other will vote this rubbish into forgotten history as this program needs to be canned!
205 out of 276 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
This show is unadulterated crap
ialeksandrovna25 September 2016
Five minutes into the show, I wanted to throat punch the arrogant, millennial twerp in the title role. Painfully bad. Horrible writing. Horrible acting. Hackneyed plot. Predictable dialogue. Assumes audience consists of morons. And anyone who continues to watch this probably lives up to that assumption.

The stupid super spy schtick is SO bad!

It's like the writers decided to make a MacGyver for dumb millennials who are unfamiliar with the US government, with foreign policy, with anything resembling the intelligence community!

Make it go away!
173 out of 234 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Please, god, No!
henrik15069325 September 2016
Almost cried cause it was so bad. Downplaying the audience like we're stupid. Guess target is 13 year old, but that's really stupid when the fact is that the high ratings come from nostalgic grown ups.

I was really excited. that died fast. you know its bad withing first 30 sec. Will not recommend any friends. Will not see next episode. They didn't even keep the whole soundtrack which is 33% of macgyver 33% is his charm (which he has 50% of). 33% is the clever macgyverness (50% again). 1% is "well that was just stupid" which it has 100% of..

Dialog: horrible Actors: poor Plot: horrible Reboot: too much bling MacGyverness: poor

They really made no effort making this good, so it's a bigger disappointment than the last Godzilla movie.

Kill it before it lays eggs.
106 out of 146 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Worst Reboot in History
jarrettcdunn27 September 2016
Sorry, but I can't get how ANYONE can say they like this show. I'm not expecting Richard Dean Anderson or anything, but the only thing the show is about is the 'cliche's of MacGyver, not the actual story, Opening Gambit or challenge of the week. Yes, the original MacGyver has voice overs, short voice overs explaining either why he was doing something or where he was to set the stage. It seems over half of the episode is voice over though.

Also the updating it of him being a 'ladies' man so destroys the whole personality of him. He was a ladies man in the original and has girls falling over him not because he was smoking hot and buff (as he is in this) but rather because he was a genuinely good guy. He was an intelligent, modest individual that felt anything could be overcome if one just put some thought into it, and dealt with people with genuine fore thought instead of acting like a bull in a chine closet (see the original's 'Trumbo's World' episode for a perfect example). This MacGyver is a loud mouthed 'bro' vs a soft spoken man with charisma who approaches things with an open mind.

But basically they took all the ancillary parts of the original series and made the new series all about those while throwing out everything that made the original so charming. Instead of it being about story development and slowly learning more and more about the main character it is in your face constant bludgeoning over the head of how smart he is and how he is the most awesome dude ever. Neither of which are MacGyver traits.

All in all don't waste your time. The acting is horrible, the writing is horrible, and the show runners have no idea what made MacGyver episodes so great. You'll just wish you had that part of your life back.
104 out of 145 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
VERY Disappointing
Man9920423 September 2016
Angus MacGuyver is one of the most beloved TV characters from the 1980s. This is not the prequel that devoted fans were hoping to see.

It appears that no one connected with the new version has ever seen the classic programs - they totally ignore the established characters. They totally ignore all the endearing quirks that made us want to watch the series.

Sadly, no matter how much he tries, Lucas Til is simply NOT a young Richard Dean Anderson. He is far too bland and lacking in personality to play this character.

The plot of the pilot seemed very "recycled".Nothing was new. Nothing was innovative.
103 out of 146 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Tiresome beyond belief.
gs2023 September 2016
If you were going to produce a show that was as uninteresting as say, Hawaii Five O, you could not do any better than this mess. The frenetic action is almost laughable in as much as the the completely unknown pig eyed hero "star" has absolutely none of the grace of the original Richard Dean Anderson. Sometimes no matter how much money one spends the result may still be crap. Poorly directed, poorly written, it is a total mess. Don't waste your time. It will, I predict, not last more than a season. Boring beyond belief. I suggest you turn your attention to British cop shows. At least they know how to develop a character. I think it's sad that George Eads thought he would do better here than with CSI ...... An astonishing miscalculation on his part.
138 out of 199 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Episode 1 - OMG - this is NOT 1985 Wargames or 1995 Hackers or MI - Spoilers
shamimislam-669935 October 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Really? REALLY? Who writes this crap? Spoiler alert!!!!

1. The hairpin/paperclip handcuff trick gets old really fast 2. The tray as a Frisbee to knock out the guard - stupid? 3. The guard shoots directly at the tray and not the exposed knees of the target 4. Borrowed glasses from Mission Impossible and Person of Interest 5. All these stupid references to Cairo - if you're not going to tell the story, don't tell the story 6. Thornton as a woman just doesn't work - she's not enough of an asshole 7. Nikki escapes from custody in a moving vehicle - REALLY? And she fakes her death but never gets picked up on a camera? 8. The plane landing gear does not go up at all even though the plane is clearly high enough 9. The boat was going straight as it hit the bad guys even though Macgyver set the steering wheel to turn 10. The thing with the camera search and the ex-con was just too much. It doesn't work that way - and facial recognition TAKES HOURS!!!!!! 11. AND THE WORST OF ALL:

WE DO NOT HAVE LOGIC BOMBS in 2016. That was 1985 with Wargames and 1995 with Hackers. Magnetic disks do not have LOGIC BOMBS. Logic bombs do not exist on magnetic disks. Only in firmware. We have encryption in 2016 on hard drives. And booby-traps. And shredders. Not logic bombs. That's insane.

And the creme de la creme: She CRACKED OPEN a magnetic hard drive with a hammer. First, you can't crack it open - it has 5 screws. Second, if you try to crack it open with a hammer, you could scratch the platters. And THIRD but most significant - if you want to prevent data loss, you do NOT expose the disks outside a clean room. And lastly, if Nikki was as an expert like she said she was, it would have been an SSD - in which case, using a hammer would have broken the transistors inside.

Who writes this crap!!!!!!

I am SO HAPPY RICHARD DEAN ANDERSON declined to participate in this trash.
35 out of 47 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
How Bad can it be?
langolera26 September 2016
First it started out like a Mission Impossible episode. Then it got worse. Totally miscast. Who wrote this crap??? Has literally nothing to do with the original. Including the show's theme music. Maybe next time, keep with the original concept. And since when does he have a team??? They should have had Henry Winkler do the show. Just then, it might be worth watching. As it stands now, no way am I going to watch another episode. If you are expecting a show like the original, this isn't it. Very disappointed. I was hoping for another good show and it didn't happen. Why does Hollywood insist on doing their own thing still? It isn't working. This show is not going to make it.
34 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
It's a thriller/ detective/ james bondesque mishmash
jonnithomas24 September 2016
for children of around 12. however that may be an insult to some 12 years olds.

it's poorly written, badly acted and so false and glitzy it goes totally beyond any form of reality or belief.

I really couldn't watch a whole episode as it was totally cringe worthy.

if you want characters and realism don't really don't watch this.

anyone think it will get a second series ???? I would rather walk home in a blizzard than watch this fiasco.

well the issue is that I have to write ten lines about this rubbish. so how do I say it in a different way ?

it is bad, so bad really bad. trust me Jason borne it is not.
102 out of 151 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
fire the one who decided this reboot was a good idea.
andfhood-762-3747216 February 2017
One is better off watching MeTV and catching reruns of the original show. This show is an embarrassment. This show feels more like a CSI/ cop drama. There are time during this show I'm thinking to myself, "where did MacGyver go. " since when did Mac play second fiddle to his partner? This show is nothing more than a bunch of kids running around unable to act.
22 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
this disgrace burns MacGyver for all future references
gant-1106730 September 2016
Warning: Spoilers
I grew up watching the original series back in the 80s.

Everything(!) is off in the new show. Where is the modest, cautious, reasonable and charismatic Richard-Dean-Anderson-MacGyver? This one is James Bond with a PhD and an 80s haircut (because he had to look something like the old Mac?). It doesn't stop there, there is no character that remotely resembles its counterpart of the original series. Everyone is an overachiever. This time, Jack Dalton is young, strong, fast, attractive and has a haircut.

And of-course they messed up the tech stuff ranging from ridiculous to plain wrong. (You cannot disrupt wireless communication with a "strong" DC-powered electromagnet).

What this show already achieved: it burned MacGyver for future references (as in using the common verb "to macgyver sth."): Where you might have dwelled in fond memories of the 80s and RDA solving the problem at hand with chocolate and baking soda, you now picture that new guy doing something ridiculous employing wrong science). Keep in mind: Younger generations will associate MacGyver references with the new show.
27 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Please give me a paperclip so I can escape this series
jcorreia197725 September 2016
Warning: Spoilers
I'm pretty sure we all grew up watching the original McGyver series back in the mid 80's, so I assume we were all looking forward to see what the pilot looked like. What sad day it turned out to be.

Let's start at basics: everyone in the series is top of their field, be it at MIT or Delta Force; so far, a bit of a cliché, but OK, fair enough. However, it's impressive how McGyver smashes the typical misconcepts about the average MIT student - forget nerdiness, the general MIT student is an efficient fighting machine (damn, he's more aggressive than the Delta guy) that can solve a clue by remembering an obscure poem written in1907. Seems like the average MIT guy, alright.

Then, everything's everywhere at the same time - if he needs to know something, one of his team mates figures it out in 2 seconds. The part where he enters the party where the biological agent is is nothing short of horrible - a kid, dressed as a waiter, surpasses at least 4 obstacles to get what should be a heavily guarded weapon for sale, and yet he still gets to it.

If it's not that, no problem, he'll just disarm a biological warfare device and fight like a seasoned MMA fighter against one of the terrorists in the end. The only good thing out of this is that lately my time was short as I'm watching so many series at the same time. Well, this one's helping me out, as I won't see an episode past the pilot.
27 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
WTF did I just watch?
lexusdriver1 February 2017
I have just started watching this series, as it's only hitting the airwaves in New Zealand tonight. I am already regretting it, as the feel of this show is almost farcical. The acting is mediocre, the special effects are certainly 'special'. If RDA were dead, his coffin would explode from the friction caused by rapidly 'turning' in it. If there were a 0 option, or even negative, I'd be all over those ratings. One person who was shot by a high-power rifle round from a sniper acted like he'd been potato-gunned. I can't rate this crap low enough. The only redeeming attribute is Tristin Mays. Beautiful. I simply want to shoot the lead actor, he comes across as every single thing the original Mac was not. AVOID.
18 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
utterly ridiculous
fixedfrequencies17 January 2017
most of the characters are bloody terrible;

1st we have Jack, a hardened special forces guy (or whatever he's meant to be) who spends most episodes talking about his feelings.

2nd we have Bozer who is the most unlikable character I think I've ever seen. he spends every episode begging for parts of a girls phone number and I have yet to see a good reason why he's in the show, he adds nothing to it apart from cringy filler scenes and for some reason they need him on the "team" because he can make masks? it just makes me think he was a quota hire.

3rd. riley - the "badass hacker" doing the most cliché "I don't need anyone" routine. I can remember her being in it because she's hot and the other guy simps around her but other than that I can't remember anything she actually does besides randomly typing on keyboards.

4th. the "rewritten as a female" boss; they're always female these days in TV shows - some kind of feminist power fantasy. there was an episode where this lanky skinny woman takes out a load of giant soldiers.

5th. the new female boss - this time she's a midget, are you telling me that she passed any of the physical fitness tests/training etc. that this job would require?

as for Macguyver himself meh. the "science" is mostly utter rubbish. take the most recent episode for example, they have a military issue satellite phone, now - I've designed consumer versions of these things for trekkers etc. and specification 1 - before we even start on the electronics; it has to be waterproof!! if you can't submerge it the military wouldn't go near it! creating a spark by briefly shorting it with a li-ion battery would not discharge it and there is no way in hell you could use lightening to charge it up again!
16 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
I only have myself to blame
jackVSjack2 October 2016
Warning! Pretentious review attached.

That metaphorical cat had to be sacrificed. I saw that there is another plagiarised 80's classic and was curious how bad it could be.

Counterfeit MacGyver is a few steps away from admiring a newly painted room for 45 minutes. With a plot so transparent it's almost possible to look through into another dimension, so the brain isn't left at the door it's shipped to Cairo! If you listen carefully you can hear a pigpen of squealing pigs in the background as the acting is significantly more hammy than a industrial spit-roast operation. Pulled pork seemed on every menu now. Like so many other C class castings they continue to expect the viewer to believe that top secret covert government organisations are only run by top model rejects who failed only because their IQ is marginally higher than a teaspoon. I have seen worse is the more depressing thing.
18 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
laughable
pslee-380753 July 2017
this show is straight out sucked. It's great destroying my memory of 80s MacGyver TV series. No act(trying so hard it's like watching Jr. High Drama class), cheesy dialogues and pick-up lines. it's a mystery there is a season 2 for this show (and FireFly got canceled after 1st season!?)
14 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Unmitigated garbage fire
kburright26 September 2016
This is the most generic, formulaic, recycled CBS Generic Formula Show I've seen since I accidentally witnessed CSI Cyber.

Despite the fresh face of the lead and suspicious whippersnappers making up half the cast, the CBS Idea Generator (a bucket left out too long during a CSI shoot) manage to simply recreate all the same old, tired landfill rejects that have been entertaining computer illiterate baby boomers for the past 15 years. It's got George Eads! That's CBS Ratings Gold! Now they're sure to get all the aged viewership that makes up the bulk of their viewing catalog.

The computer tech talk is once again painfully atrocious gibberish. If a Bronze Age farmer traveled to 2016 and saw computers, then told his village about it and the village storyteller passed down epic songs about computers that were eventually put into written form and translated to English during the 1800s and then used as a reference manual for writers, that would probably be less gibberish.

But with a target viewership mostly of retirees and those on the home stretch towards it, CBS really doesn't need to actually write anything comprehensible when it comes to computers. After all, CBS just figures middle aged and old people are too frightened by technology to know the first thing about it. Surely none of them are smart enough to know better, so just keep picking words at random out of the bucket.

The painfully stereotyped support team just makes things worse. Every character is Generic Stock Character that's been overused in TV and movies. I'm embarrassed for CBS that they can't think beyond character ideas that were outdated before Blackberries stopped being cool.

Now, I liked the original show a lot and was really looking forward to a reboot. I think they made a mistake doing a show based on MacGyver's younger days working for the government. Not just because it was an instant CBS Generic Formula Show, but because younger audiences know this is just propaganda fantasy. They stopped buying The Man Is The Good Guys trope long before NCIS suddenly was excited about all the great things NSA surveillance can do. This is the kind of fantasy believed by people who never cracked history texts after 12th grade. The kind of stuff I really wish was true, but can't bring myself to watch because images from Heart Mountain still haunt my dreams. MacGyver as a government tool? Do you know MacGyver, bro?

But the worst part of all that isn't that it's propaganda fantasy it's that it's REALLY BAD propaganda fantasy! There's just no excuse for the unmitigated garbage fire that was so bad, my DVR literally crashed in the middle and erased all the episodes to spare me more misery.
21 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Mindless monkeys re-aranging plots
mirco-wilhelm25 September 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Let's face it. The original was a cheesy 80s TV show. It wasn't really that good, but it had an interesting angle about how it works. More or less a one man A-Team without the guns, but with the construction scenes.

This series starts of with a whole team supporting this one-man show. Enter: Bond, James Bond in a beautiful Mercedes Gullwing.. oh wait, that's just a kid with his dad's car. This is your MacGyver? Seriously?

About 10 or something minutes, our "hero" get's tricked to hand over some glowy virus thingy (why do they always glow?). He and the girl get shot, he survives, the girl goes missing.

At this point my Cluedo skills start kicking in. Theory: Girl hired bad guys, staged death to sell off the item.

Now our hero is in remorse mode. The comic relief fast talking black best friend, who doesn't know about his real job, tries to cheer him up while he and his team chose a replacement for the lost girl.

At this point the series mashed plot point from so many bad recent TV shows together, I can't stand to watch any more having to test my theory... skipping 20 minutes, ... yeah, I was right.

  • Predictable as hell - Boring beyond belief - Uninspired like another Mission Impossible movie - Written by a preschooler


-> unwatchable
25 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Just terrible.
jonathankayumba25 September 2016
Warning: Spoilers
This show, if i were watching MacGyver for the first time, would make me despise the entire MacGyver series as a whole. insipid writing, poor directing, poor casting, below average acting and a pilot so bad it would rank as one of the worst ever, are but a few things wrong with this show.

The science bits, was one of wow factors in the original. In this reboot the science just... bored me. I felt like i sat through a 45 min teen spy/Sci-Fi show on Disney or Nickelodeon.

The lead, Lucas Till, was a bad choice and that's understating it. his MacGyver felt like an overconfident playboy college kid who just happens to be a spy. His supporting cast left nothing to be desired both in that way they were written, and in the way they executed their respective roles.

The whole thing in the end just felt rushed and under cooked. If the pilot is supposed to set the tone for the rest of the season, then it is safe to say that, this show is going to suck!!.
20 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Wasted Opportunity That Misses The Mark
gbidari21 June 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Save yourself from wasting any time on this trash fire of a show. If it wasn't a MacGyver reboot it would be pretty bad. But considering the source material, this show is just awful. Nearly everything that made the original great is missing here. From the thoughtfulness, intelligence, social responsibility to lack of gun play. Loss of human life in this reboot is completely inconsequential, which was a tenet of the original's DNA. MacGyver is just a doofy guy in this instead of the likable guy dealing with a lifetime of failures trying to be the best human he can be and struggling with his inner turmoil. It's no wonder Richard Dean Anderson won't go near this garbage. Moreover the themes and plot of the show is such a poor rehash with no originality. Characters and scenarios that made the original work are twisted by the writers of this show in an effort to be clever but end up beyond dumb and unbalanced. In the words of the REAL Pete Thorton "WHAT A WASTE."
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Totally devoid of facts! If the 80's original was alive, it would kill itself. Warning: Spoilers
Just one episode (s01 e03), Location Labuan, Malaysia: driving on the wrong side of the road, wrong car, and a doctor in a golf club can't speak in English!!! The creators of this show should do the world a favour an just not kill the show and not the childhood memories of a the great 80's show.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Science Facts have left the series
matti_kaki18 January 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Original MacGyver had a lot of real science included. Not every of the tricks were shown complete because they wanted to prevent people to build something really dangerous. But usually they really worked when the missing formula was added.

BUT this. I've seen only the first episode, which usually should be the best, and I felt really embarrassed and shamed because of few of these "facts".

"Mac" built an electromagnet using a battery. bolt and some wire. Well that really works but not in the purpose he used it for. He walked near security guard and switched the electric magnet on and immediately the guard was unable to work because his radio started to malfunction. The magnet using a battery is a DC current driven magnet and acts just like a weak magnet. It can't harm a radio at all especially when in several feet away and working with one finger battery.

The other wasn't a trick but shows that there was nobody who knew something about boating. When Mac was driving a boat, there were green and red lights seen also backwards. In real boat (or a plane) they show your driving status. They must not be visible directly astern.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

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


Recently Viewed