Zero Hour (TV Series 2013) Poster

(2013)

User Reviews

Review this title
36 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
10/10
Should not have been canceled
thatarethou7 March 2013
It's a really good show, well worth your time but very very stupid people who should never be allowed to make such decisions canceled it after airing only three episodes. I am very angry at these idiots.

Most similar historical fiction history mystery thrillers are poorly written movies and history, science and logic are abused to remove anything that can be taken seriously by an intelligent person. You have Nickolas Cage or some one interchangeable for him dodging rock slides and getting through booby trapped labyrinths in those crappy movies. This was something like that but unlike those movies well thought out and executed. But some short sited sound bite morons canceled it so they can put on something that American attention spans can handle like Honey Boo Boo.
71 out of 102 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
10/10
It is sad That Zero Hour was canceled
Mar Velez27 May 2013
I think some shows are just to intelligent for most people. Maybe People like easy, action and not very smart shows. If you look at what happened to "touch",first season was great and original, then in order to adapt to an audience that wanted action, the script was changed and became completely vulgar and predictable. I loved Zero Hour! It reminded me of a lot of god books i read and it had everything: a smart story, action, original script, and a way of telling the story that surprises you with the unpredictable. It is more and more difficult to find original story's that surprise us. Everything seems so "haven't i seen this before". And maybe story tellers can not do better because the audience demands more of the same.
48 out of 68 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
10/10
Zero Hour (I watched all episodes)
andbaxt7 June 2013
Zero hour is one of the best programs in years and those who say different after only watching episode one, have really no idea just what they have missed as the program progressed towards the end. don't be put off by amateur reviewers on here that have not watched the whole series.

Zero hour only states as being cancelled in various places because knowbody was given proper info about its release dates or other info. The viewing dates are all messed up on various sites that list TV programs. I don't know exactly where they have been aired but I have watched every episode up to the last episode 13. This will be the end of it then as there is only going to be the one season.

Go to Google and type in RELEASE BB and the link to watch for in the results will have "rlsbb" in it with a ".com" on the end. Now go to that site and type in ZERO HOUR and you will find all episodes as you go deeper through the pages. Sorry I cannot help you obtain them as it would not meet with IMDb regulations, but maybe you know somebody who can. It is well worth the effort.
26 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
6/10
Most Seem to Dislike, I Like
go-imdb-ca5 March 2013
I've watched the first 3. I, unlike others, like the characters and it's nice to see Anthony Edwards in role again--since his days with Northern Exposure (I never watched ER). The young cast, most notably, Scott Michael Foster and Addison Timlin I find to be refreshing, both of which had a stint on Californication among other projects not leaving out that Scott worked on The River. Michael Nyqvist has chops...here in Canada he's been on Millennium but back home he's well known. His character is well acted and I feel that he brings the best out of Jacinda Barrett, she's no slouch herself.

Carmen Ejogo; she's been around and can act. Here's where I have to complain; the writing she has to deliver is poor and her role could be a bit more stereotypical--but not much.

Is the show going to win awards? Not yet for sure. But reading the other reviews made me want to say this: "Let's wait and see where this is going...". I truly believe that there is a lot more in store.

Reading my own review I got thinking that I look like I work for a studio or some such--I don't. I simply don't find the show all that bad and it's staying on my record list for now.
24 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
A waste of time
chopendoz2 February 2013
Warning: Spoilers
This contains spoolers - that is if it could be spoiled any more than it is already.

I watched the pilot episode with a skeptics eye. I was expecting the usual generic TV formula with almost all the characters being around 30 - and good looking, for the most part. Maybe a patriarch-type figure for light relief. I was not disappointed. It was an interesting idea for a series but poorly executed. Who wrote this script? A teenager who failed a correspondence course? We are expected to believe that the two teenage reporters could just jump on a plane and fly to Bavaria, just like that? That the 93 year old German guy spoke English? That he would let them into his house merely because they 'had come a long way'? That he would tell them his secrets without even knowing who they were?That they actually understood who the Nazis were? That the FBI knew almost instantly that our hero was flying to Canada for some unknown reason ('hey! I think I'll go with him'). That an FBI agent could fly off to Canada at the drop of a hat? (where she has no jurisdiction I might add). To somewhere in the Arctic Circle - where it is apparently not cold. The bad guy had already flown to Canada the day before it seems. Possibly even before the abduction. Have the producers/writers any idea of how long things take? In a series with a time-based theme? They seem to live in a dream world. Perhaps it's just me, but I like a little realism now and again. This was a waste of time.
67 out of 111 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
3/10
Awful
Toecutter200129 January 2014
Warning: Spoilers
What an appalling piece of drivel. About as cerebral and challenging as Spongebob. They couldn't decide whether to rip off National Treasure or The Da Vinci Code, and so came down somewhere in the middle. I've seen better acting from my 8 year-old when he's been caught doing something naughty. Plot holes all over the place. What happened to the other clone from the malaria hospital? Where did he come from? The whole series ended up being about preventing the baddies from making a new baby Jesus (which, as we all know, would bring about the end of days), so how come when there were two of them implanted in two women only one had to be stopped, while the other gets to head off to Africa to "anonymously" heal vast numbers of sick people (including a mute child and a blind Internationally notorious terrorist who were able to track her down with remarkable ease)? And in the end, God seemed to be the one to prevent the disaster while the characters who had spent 12 episodes running all over the planet trying to save the world actually contributed bugger all. A monastery in the middle of a cartographic dead zone in Tajikistan, and when the rescue gets a bit tricky, the FBI cavalry are only a 5 minute helicopter ride away. Why not just bring them in the first place? I actually thought the basic idea might work, but it was so poorly executed that by the end I realised I'd only been watching out of a morbid sense of curiosity as to how bad it could get. It was almost like they started making each episode before deciding what was going to happen. And they obviously got pretty bored with the Nazi stuff pretty quickly and moved on, but forgot to decide what to move on to. You'd probably enjoy it if you're a gullible conspiracy nut who thinks most TV is just too well-made.
8 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
7/10
Enjoyable Mystery
RoseM4441 March 2013
Thank God, a mystery with a bald, middle-aged hero. I'm so tired of the sneering, posturing superhero that has the depth of a tissue. I'm also enjoying the mystery. It's an interesting story and one I look forward to watching. I tune into television to relax and be entertained. Just like National Treasure, a movie I thoroughly enjoyed, it's not meant to give us the meaning of life, it's designed so we can have fun and possibly learn some interesting facts along the way.

What I liked about last night's episode was how it left me wanting to do some more reading about Einstein. His personal life was far more interesting than most people believe. If a program can do that, I say we need more of them. And the lines about love? Love can never be corny or irrelevant.
23 out of 36 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
7/10
Insults the intelligence
Dave Jessop27 September 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Starts of with the usual "Nazis after religious artifacts" plot in 1938 - OK - been done before but not a problem.

Anthony Edwards as an owner/editor of a sceptic magazine which specialises in debunking all sorts of conspiracies and stuff suddenly starts believing all sorts of things

The plot is about a secret society that were hiding The Cross (remarkably preserved after 2000 years even submerged in water for so many years).

The cross is moved to a Nazi sub to be hidden in a secret place.

Apparently our "hero" is somehow related to a Nazi officer who was also a Christian dedicated to protecting the cross - Anthony Edwards again with the worst German accent ever (in flashbacks.

Hero wants to know why the Nazi has his face. Later the Ashton Kutcher lookalike eye candy for girlies comes up with the explanation "It can only be time travel or reincarnation".

Hero's wife is kidnapped by a terrorist who is after 12 clocks which point the way to the location of the newly hidden cross (terrorist is by far the best actor - he was in the original Steig Larssen Millennium trilogy).

Enter the female FBI agent who was a Peace Corps worker who joined the FBI to avenge her husband's apparent murderer (it's the terrorist) - she seems to be able to speak every language on the planet which is pretty handy as her and the hero globe trot on the trail of the terrorist murderer/kidnapper.

OK - a bit cheesy so far but still could be decent entertainment

The thing that really ruined it was the incredible leaps in logic that somehow keeps them on the tail of the baddie - massive "thinking outside the box" moments that the hero comes up with and everyone nods in agreement like it's the most obvious conclusion

I saw the "twist" in episode 5 of 13 - I'm sure there are people who got it even earlier

The ending was so bloody nice and fluffy I almost gagged

I know most shows are dumbed down for general viewers now (and American shows are the worst at doing that) but I found it an insult to my intelligence that we are supposed to take these leaps of logic (and faith) as Gospel (pun intended)

Not sure if I should give it 4/10 or 7/10 because I got as confused as the plot
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Don't Think I Will Waste My Time
dlbach14 February 2013
Warning: Spoilers
To start, I am not a fan of Anthony Edwards. I tried to over look him and focus on the story and the characters. However, Mr. Edwards caused his character to flat-line on me.

The storyline is plausible, but the actors and the manner in which it was deployed left me feeling betrayed by the production staff. There are too many holes to be plugged up and I don't think the show will be able to pull that off.

With the timeline, White Vincent was born, roughly around 1939 which present day would make him 74, however, they have a 52 year old actor playing the part.

The two kids seemed misplaced. In the beginning I believed they were just employees of Anthony Edwards' character. Then at another point I thought perhaps they were kids of the couple, or at least the girl was their daughter and dating the boy. I never did figure this out. Supposedly the four were very close, yet no real tears were shed even though the CC stated that one of them was crying. I thought the girl was and that is why Edwards was comforting her however, her eyes were bone dry.

The FBI agents were laughable. One was just a monkey in the wings. He looked stupid saying nothing while his partner played Lone Ranger. The female agent was a real piece of work. First, acting like she wants to help and then making it seem like the kidnap victim was a terrorist instead. She gets all angry because Edwards won't share information with her, but I wouldn't trust her either with the way she was behaving. My thoughts on her were "Dirty Cop".

The witchy fed has a ticket to sit across the aisle from Edwards who is going to Canada and then on the the Arctic to search for clues regarding his wife's whereabouts. How is it possible for her to be able to drop everything and do this and get that exact seat and be able to carry her weapon across the boarder without questions? The Arctic. Last time I heard it is very cold there and those who do go there for work and what not need to wear much protection from the cold. However, this Arctic isn't even as cold as NYC in the winter. Even the pilot was bare-skinned in the air and no problems. Usually when it is cold, people can "see their breath". Not in this Arctic.

Find actors with some depth and acting ability wouldn't hurt. Do some more research. Refine the story so that it isn't all over the place. Then return with something worth watching.
30 out of 60 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
1/10
Been there, done that.
mb26567422 February 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Well, this is an old concept done again. Skeptics meets the noble apostles of superstition, becomes superstitious. The end of the world is coming and it's, once again, played out from the stories in Christian mythology.

The theme is familiar but not very well performed. The acting is so and so, mostly not convincing at all. I'm sorry to say it but this show is boring and tedious, IMO just a waste of time.

How I would have loved to see it turn the concept around, men and women of faith meets the noble apostles of skepticism and become skeptics too, that would have been a true innovation in the doomsday ridden landscape of movie and TV-show scenarios.
22 out of 42 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Unintentionally hilarious, at least for the pilot episode viewed late at night
morandb12 February 2013
I watched the pilot online before the official broadcast because friends recommended that it would come across as just plain bad in its broadcast time slot (8/7pm).

--- Emotional reaction ---

The overall tone is hilariously overwrought. The scenes are hacked together. There isn't even an attempt at a pretense of internal logic. Even in the context of a portion of an individual scene, the characters' actions often are absurdly nonsensical. The silliness, stupidity and illogic come flying at you at such a pace it is impossible not to laugh -- I was laughing well past the end of the credits.

Watch it with friends and wine/beer/... and debate questions such as: Is this good enough to be a bad parody of "The Da Vinci Code" and the like? Is Anthony Edwards starring because Nicholas Cage said that there wasn't enough money ...?

--- Analytic reaction ---

Quick cuts between short scenes are typical of this genre, but to be successful, it requires audience involvement, either with the characters or the cause (idea, threat, ...). There is none here.

Nazis as villains is so overdone and outmoded in this and related genres that it hurts audience buy-in. Even if this isn't the case, it is just so badly done -- so over-the-top and comic. This is an enormous red flag that the show's creator has no creativity or imagination.

The genre appears to be race-to-the-treasure. This requires the lead characters to buy into the high-energy craziness, such as Nicholas Cage in the National Treasure series and the gaggle of comics in "It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World" (1963). Anthony Edwards is badly suited to play this role, both from the type of actor he is and audience expectations from prior role. And worse the script saddles him with two conflicting roles. The other one is that of the skeptic/voice-of-sanity (comic relief, exposition, whatever). Although the actor is much better suited to this role, the writers give him no support (I remember only one line, and it was a throw-away). The Anthony Edwards character could have been the "reluctant hero", but actor and the setup in the pilot preclude this.

There are multiple statements by characters to tell the audience that things are not what they seem, but rather than ambiguous hints to draw you in, they are ham-handed signals that the writers don't have the finesse to handle this genre.
42 out of 89 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
5/10
I've seen a lot better...
opentoe25 February 2013
I thought this was going to be a good show, but it's turned out pretty bad already. I won't even waste my time on picking out certain things but want to mention one scenario.

When the bad guy saw Hank outside the Submarine in the second episode. They both went into the sub and found Hank's "double" dead there holding a watch. And the pretty FBI agent makes the bad guy put down his gun. Now there goes Hank, taking a million pictures of this watch but he NEVER takes one picture of his double dead self???? Are you serious. Even the FBI agent is snapping pictures and she doesn't even take a picture of double dead Hank. I don't get that. Then Hank goes back to the city and explains he saw himself and his young team doesn't really understand what he means when he saw himself. He showed his young team a ton of pictures of the watch he saw but not one of his double dead self.

Things like that just get to me. Sorry.
18 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
9/10
Great series
phil-wigglesworth5 August 2013
At the start it appeared predictable, and at the point that ABC suspended the series it seemed that a formula had been established that left he viewers adrift. The great thing was that when the series rebooted in July, we suddenly found out that that Da Vinci take off was no more. The pedantic finding of he clocks, presaged by the hours counted in the title sequence, were short circuited and the whole story moved from pure religious fantasy to science fantasy. The final story kept a good balance of resolution and mystery. For a one season show, in this genre, this is as good as it gets. Enjoy the combination of Science Fiction, Fantasy, rewritten Nazi history, and the ultimate human story set in a religious context. The great thing about this series is that it does have an ending, and yet it is unlikely that you will work it out in the first ten or so episodes.
9 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
7/10
I saw it all the way through and people are missing the mark
mike-ryan45530 June 2013
I was outside the USA and have seen the show all the way through from foreign broadcasts. This gives me a lot better perspective on it. So I have to speak in defense of the show against some attacks I see as based on lack of knowledge.

First, they do fully resolve the plot. This isn't a show that is canceled in mid-stream like Threshold where there is never a satisfactory answer as to what is happening and why. The show apparently was intended to only go thirteen weeks so the resolution was much clearer and more complete than say Lost's was.

Second, not every cliché was used the way that we expect. Against the Evil Nazi Mad Scientist, they had the Good and Human Nazis.

So was it great art? No. Was it over the top and crazy? Yes. Would I say the ending was politically correct? I'd say yes, but it was feel good. Did it foreshadow many of the events ALL the way through? Yes. Some were painfully telegraphed, and a couple of them you KNEW they would do without motivation by the characters.

As a religious person, I also liked that there was an almost semi-favorable representation of a name brand religion by a TV show in this day where constant attacks on religion seem to be fashionable in Hollyweird. So I'll give it a seven. One extra point above average for mentioning God as a good idea and one for actually finishing out the story.
13 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
3/10
Interesting Concept, terribly executed
farquarg7 July 2013
Warning: Spoilers
First the good. Most network dramas are either medical or legal or crime dramas. The simple fact that this show doesn't fall into these categories is commendable. I also have to give ABC credit for taking a chance on something new.

***Spoilers below***** The story line is about a man, Hank ( Anthony Edwards) whose wife is kidnapped. He finds out that her kidnapping is related to a clock. The clock is in fact a puzzle with clues leading to other clocks. If you find all the clocks you will learn the location of the True Cross. The cross was hidden during the 1930s to protect it from the Nazis. The story is a blend of modern day events with flashbacks to 1930s that shed light on the reasons behind the current events.

It's an interesting concept and there's a tremendous potential here. But the writers, actors, basically everyone and everything associated with this show fails. The characters jump all around the world, they go from being stranded in the arctic to being back in New York effortlessly. Because there's no effort, there's no chance to connect to the characters emotionally--the viewer never cares about the characters.

The show is based in 2013, yet the characters run into virtually none of the problems someone in 2013 would face. There's no real resistance save from those involved in the conspiracy directly. When there are tragic and moving events, such as Hank discovering everything about his life is a lie, the characters are barely affected. The only reason you know something happened is they talk about it. Otherwise they carry on as if completely unaffected.

The whole show feels as though it's a 10,000 ft level summary of another story.

The failure of this show is a shame because networks will be less willing to take a chance on new ideas.
9 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Great !!!
Jaye Munger14 February 2013
My husband and I seem to have a foolproof method of picking winners in new TV series.....if the half hour or full hour passes by very fast....the show is always a hit!!! This has been true for every one of our favorite shows. Guess what.....ZERO HOUR went by in zero time !!! We both think it's an entertaining, interesting, and well acted show. The concept has been done before, but not exactly in this manner. We liked the fact that past history was included, not just total fiction. Some things portrayed in the show really did exist or actually happen. It was fast paced, no long, drawn out scenes. I think this show will appeal to those of us that enjoy a good mystery, with lots of clues, and plot twists. There was good chemistry between the cast members, another element needed for a long running series. We think and hope it will run a long while !!! Following Day: Wow, some of you guys are really tearing this show apart!! Are you all unaware it is suppose to be a TV show, for entertainment purposes?? Most of you sound like its a doctoral thesis gone wrong !! Lighten up...it's unique and exciting to watch, OK a little work on the Arctic costuming, and the missing breath vapor was a good call. I hope the show's production team will take notes from some of the reviewers ! And the Fed got to go along on the plane because she is allowed to carry her gun on a plane...and she's sexy !
29 out of 65 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
3/10
Spoiling a good concept Without any basic studies
jomingeorge723 February 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I am giving the ratings only for the concept.I really wanted to like this show but the script has been spoiling by adding blunders to the script in each episode. I feel this show was made by a group of people who had never been outside the united states and writing a story purely on imagination with a vague reference on the facts.

I read many reviews about the first season and I am not not adding anything to it.

In the second season, at Chennai in India, people speaks Hindi!!!. In India, Hindi may be the official language but there are many states where people don't even know Hindi. Chennai is actually listed as number one state with people who doesn't speak Hindi, in reality they are against Hindi and there is a group of people who are strongly arguing for Tamil to be one of official languages of India and they even demanded a different national status for Tamil speaking people.It seems The writers taking things for granted.
10 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
8/10
So Much Potential I Do Want to Like It
PartialMovieViewer21 February 2013
Warning: Spoilers
This is kind of like a thousand pound weight sitting on top of a table…a whole lot of potential waiting for a nudge over the edge. This show has the potential to take off like a rocket. The idea is brilliant and the cast is coming around. I can deal with the cub reporters, I mean they are typical kids who don't listen and they are turning out to be kind of fun. The priest who can't stay out of trouble, he needs to be in it more often. Now that inept FBI agent, what is her point – she just doesn't cut it. I mean, if she could act, that would be one thing – but the way she forces badly contrived script only exposes her as a very weak link. Also, every time Carmen steps into a scene it almost seems the story is all about her and her messed life – cry me a river. If it were up to me, I would write the entire FBI out of the story all-together and I think I would add a character who provides some kind of comedic relief (one a little older than the kids) sidekick who is maybe a genius with puzzles. He or she could suggest a next step for the 'team' to take or help solve them really difficult mysteries. Stepping out on a limb, I think a little humor may actually add contrast to the supposed seriousness of the tale. The show's pace is generally okay but the story has a tendency to jitter and jump around at times – a little chuckle here and there would help transition as well. I would also suggest slowing down the pace of the main story a bit and maybe concentrate more on suspense. This show could easily become a favorite, but I do sense that PC influences will tank whatever brilliance this machine may possess before it even gets a chance at a solid beginning. I watched the second episode and could already detect corrosive effects of political correctness beginning to eat away at whatever chance this show has…too sad. I gave this show a 7, I hope I have not stepped out on another limb.

Update Alert - Just watched the latest show and it appears the writing is less choppy. The FBI Agent seems to be more solid in her roll and less of a loser - good recover on her. The show is picking up and I am starting to watch it because I am interested
8 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
7/10
Good show
stefferbug200328 February 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Unfortunately I think I already have the gist of this show. An its still early . Would have liked a bit of question as to what they are after. They are going for the cross Jesus died on to get the traces of DNA left from his blood. This way since they already created a child without parents they think they can create God. Which Im sure is the whole deal about this show. I just wished they had let the part of the baby that grew into a man stay hidden for awhile. It would be a great show if they had let this all come out slower. Im still going to watch it because it do like the suspense. I also like the cast good to see some of these guys back in action.
9 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
6/10
Intriguing ride that's not quite there
AE Hopwood1 March 2013
"Zero Hour" is a fast paced, twist-a-minute, intriguing, historical thrill ride that doesn't quite measure up. With its codes, symbols, maps, hidden objects and messages, and "ultimate secret", it's no wonder "Zero Hour" draws inevitable comparison to "The Da Vinci Code". This hour-long action drama centers on unraveling a mysterious secret hidden by twelve "new apostles" appointed by the church in 1938 to transport and safeguard some apocalypse-inducing secret from away from clawing Nazi hands. The mystery kicks off when the antique clock shop proprietress wife of Hank, played by "ER" (and "Top Gun"!) vet Anthony Edwards, is kidnapped after purchasing an unusual clock at a flea market. Hank runs a magazine called Modern Skeptic, focusing on conspiracy theories and historical mysteries (how convenient), and after being disillusioned with the abilities of the authorities, he enlists two of his young staff members, "Greek"'s Scott Michael Foster and his fellow "Californication" alum Addison Timlin, to follow the clues and track down his wife himself. This leads him to discover the rather convoluted conspiracy already outlined, and the necessity to investigate and travel the world to unfold the clues and match pace with the kidnapper, who is doing the same thing.

So many things happen in the first episode alone, it's tricky to keep track of it all. The conspiracy is interesting, especially its echoes of the supernatural, with genetic experimentation and a Nazi doppelganger of Hank, that make it a global "National Treasure" with the spirit of "Lost". While there are some very convenient discoveries and knowledge, there is at least an attempt to make the method of deduction somewhat plausible. The characters are under-developed but likable. Hank is so far a rather generic smart, good guy who just wants to get his wife back. His employees Arron and Rachel are also pretty stock characters (though it would be hard to fill in too many characteristic details for them and still have time for the plethora of details involving the plot set-up), their distinguishing characteristics being youth, loyalty, tenacity, and the extreme likelihood that they'll end up together at some point (if the show isn't canceled before they get around to it). More interesting are baddie Victor, who, though also thus far a non-specifically broad antagonist, is brought to life with grit and a somewhat psychopathic nonchalance by the Swedish "Girl With the Dragon Tattoo" actor Mikael Nyqvist, and unconventional FBI agent Beck, played with a mostly successful American accent by Brit Carmen Ejogo. The dialog is nothing to write home about, and I'm not sure they can (or should!) maintain the breakneck pace of the first two episodes, but despite its shortcomings, the fun and infinitely expandable premise, the obviously decent production budget, my hope for future improvement, and a soft spot for Nyqvist, Foster and Edwards will definitely keep me coming back every Thursday at Zero Hour (8 o'clock…), for the time being.
6 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
1/10
Painful to Watch
Robin Krauss11 March 2013
A good story premise, but uninspired casting, juvenile script, amateur direction. The dialog uses every cliché in the book. Casting a geeky main character with two student sidekicks? They obviously spent money on this show, but they didn't spend it on the cast or writing. It deserved to die. The main character makes me cringe. Always makes wrong decisions. Comes off as a naive dunderhead that makes you want to slap him around. The characters in this show make you want to root for the bad guys. There are shows on TV that have excellent writers - like The Good Wife. They're smart and have depth, and are able to bring out the actors talents. I think Zero Hour has a major identity problem. I'd be curious to know who they feel their target viewers are. Judging by the writing and direction I'm guessing it's 12 year olds - or adults with a recent lobotomy.
11 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
2/10
Murder She wrote for 2013 - sorry murder she wrote fans...
mattgibb125 February 2013
This is akin to murder she wrote, except, that was probably better acted at least. The plot is an interesting one however the delivery is just so corny that its cringe-worthy in many many places. I am guessing this show will be known for its corny one liners rather than the acting or script writing ability. Shame really, as the premise seemed a good one. I did have high hopes for it but unfortunately it is not going to last very long, if it does it will be a new murder she wrote corny show for old actors to get some work in. Don't waste your time if you have a reasonable amount of brainpower, if your a bit of a thicket (sorry) then this show will probably seem really good... But for those of you who liked warehouse 13 for fun, or eureka for fun, you will be sadly disappointed that this shows corny side takes away any fun it could have generated - disappointing 2 out of 10 for me...
11 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
2/10
Miserable show
alenresident1 March 2013
This show tried to make something, but it failed in every way. I would like to describe this show as a mixture of National Treasure, Indiana Jones and Da Vinci Code. Why every TV show tries to show us apocalypse? Dumb references to Ainstein, Catholicism, and religion. Please producers, make something original, fresh and entertaining. This is just boring and will surely be canceled in the next 2-3 months. Shows like "River" that has been canceled showed some freshness in this genre. Characters are not developed well. Emotions between them are not even shown realistically. Why in every show, there has to be some intelligence agency. We all got bored of mentioning FBI or CIA. Make something new and fresh.
10 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
9/10
I really enjoy, but ...
giffsfam15 March 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I really do enjoy the show. The background sounds have been too loud though, maybe it's my TV, but sometimes the music or crowd/street noise is over-powering the characters speaking. It's still worth watching. Something else I just noticed, because I have been watching the Alias series, was the similarity to the Milo Rambaldi concept, again OK. I wondered if J.J. Abrams was involved in Zero Hour? Then to even make it more similar Arvin Sloan's dead wife shows up in the last scene of last week's show appearing to be a villain!? Still like the show and hoping to see Jennifer soon!! If they can get her for an appearance or two that should take care of any cancellation issues!
6 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
1/10
Waste of time
hagopikagopian16 February 2018
I hate those tv series extending a 15 minutes-story to a 12 hours-story. I would recommend you to watch the first episode and the last one. that is it. waste of time. I really try hard to understand this kind of tv series that you can predict the end. Plus, I didn't like the scenario. I don't know even why I have kept watching until the fifth episode.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

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