Adman98

(2012-04-25 09:22:10)

NCIS Los Angeles is terrible

Despite its high ratings, I find this spin-off totally sucks. I supposeit is currently benefiting from riding on the coattails of its lead-in,the number 1 ranked NCIS (and deservedly so). No way can I see itsustaining this initial success.The characters are cartoonish and the Linda Hunt character is downrightirritating. What a waste of talent. Just what the hell is Hetty'sposition supposed to be anyway? The whole concept is ill conceived and poorly executed.I have tried towatch 3 episodes now and fell asleep each time.No mas!

Henry Bowman

(2012-04-24 22:40:55)

Two different universes

I just watched 10/13/09's NCIS and NCIS:LA back to back. These twoshows weren't separated at birth, they were born in entirely differentdimensions.NCIS (and earlier, JAG) showed a terrific understanding of morality andhonor. Today's NCIS episode explored the concepts of duty, doing theright thing, obeying legal rules of engagement, and the consequences offollowing immoral orders.This was followed by NCIS:LA, in which our two heroes jimmy their wayinto an innocent civilian's home because they "fear she MAY be introuble," and then take the opportunity to plant listening devices allover it with no warrants in evidence anywhere (she wasn't even asuspect). Excuse me, what happened to propriety, legality,constitutional rights? The characters on NCIS:LA continually act as ifthese things just don't exist.It gets tiresome to watch the two main characters act as if everyunlocked front door constitutes "probable cause" and an invitation forthem to intrude with guns drawn. Maybe that's life in LA, but inArizona, Missouri, Virginia, or Georgia, these guys would be red jellywithin a week.I was ready to complain to Bellisarius (who in the past has beenexemplary as far as getting this stuff right) but then I discoveredNCIS:LA is done by a separate production company. Let me tell you, itshows.This show does to military honor what pornography does to sex.

dogs_go_beep

(2012-04-22 20:46:47)

Very poor

If this had been a standalone program, I may have given it a 2 or 3(actually I wouldn't have signed up to give it anything), but regardingthis as a good spin-off of NCIS is a joke.I gave NCIS:LA a decent shot before forming my opinion, coming from abackground of watching all NCIS to date I felt I had to. I was hookedon the original NCIS well before its fourth episode (I've seen 4 LA),and can safely say that there is very little in common between the 2.I'm not fond of any of the characters, their stories do not interestme.Perhaps the thing I detest the most about LA, are the cross-overepisodes, especially those which shed light on the characters in theoriginal. I will not watch LA to gain insight to NCIS, and I reallyhope LA doesn't contaminate the original show more than it already has.The thing I love about the original NCIS are the characters, theirdevelopment and interaction with each other. NCIS:LA may develop itsown in time, but I hope it doesn't get the chance to do so.NCIS is too good to ruin.

hodson_2008

(2012-04-22 18:21:58)

NCIS Fans: You will not be disappointed

I was a huge fan of CSI: for years, so naturally, I was excited by thespin-offs. And, like most true CSI: fans, I was sorely disappointed.That's not the case here. While NCIS: LA is not as"investigatively-oriented" as its original, it is still an intriguingand adventurous show. The lack of forensic investigation is easilyexplained away in the NCIS introduction show, stating that the LA teamis more "Special Ops". The show has its unique characters, many ofwhich seem to have a similar back story as the original - Callen'smysterious background mirrors the shaded past of Gibbs, Eric and Domthe techies are reminiscent of McGee, Kensi is (trying to be) as toughas Ziva. Even Hetty has an odd and enlightening past, much like Ducky.The only thing missing is the quick wit of Tony. It was very easy forme to become addicted to this show. And I hope it is the same for otherNCIS fans out there!

luke_rock

(2012-04-15 19:10:22)

Took a while....

It took a while to get me interested in this series. Having been along-time NCIS fan, I felt obligated to give it a fair shake. After thefirst few episodes, I felt bored and wondering if I should keepwatching. Maybe it was because I was preoccupied when NCIS: LA wouldair. However, after settling down and focusing on the episodes, mainlythe one where Dom gets kidnapped, I felt like they've hit their stride.There's no doubt this is a completely different show than the originalNCIS. That's what makes it tolerable. They're not trying to copycat theother like the CSIs did in my opinion. They've got humor. They've gotcrimes they're trying to solve. They've slowly gotten some chemistry.Keep in mind, Shane Brennan is running both shows and he has yet todisappoint me on the original. They're in good hands and hopefully,they'll get even better. The first NCIS had a few bumps in the roadduring the first season and hit their stride in Season 2.

andy-545-158590

(2012-04-15 05:53:09)

Another crappy new show

NCIS Los Angeles should not have NCIS in the title. Tlak about norelation as a spin off. I didn't know Mrs. Yoda was in the navy. Why isthe navy set up in a BelAire mansion? Why do navy investigators runaround in sports cars, dress shabbily, and never need to show ID forofficial business? Why is the younger navy investigator so stupid? Theyneed a sidekick? The first episode made US Navy SEALs look prettystupid. Who is the psychic who knows everything. Must be theMentalist's baby brother. The writers on this show don't get out of thebasement much. To say I was disappointed is a gross understatement. Idon't need to remember to watch this loser again. Don't worry though, alot of the Hollywood crowd may watch. Maybe.

apollo451

(2012-04-14 01:38:37)

Disappointing...

I had expected a decent show but instead came a failed attempt to copythe popular TV show "NCIS". In my opinion, NCIS is not the sort of showthat should join the category of shows that are put on TNT and USA tofill up time (Law and Order, CSI, etc...) that have been spinned in allsorts of directions further improving the originality of the firstparent show. (Not to pick a fight with Law and Order, it's a good show)In NCIS there is character development, plot development, and a decentstory line as you see insight as to the characters backgrounds. In theshows of NCIS: LA I've watched, all I can call it is disappointing. Ididn't have incredibly high hopes for it in the beginning, and I'mhappy I didn't. With a poor degree of acting coming from LL Cool J (Ilost all my respect for him when he was in a show with Elmo) but thisis one of the reasons he should quit acting entirely. The writersattempted to substitute each character of the original show, NCIS, forsomeone with a different personality in NCIS: LA. It didn't work, tosay the least. Because let's be honest: the only reason anyone wouldever watch this show is out of sheer respect for NCIS...

(2012-04-13 10:43:16)

Booooooooooooooorrrrrrriiinnngg! Yawn!

This is merely beefcake without any redeeming characteristics. Whathappened to the elements that set NCIS apart from the crowd ofCSI-wannabes? None of those qualities are included here, and all thethings that made the other copycats so easily ignored are! With all duerespect to Chris O'Donnell and LL Cool J, there is entirely too muchtestosterone, and not enough of the casual humor of the original. Thecomment about the lack of any connection to the Navy was entirelyappropriate, an obvious mistake, but one that begs the question: Whycall it NCIS-ANYTHING? Why not call it whatever cool title they havelaying around waiting for the next macho-man cop-show?. If we neededanother mindless cop show, this would be perfect! I don't know whyHollywood gets it so wrong, so often, but I suspect it has something todo with the herd instinct--when one person wanders down a certain path,everyone else follows along, just to be sure they aren't missingsomething they previously overlooked! This one won't last the season,if they don't make sweeping changes, like losing the cast, firing thewriters, and getting someone who can direct. Other than those minorchanges, it doesn't need much. I'm sure the caterers are tops!

primacag-219-477782

(2012-04-10 20:07:10)

A name does not a show make

I've seen a few of these, and many of this shows namesake. Eithersomething is happening that I don't understand, or this show is bunk. The characters are shapeless and formless, only having a corporealexistence. The humor is humorless, and does not make me smile.Having an Oscar winner on the show that makes cameos irrelevant to theplot is not a good use of the Oscar winner.There are too many irrelevant characters on the team that do little tomove the episode forward. Having a hard body is not enough to make theshow interesting. The tech side of the show is taken for granted. It should add to theplot not exist as an appendage and taken for granted.The characters develop too slowly. It is not clear what justifieshaving a large office of special projects when the episodes seem toonly occur in LA. Could be better, might be better, only NCIS in name, not in spirit.

lanticoli

(2012-04-10 13:16:34)

This show is a joke and embarrasses the original NCIS

After watching this show twice and trying to watch it twice more I findI can not understand how a show so stupid can be allowed on T.V.Have we stooped so low that the people producing this unrealistic pieceof trash think we will watch anything. It is doubly tragic to thinkthat a quality show like "Without a Trace" was canceled to possiblyallow space for this idiotic waste of time.I absolutely do not understand what this show is trying to convey tous. Why a clandestine type building that is an embarrassment to agovernment agency, a head of department that is out of a book offiction, a buff agent who I think was hired just to show off his body.In fact I feel most of the cast was chosen to enhance the stupidity ofwhat the industry feels they can subject us to.I have never in my life ever wished failure on anyone or anything and Idon't feel I need to now. This show should self destruct on its own,and the sooner the better

desertwatch333

(2012-04-09 12:26:55)

The show is empty without Hetty

There's something special about the Hetty character - she is the centerof the show in a unique way. The other characters look to her, respecther, protect her...for such a tiny woman, she packs a mightypunch...strength and wisdom and courage...the show needs her. Shebrings the team together, she brings cohesiveness and, despite herprofessionalism, she brings warmth. She hasn't been in the show for abit and I know that I, and many others I've spoken to, just don't findthe show as compelling without Hetty. The other characters are strongand well played, also essential but they are a team because Hettycenters them. We know this is only fiction but it's great fiction. Ihope they bring Hetty back full time - she has everyone's back and theyhave hers...and each other's.

tokanac

(2012-04-08 15:03:56)

What the hell's going on?

A spin-off show from one that is already famous in its own right has alot of expectations to live up to with both its audience and the castand crew, and it can go both ways: it can float or sink, and not onlydoes it depend on the acting, but it depends on different departments:the writing, directing, lighting, etc. And with NCIS: Los Angeles, ithad a *high* expectation to live up to, and even though it's not quitethe same as its predecessor, it has still hit the mark and become ashow worth watching. I say this with caution, because it's still earlydays (at least in Australia), and NCIS is pretty great! I doacknowledge that NCIS is a spin-off of JAG, but who remembers that(except me, I just proved), and who really wants to admit that? NCISmight be a spin-off, but it's easy to forget, and it's risen to fameand it's the #1 Hit Crime Drama here for one reason and one reasononly: it's genius! It stands up on its own, and shines on its own right(as for-mentioned)!I must say that NCIS: Los Angeles isn't too shabby, and it's worth alook, but I also must say that there have been somethings that don'treally make sense. Two episodes (Legand PtI, and Legand PtII) of NCISwas aired introducing the new show, and one of the main characters ofthe Los Angeles office, Special Agent Lara Macy (played by LouiseLombard) was introduced, and suspected to be the strong character (likeGibbs), but she never appeared in NCIS: Los Angeles, and that was neverexplained. Another thing that was never explained was why PaulleyPerrette (who plays Abby) appeared in the promos for the new show, andwe suspected she left NCIS to be in NCIS: Los Angeles, but she onlyappeared in one episode of the show, and stayed on NCIS with MarkHarmon, Michael Weatherly, Sean Murrey and Cote de Pablo, not tomention David McCallum and Rocky Carroll (yay!). These two thingshaven't been explained as of yet, and Louise Lombard hasn't starred inan NCIS: Los Angeles episode to date.Saying all that, I do like the new spin-off of what I've seen so far,and that's the first episode twice, as there was an Encore as well.

jonty-24

(2012-04-06 14:04:23)

Could be a lot better if they got rid of the squeaky dumb nerds.

What really annoys me is the high pitched squeaky nasal immature twangof that woman "Nel" (the so called analyst) played by RenГѓВ©e FeliceSmith. Useless. She's about 12 years old and why they brought her ontothe show is anyone's guess (big boobs maybe?) The plots are thin, haveno depth are childish and lack insight.Stick to NCIS it's a winner. They even know when to stop with the"Goth" thing too! The characters are well balanced and believable. Even"Ducky" old Iliya Kuriakin comes across as funny and wise and genuine.Pity though that Mcgee is looking more like a skeleton with eachepisode. Somebody should tell him it does not look good. More power toNCIS keep 'em coming.

marty684

(2012-04-06 08:10:17)

Linda Hunt is miscast

I loved Linda Hunt in many movie roles, but assigning her as thecommander of NCIS Los Angeles is possibly the most egregious example ofmiscasting in TV history. So tiny she is barely visible, she has NOpower or authority.After Harmon/Gibbs defined the role in the original,she is an unbelievable let-down. The only thing less believable thanHetty being given that job is Linda being given that role. Surely atough veteran actor such as Tom Selleck or Sam Elliott would have madethe series come alive. The original NCIS is great because Gibbs is therock-steady hub around which all the characters orbit.Without such astrong center, NCIS L.A. is like a boat flailing helplessly with norudder to give it direction.

pauljboatman

(2012-04-05 08:12:53)

What Happened to Mace & Why Don't the Agents ever show ID

Not as good as NCIS, but a good second. I will definitely watch theshow every week. I was just wondering what happened to "Mace", agentMacey, who was introduced as the team lead in the two lead-in episodesshown on NCIS. I liked her a lot better than the little dwarf lady theyhave as the team lead now. I felt it could be a good story line betweenher and Gibbs. I also wonder, why don't any of the agents ever showtheir ID when they identify themselves as federal agents? I, like acouple of other inputs I've read, think it would have been more logicalto have staged the team out of San Diego rather than Los Angeles. SanDiego is a well known Navy town, LA, ah, NO!

jimmy-150

(2012-04-04 18:27:11)

I wonder what the mid-season replacement is going to be.

Poor Chris O'Donnell, type cast into the "Batman and Robin" characteragain. I cannot help but to see haunting similarities to the Batmanmovies, an elderly matron who does all the same tasks as Alfred, asecret NCIS-cave, and the NCIS mobile (which is a souped up hot rod).Perhaps next will be the NCIS signal, which will be set up in alighthouse to keep the naval aspect intact. This show would have beenfine if they had not tried to pawn it off as a NCIS spin-off. Too badthey cannot relaunch the series under it's own name, with nocorrelation to NCIS or the military. It would be a decent show if itwas a civilian agency using ultra sophisticated equipment, similar toTom Clancy's Deep Black books.

Menno

(2012-04-02 17:07:55)

It isn't bad but it isn't NCIS

The biggest flaw they made with this show is calling it NCIS. Theywanted to cash on the success of the original series and give the showa boost in it's early viewer rating. This was a big mistake. Thebiggest selling point of the original show isn't the crime solving,their are loads of shows that do that; it isn't the army setting or thecombo of the two. The single biggest selling point is the interactionof the characters with each other. It just works so well. Any show withNCIS in it's name gives the expectation of having a Gibs, a Ducky andall the others. In this show the characters work well. But not on thelevel that NCIS does and so it's a disappointment. If it was given anyother name you would have found it entertaining and would have watchedit, instead you are now constantly comparing it to the original and itfails that comparison.My biggest advice: Watch this show first and then watch the originalNCIS and you'll probably like em both.

stoughs

(2012-04-02 02:58:30)

Baffling, Confused, Un-"readable"

After watching two episodes (in near-agony), I figured out this isreally a Starsky and Hutch re-make, not an NCIS-like story structure.The reporting relationship between characters in the NCIS organizationis indecipherable. The characters seem to say random things to oneanother (and sometimes to no-one at all) driven by no motivationwhatsoever. There are some peripheral characters with no identifiedjob, role, or purpose except to chat with Starsky & Hutch. Then thereis the location, which looks like a tarted-up version of the RooseveltHotel lobby in Hollywood, not a professional office building of anykind. Plot elements are obviously concocted, hardly credible and rarelyare derived from any personality traits or situations the charactersfind themselves in. I think the screenwriters must actually work for ashoot-'em-up video game development company instead of a dramaproduction company. This show is a mess.

Timothy

(2012-04-01 03:40:02)

Coined, patterned, stereotyped, predictable

All the clichГѓВ©s are laid out in predictable form. Typical US, patternedTV. Lines seem taken pretty directly from has been shows. You couldpredict the end and all the story lines within the first 5 min. Watchif you like MOR shows with a bit of eye candy. Characters fitstereotypical roles with completely patterned positions in the teams.Definitely not as good as the original. Have a look at a video aboutthe real NCIS and neither show has much in common with the real deal.At least Gibbs walks the talk and Abby offers inspiration to themarginalized in society. LA is a pretty weak setting for the gutsypotential of this kind of show. The LA version has all the integrity ofan LA fashion show.

kmustain36

(2012-03-31 14:04:24)

has some potential

I have been an avid fan of Belasario for many years now and have onlyseen a few let downs. This show exhibits some great characters and itis a shame that the writing and directing is not keeping up withpotential of the show. This show currently reminds me of a cross ofMiami Vice and a mass of other terrible 80's cop dramas. I agree withthe rest of the comments that mention that there is no real Navy orMarine involvement in a lot of the plots. Also, the fact that thenearest Navy or Marine base is 4 hours away from the current setlocation makes the reality of a NCIS presence in LA somewhat farreaching. They should have aligned this show with something relating toeither NSA or FBI for the types of crimes they are investigating, i.e.espionage and terrorism. I believe that if the show turns towards amore character development route and finds a better suited location theshow would take off.