Old folks aren't always what they seem.

voting is right for you.

My takeaway was that they refuted both. The case that was tried in fact found police corruption. Slightly less in- your- face on the ageism question, but the end of the episode set up her story. (Avoiding the huge spoiler. )

(unless it’s a two-parter, and it looks like the good guys lost but then in the next episode…yep, good guys really won)

I wouldn't have wanted to know prior to watching the episode.

There was corruption in this one case, but it is not widespread, and it's only ageism if you push someone out early.

Either way not that important I suppose, they just jumped out at me.

I don't watch these kind of shows on network or streaming most of the time anyway, I do like a few British police shows but I just figured I'd watch it because of who is in it but I won't watch again.

I did check out High Potential with it's always sunny in Philadelphia star Kaitlin Olson and I thought that was not bad, for a network show. Only checked it out because of her, huge fan of it's always sunny in Philadelphia I'm using Siri and too lazy to capitalize the title.

mostly because I'm a big fan of Kathy Bates. If those themes develop in a negative way, I'm more than willing to both revise my opinion and stop watching.

Even though it's fiction, trespassing and then muscling in on a conference and then being taken seriously instead of having security kick you out was ridiculous.

might try this evening and see if we will continue. The show that we have found that consistently defies logic is Tracker. I resisted watching this for the first season's worth (he's Kevin Pearson, don't like him as this guy) but when it got a second season, I caved and we watch it when we will have interruptions so we need something super-light. Wow. He is able to easily break into any house, and none of the houses, no matter how expensive, have alarm systems. Total strangers share personal information with him. Every episode has us shaking our heads. Clearly the writers assume the viewers are dimwits. We'll try this one.

Who has a hard time suspending my disbelief when watching films or TV dramas, and I would probably come to the same conclusion as you if I watched this show, Eliot.

Hubby watches a lot of police procedurals on TV and even though I have never even known a cop or a detective, much of it seems very contrived to me, so I don’t care for most of them. He told me he wants to watch the Matlock reboot. We will see.

They replaced a show I really liked (So Help Me Todd) for this

Thanks for the review. I only watched a few minutes and it looked brutally bad. So it's good to get confirmation.

https://www.cinemablend.com/television/wait-cbs-shop-so-help-me-todd-ncis-hawaii-cancel-fail-streaming

was SO much fun. Now, I do have to admit that I wished Skylar would break out singing and dancing (be still my heart) and it became a bit of a joke here for me to complain about it, but I managed to love the show anyway. It seems it was very popular, why do they keep canceling the best shows? (Rhetorical.)

I was so disappointed that it was canceled. Not sure if I have a bad attitude about Matlock because it replaced my show but I just wasn’t crazy about it. I wouldn’t even call it a reboot of Matlock. She has the same last name of a TV show character that none of the young people recognize. And she’s old. Told Mr Poo that they seemed to do a lot of walking around in the show and it was making me dizzy. The most interesting thing in the show was the last 5 minutes but I’m not gonna give it away. I’ll watch a few more episodes but all I can say is I hope it gets better.

The part about there was no widespread police corruption was a necessary point in the story. The plaintiff's lawyer was trying to point out her client was the victim of police corruption and served over two decades in prison before he was found to be innocent. It was the city, the defendant, who fed the press the story about widespread police corruption being false the day before the trial began. It was later proved, in the trial, when the original detective testified the original 911 tape was purposely misplaced so it couldn't be used in the original trial which proved police corruption.

As for the age discrimination, Matlock did use her age as a wedge to get her foot in the door of the law firm. The law was to protect older workers from being fired or forced to retire after a certain age and she used it to get hired. The problem I have with this is it's hard to believe a law firm would bend so easily and hire her because she was threat to sue them for age discrimination. All they had to do was to treat her like any new applicant and if she didn't meet their expectations they wouldn't have hired her. But hey, it's TV and anything can happen.

I don't think either item above is RW bullshit but simply story lines.

Spolier Alert: At the end of the show we discover Matlock isn't who she pretends to be.

Lot of people here didn't like it. We thought it was very watchable. I don't see the reason for the Matlock name, she could have been anyone, it was a good story on its own. Nothing new or striking, but I like her a lot. And the ending was interesting.

We tend to like shows that others don't, and we don't like shows that others rave about, so this fell right in line as far as this thread!

But I think it's Fox called "high potential" with Kaitlin Olson from it's always sunny in Philadelphia

I’ll give it 90% popcornmeter.

now we gotta wait until October 17th for the series actually starts.....I like it.

If you thought TV had too many legal dramas as it is, you might want to make room for Matlock, starring Kathy Bates, as it's a good one. At the time of this writing, Matlock has a perfect 100% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. This version of the show is a gender-flipped reboot of the 1980s show of the same name starring Andy Griffith way later in his career. There are currently no ties to the old series, and with Griffith long passed away, there isn't any hope of him showing up for a cameo.

Kathy Bates' version stands alone, and for those who put stock in Rotten Tomatoes scores, it's surely worth a watch. Matlock follows Madeline "Matty" Matlock, played by Bates, as she gets back to work in her 70s. The first episode debuted on September 22, but the second episode doesn't release until October 17. For those who liked what they saw, there's nearly a month-long wait for more. The rest of the season is set to run for 18 episodes, but there's no reason not to suspect more to come if the Tomatometer remains this high and the viewership is there to back it up.

https://l.smartnews.com/p-PLt8E/47weIA

This is definitely not what I thought it would be. I doubt I’ll watch it again. I need a Monk or Psych reboot.