I am commenting on episodes one and two, after reading all the reviews. This critic that has access to most every major streaming network, and have binge watched many different series. I don't read books, I watch TV. I just started binging Joe Pickett. My standards are high. My measuring stick is the most entertaining and successful current phenom series, Yellowstone. It is no coincidence that many recent series are cowboy/horse/ranch/cattle/wildlife related, usually with vast and open mountainous backdrops. One reviewer mentioned the CGI elk (episode 1), I spotted that instantly. I hate CGI anything and can usually spot it 99% of the time. I say this because it has become the cost-saving and lazy-man's way of adding action that could be created for real. It cheapened the series for me instantly, especially in the initial pilot episode. Compare this with the opening pilot scene of Yellowstone where John Dutton has to put down his horse (my mom refused to watch the series as soon as she saw that). Yes, all of these are fictitious soap-operas where anything goes. I believe the trick to success is to portray a story with a perfect mix of realism and fantasy, usually squeezed into an unrealistic timeline. If successful, the timeline becomes transparent and insignificant. Timelines are tricky and come into play more than most might realize. Usually, the more one notices a timeline, the more it takes away from the realism, i.e., facial injuries, pregnancies', etc., etc.. Other components of a successful series include believable and/or likeable characters, more than just the main character(s). So far, Joe Pickett is just okay, so far, it is lacking the realism effect. I plan to watch to the end (season 2). My overall rating might improve, only time will tell. For now it's just a 5-star "okay". I am not comparing this to the books. From what my mom has told me, rarely ever are the movies/series as good as the books (she's always been a voracious reader at 88 years young) Don't get me started on how I find it entertaining reading reviews that dissect fictious characters as if they were real people (psychotic, insane, etc., etc.). The more a character gets talked about, bad or good, usually reflects how talented the actor is with their character. Some actors fit their part and/or grow into the character better than others. Look for my final review in the last episode of the 2nd season when I get there.... 'nuff said.
1 out of 3 found this helpful.
Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
