- Critic Score
- Most active
- Publication
- Most clicked
-
80There are precious few signs of trouble or uncertainty in the polished, instantaneously seductive finished product on display in its first episode.
-
80A network series potentially good enough to be on HBO.
-
75Once "Brothers & Sisters" gets started, it works, and it works well.
-
75The promise of grown up storytelling is alluring. This is a series to watch to see if it grows.
-
75TV desperately needs a straightforward drama that explores family dynamics without some imposed gimmick, and Brothers & Sisters could just be the show to fill that bill.
-
75With fun, familiar faces like Field, Flockhart and Griffiths on board, attending a family reunion with the Walkers every Sunday could be a lively, entertaining way to end the weekend.
-
70Despite cast changes, rewrites, and producer musical chairs, this brainy soap checks in with promise.
-
70Meeting the Walker clan and getting a glimpse at their personal lives... is like being led to a table of tantalizing appetizers. Even as you take a sample of these introductory delights, you're wondering whether the main course will live up to your expectations.
-
60Ms. Flockhart... is not convincing as a woman of conviction. And that is too bad, because "Brothers and Sisters" has wit and grace.
-
60On the glossy surface, it's an earnestly predictable but impeccably produced soap opera. [13 Sep 2006]
-
50"Brothers & Sisters" establishes itself as little more than a family gathering you should have no interest in attending. Their dialogue sounds real, but not much of it sounds interesting.
-
50What should be a juicy family soap opera -- the family in question owns a food company -- comes off as a blah banquet.
-
50The pilot was reshot, and it shows--the timing lurches and scenes grind into each other. [22 Sep 2006, p.90]
-
50The pilot has a "Steel Magnolias" feel to it: Too many stars, too many faces, too many names, a cornucopia of character business.
-
50The good news is that "Brothers & Sisters" isn't even remotely a disaster. The bad news is that it isn't even remotely a success either.
-
50"Brothers & Sisters" may find a way to streamline its storytelling and allow viewers to more easily sort out the huge cast of characters (there are at least 10 series regulars), or it may remain an unwieldy mess. Time will tell.
-
40File this under "We'll See."
-
40"Brothers & Sisters"... has all the traditional themes of unhappy marriage, unmet parental expectations, unexpected financial chicanery and (possibly) unfaithfulness. It deals with them convincingly, though not with any great depth or insight.
-
40Based on the first episode... we're talking predictable prime-time soap.
-
40A work in progress.
-
38A clutter of clunky dialogue that sucks the life out of [Flockhart] and other usually skilled actors.
-
38The show wants to mix in big themes (politics, money) with a family soap opera, but it just feels bloated and vague. [25 Sep 2006, p.43]
-
30It's the sort of talky tedious drama that is far less intelligent than it clearly thinks it is.
-
30The show seems as if it desperately yearns to be a worthy companion to "Housewives" but lacks the requisite bite, despite political references meant to feel edgy that prove mostly banal.
-
20If you're looking for the deep emotional truths that the creators of ABC's would-be heart-tugger imagine they're after, well, pro wrestling might be a good choice.
-
20An incoherent, almost unwatchable mess.
-
10Not a single note in the premiere of "Brothers & Sisters" rings true.
prev
next
Page:
- 1
User score distribution:
-
Positive: 76 out of 97
-
Mixed: 5 out of 97
-
Negative: 16 out of 97
-
RacheliG.10
-
TerryK3
-
GL10Love the show!! Rob Lowe should stay on permanently!! Chemistry between him and Calista is amazing!