• Network: ABC
  • Series Premiere Date: Jan 9, 2006
User Score
4.5

Mixed or average reviews- based on 30 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 13 out of 30
  2. Negative: 16 out of 30

Review this tv show

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Claire
    Jan 12, 2006
    1
    Insipid garbage.
  2. DaveW
    Jan 23, 2006
    0
    Unbelievably bad. Non-funny, non-creative, non-watchable.
  3. lolal
    Jan 9, 2006
    3
    Emily, clearly in her 30's and despite her high powered job, skittles around wideeyed and oblivious, not to mention dressed like a slutty 13 year old, her every mood and possible opinion entirely depending on whomever she happens to be talking to at the moment. A 3 out of 10 for the gay guy because he sparked a lighter and mouthed "flamer", and it was kinda funny. Offensive to grown Emily, clearly in her 30's and despite her high powered job, skittles around wideeyed and oblivious, not to mention dressed like a slutty 13 year old, her every mood and possible opinion entirely depending on whomever she happens to be talking to at the moment. A 3 out of 10 for the gay guy because he sparked a lighter and mouthed "flamer", and it was kinda funny. Offensive to grown women, homosexuals, and practitioners of Brazilian jujitsu. Expand
  4. LBALBA
    Jan 12, 2006
    1
    Rip Off - bad scripts and poor acting - YUCK!!!
  5. KevinB
    Jan 10, 2006
    0
    There was nothing good about this. The script, the wardrobe, the writing-eveything was sophmoric. With so many talented people in LA, how does a show like this get made?
  6. MM
    Jan 24, 2006
    1
    I really wanted it to be good. I knew it was going to suck after the first few seconds of the show. Bad writing which resulted in not so good acting.
  7. KyleighH
    Feb 11, 2006
    2
    I've read about this show in TV Guide and was quite surprised that it was canceled after only one episode. Heather Graham did her best, but her tv show didn't do its best either, which is probably why the show was canceled.
  8. MarcD.
    Jan 10, 2006
    3
    With so many good, solid programs on TV the last couple of years, why in the world would you waste your time on this? Not putrid, but far from original, and really no redeeming value. Skip it!
  9. rawrraar
    Jan 12, 2006
    0
    Heather Graham should stick to snorting coke and playing strippers and hookers in movies.
  10. Eddie
    Jan 20, 2006
    0
    Take a look at all the critics who gave this a good score and scratch them off your list. This show (and rightfully so) got cancelled after one episode.
  11. TomB
    Jan 9, 2006
    0
    10 minutes in, and this is painfully, excruciatingly unfunny. Any critic who gives this over a 30 is clearly on the take. Any one who laughs at this is either mentally deficient, under 14, or both.
  12. JerellP
    Jan 18, 2006
    2
    Wasn't Heather Graham's best tv role was on Scrubs??
  13. [Anonymous]
    Jan 22, 2006
    0
    My reason why not: The show is terrible. Not funny. Doesn't work at all, ABC must see it too, I've head they stopped production already.
  14. juliek
    Jan 23, 2006
    0
    So awful. Characters completely unrealistic and just kind of stupid. Painful to watch.
Metascore
48

Mixed or average reviews - based on 23 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 2 out of 23
  2. Negative: 5 out of 23
  1. Reviewed by: Jennifer Armstrong
    50
    Emily comes off as a regressed teenager. [13 Jan 2006, p.70]
  2. Reviewed by: Brian Lowry
    60
    Breezy and fun, there are several reasons to sample "Emily," but also plenty of room for skepticism over whether this witty half-hour has the depth to survive a highly competitive timeslot.
  3. Judging from the first episode, "Emily" needs not only a new boyfriend, but also some more grownup material.