Legend of the Seeker : Season 1

Season #: 1, 2
Legend of the Seeker Image
Metascore
53

Mixed or average reviews - based on 7 Critics What's this?

User Score
7.3

Generally favorable reviews- based on 158 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Starring: , ,
  • Summary: The producers of syndicated hits "Hercules" and "Xena" look for a hat trick with its latest fantasy show based on Terry Goodkind's books.
  • Genre(s): Drama, Fantasy

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 7
  2. Negative: 0 out of 7
  1. It is, basically, good-looking fun, and if I say that much of this might have been written by a 12-year-old, you must understand that I mean that as a good thing.
  2. Big on style but more challenged in terms of substance, Seeker demonstrates much production savvy but at the same time too little provocative/evocative interaction aside from the ultra-violent kind.
  3. Legend of the Seeker may thrill some "LOTR" fans, but the content of the pilot is nothing original.
  4. Reviewed by: Brian Lowry
    50
    There's nothing howlingly bad here (except perhaps for a few of the supporting performances), but nothing particularly distinctive, either.
  5. Reviewed by: Verne Gay
    50
    Murdered innocents, a gory sword fight in slow motion and dry, witty, dialogue. Yes, it's all here, but what's missing is ... excitement.
  6. 50
    A new syndicated series that is like the illegitimate love child of "Lord of the Rings" and a weekend role player.
  7. The premise is pretty standard Joseph Campbell, journey of the hero stuff, but the execution is poor.
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 41 out of 66
  2. Negative: 21 out of 66
  1. Aug 22, 2010
    10
    The actors did a great job of acting out a modified version of Wizard's First Rule. For example, Craig Horner (Richard Cypher) couldn't haveThe actors did a great job of acting out a modified version of Wizard's First Rule. For example, Craig Horner (Richard Cypher) couldn't have been more humble or witty than he was the book. Bruce Spence (Zed) also didn't disappoint. He was able to maintain a level of humor and mystery that made his role as Wizard indispensable to the plot. Still, the series would have been meaningless without the stellar performances of Bridget Regan (Kahlan) and Tabrett Bethell (Cara). To be honest, I thought Tabrett was a much better actor. I always thought her reactions and emotions were much more convincing than Bridget's. In sum, it was an excellent series replete with suspense, great fantasy action, and memorable moments. Remember, don't judge it for not following the book to the t. Enjoy it while considering they had to modify the storyline to accommodate a tight budget and younger audiences. Expand
  2. RC
    Sep 21, 2009
    10
    Having not read the books on which the series is based, I can't say whether the show is faithful/not faithful to the characters, plot, Having not read the books on which the series is based, I can't say whether the show is faithful/not faithful to the characters, plot, etc. That said, this is probably my new favorite show. Yes, the pilot and the first few episodes were a little rough, but as the series progressed, the character interactions and plot deepened. I'm on episode 12 right now (watching online), but I can't wait to see the rest of season 1 (and start season 2 this November!!). Expand
  3. Dawn
    Dec 2, 2008
    9
    I am enjoying it. The script is interesting and well written. Craig Horner is a very likable Richard and Kahlan makes you forget she's I am enjoying it. The script is interesting and well written. Craig Horner is a very likable Richard and Kahlan makes you forget she's acting. The episodes have story in them thats not in the books, but the general plot is rolling along same as the series. It's kind of nice to see more adventures of theirs along the road. Expand
  4. anonymous
    Nov 11, 2009
    8
    The books were a new take on fantasy with smart social commentary thrown in. The show is the complete opposite, with a bunch of cliches The books were a new take on fantasy with smart social commentary thrown in. The show is the complete opposite, with a bunch of cliches thrown in, bad acting, and campy dialogue. Still, it's pure Sam Raimi. If you're a Raimi fan you'll love it, even if they completely butchered the books. Expand
  5. JasonP
    Nov 12, 2008
    6
    A fun show to watch, could use a little more support in the script department. This is my new guilty pleasure show.
  6. JonC
    Feb 5, 2009
    3
    I guess I had too high expectations for the series. I know they had to omit stuff which is acceptable, but they changed things also. Stuff I guess I had too high expectations for the series. I know they had to omit stuff which is acceptable, but they changed things also. Stuff like Zedd saying a weird incarnation to get the thorn out of his hand, and smoke shaped like a snake popping out, give me a break. That's not how magic works in that universe, and they didn't even use magic at all to do it in the books. Or the barrier being green and glowing and definite like that, and of course they have to use magic catapult juice to bring it down. Or how there was a ring of fire around Richard when he got the sword, and suddenly a bolt of lightning comes down and touches it. Sorry but there is too much of that cheap, Saturday morning kind of fantasy in it for my taste (which I guess is the only thing Raimi is good at). I couldn't stand to see one of my favorite book series get changed (mauled really) like that. Expand
  7. Dec 11, 2012
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Much to my pain, I have watched the entire of the first season of this show. Having read all the books and adoring the beautiful story inside, I was hugely disappointed at the amount of 'made up' parts. I found that just in the first few episodes that they had completely made up the story, it seemed the only correct things were the names of the characters. I mean nothing against the actors in this show, they in fact did a reasonable job, despite the failure in the story. I am just going to share a few of the things that ticked me off about this show: First off, Denna the Mord-Sith wasn't killed that way, she was killed by Richard, out of love, and she stayed dead. All of the Confessors that are in the show should already be dead. One episode revolved around a kid who could read minds, that never happened! Jensen Rahl only comes into the story in the eighth book, not the first, plus she is older than about twelve. The ageil, the weapon a Mord-Sith uses is supposed to be able to fit inside your ear, and it doesn't make you travel back in time. The whole part where Kahlan has Darken Rahl's child is utter **** the ending of the story does not go like that at all. What actually happens is much more fitting and actually enhances the story tenfold. Faith of the Fallen is my favorite book, and I sincerely hope that they haven't/don't make the movie ruin that book too. If anyone is reading this and thinking that I am just rambling on an complaining too much, then you may be right. But I beg anyone who is reading this to go and read the books, they are so much better than the movies. In the books you are told of dragons that play a pivotal part in the story, when they aren't even put into the movie. The books deal with romance on a whole new level compared to the movies. If you read this and think I'm rambling, go read the books. If you've read the books and still think I'm rambling, then you haven't paid attention of understood the full complexity of the story. Expand

See all 66 User Reviews