• Network: NBC
  • Series Premiere Date: Sep 22, 2010

Generally favorable reviews - based on 27 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 15 out of 27
  2. Negative: 0 out of 27

Critic Reviews

  1. 80
    With dazzling action scenes and a pair of stars who ooze charm and sensuality, Undercovers easily overcomes its predictability.
  2. Spy dramas sometimes get too enamored of their own twists, subplots and dark details, but this one never becomes impenetrable.
  3. Reviewed by: Dan Fienberg
    When I write that "Undercovers is basically a slicker, more expensive, less geeky version of 'Chuck,'" that's not quite meant as an insult. I prefer "Chuck," but the pilot for Undercovers is stylish, sexy and, at its best, quite fun.
  4. The writers seem so concerned with ensuring that their characters are preternaturally decent and likable that they go for sunny skies when there should be storm clouds....But Kodjoe and Mbatha-Raw are so energetic and appealing that it's hard to take your eyes off them long enough to worry about such matters, and they both seem up to just about anything.
  5. Undercovers [is]quite possibly one of the best meldings of the two sides of Abrams thus far: the action-adventure guy and the seriously modern romantic.
  6. 75
    The guy who brought you "Alias," "Fringe," and the not-so-successful but interesting "Dollhouse," so, of course, the expectations are high. No, Undercovers isn't as good as those shows, but it is still a lot of fun.
  7. 75
    If anyone has the potential to be the next "Hart to Hart," it's Boris Kodjoe and Gugu Mbatha-Raw....It's co-created by J.J. Abrams ("Alias"), so expect plenty of fast action, fun and costume changes
  8. People Weekly
    Reviewed by: Tom Gliatto
    This doesn't have the stiletto kick of the CW's Nikita, but it's frothy, sexy, relaxed--a brief, all-expense-paid vacation. [27 Sep 2010, p.55]
  9. Absent the bizarre, centuries-old conspiracy plot, this show looks a lot like Alias, and it should, since that show's daddy, savvy J.J. Abrams, works behind the scenes.
  10. Lighter than "Alias" but not nearly as much fun as "Chuck," it's serving up a couple who are maybe a little too good to be true, whether they're freeing a fellow spy or heating things up in the bedroom.
  11. Reviewed by: James Poniewozik
    It's a fetching enough prospect and Kudjoe and Mbatha-Raw do a fine job bringing the Blooms alive as a bourgeois couple sharing the joy of feeling really alive again. I also suspect that they could do a fine job with even more.
  12. 70
    It's like the biggest-budget USA Network show you ever saw, fun to watch but rather forgettable, because the stakes just don't feel all that high. Still, for those who've had their fill of dark drama, Undercovers may be just the ticket for a good snuggle.
  13. The whole point of the show is to display super sexy spies having cool adventures and getting to know each other again as they try to put the spark back into their marriage. There's nothing necessarily objectionable about that, but forgive me if I expect more from a series that J.J. Abrams is involved in. Having said all that, Undercovers is not a chore to watch.
  14. The pilot episode isn't a total knockout, coming off as a tad bland and safe. Although Abrams does enough to hold our interest, it feels like he's let up on the gas pedal.
  15. 63
    The sets and costumes are lovely to look at. The two stars--British import Gugu Mbatha-Raw and German import Boris Kodjoe--are about as attractive as people get....Now if only their show didn't feel so flat.
  16. He's dashing, she's beautiful, and the show is fairly entertaining. But Undercovers adds nothing to the spy show genre.
  17. 60
    At times witty and always good-looking, Undercovers needs to figure out how to balance its serious, silly, and gimmicky inclinations.
  18. Undercovers is watchable only because of its stars, whose chemistry recalls the fonder days of "Hart to Hart"-style high jinks.
  19. Maybe Abrams just ran out of energy drinks that week. This is a poor caper show that doesn't even deliver half the surprises of TNT's "Leverage."
  20. The banter between the Blooms is so full of cloying sugar substitutes and so devoid of any real tension that there is no voyeuristic thrill to be had even from their--I'm just going to say it, because the show does--"sexpionage."
  21. Reviewed by: Brian Lowry
    Undercovers has its moments, but the show itself in some respects mirrors the initial problem with the central duo's relationship--comfortable, perhaps, but failing to spark the kind of passion necessary to elicit fidelity from viewers.
  22. 50
    The characters are gently sarcastic with one another, clearly in love, and exhibit great respect for their unique skills. What's missing is a stronger supporting cast and the right narrative vehicle for their adventures.
  23. It's light but predictable fun.
  24. Reviewed by: Verne Gay
    "Undercovers" is so content to lapse into genre conventions, that it feels complacent and banal. Worse, Kodjoe and Mbatha-Raw have such minimal chemistry that they seem to be shadowboxing most of the time.
  25. 50
    The efficiency and charisma of these two, enhanced by the haute couture and clich├ęd exotic locales, makes watching Undercovers really fun-but not very believable as a spy drama. It is all a little too casual and humorous to be convincing.
  26. 40
    The light-hearted international espionage series is predictable, pointless, and, worst of all, cutesy.
  27. Abrams and company, including Kodjoe and Mbatha-Raw, who possess chemistry but lack sufficient charm and delivery, must find some way to jump-start this misfire before it fades into obscurity, or before Abrams shifts his focus to the forthcoming mystery production "Super 8," which hints at a more intriguing fusion of "Lost" and "Cloverfield."
User Score

Mixed or average reviews- based on 25 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 13 out of 25
  2. Negative: 5 out of 25
  1. Sep 24, 2010
    This show works too hard at being cute. NBC has really been missing the mark lately.
  2. Sep 23, 2010
    Not a very good first-impression. Dry and unoriginal so far. Didn't feel like JJ. Still, I like the genre, cast and creator, so I'll give itNot a very good first-impression. Dry and unoriginal so far. Didn't feel like JJ. Still, I like the genre, cast and creator, so I'll give it another go. Full Review »
  3. Jan 3, 2011
    When watching the premiere of Undercovers I was taken back by how intriguing the Bloom agents were when coming to agent Nashes rescue.When watching the premiere of Undercovers I was taken back by how intriguing the Bloom agents were when coming to agent Nashes rescue. Excellent action(ie.sky scraper fight rpging vehicle) acting and story. Steven's proclaimed to Samantha were just getting started it couldn't be such of an understatement. Following shows went away from bringing the blooms and rest of cast to such a ethralling scenario because story focus was not on key characters for far too long. Once Sams professor came into play ep.7, and Stevens brother ep.10 grounds were laid to get things back on track. The professors death and the dispute between brothering agents made good sense to make things more personal. Writing, casting, and acting has never been so strong in an telivision series. Rating is a 10 and from here on i think more shows could learn from making a whole package like Undercovers has become. I plan on buying this season 1 on dvd and wish i could see a Undecovers movie. Cancelation not here please!!! Full Review »