Copper

Copper came out of the gate a bit slowly, and that turned out to be a good thing. It's written to give a good, solid character development that really comes in handy as the show progresses and avoids the usual 2 dimensional "good guy/bad guy" stuff where so many characters usually become boring in similar types of drama.

Tom Weston-Jones is solid as Irish American copper Kevin "Corky" Corcoran and he's completely believable as a 19th century law officer in the Five Points area of New York City trying to do the job as honorably as he can, as well as locate his missing wife and find the murderer of his young daughter, amongst other things. An added bit of gritty reality finds that he's human and sometimes finds himself tempted by stuff (and occasionally partakes in certain acts) that most viewers today know are pretty much illegal or at least borderline not lawful. That's what makes this series so good is that it plays on a part of 19th century history that was pretty messed up due to the tumult caused by the civil war, but not touched on too often in television, anyway, from the gritty appearances of the cast and the scenery, to the questionable law practices. That's what makes this show a standout.

BBC America has got a winner in this one and it just keeps getting better as the storyline is fleshed out a little more with each episode. I can see why Barry Levinson is not afraid to attach his moniker to this show as an executive producer. It's that good.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I want SOMEONE preferable the director, producer, cinematographer, somebody to explain why they took a captivating story- line cast, and perfect momentum and made several radical departures that obviously hurt the show so much that led to it's ultimate demise...

Where somebody working on Season 2 screwed up - perfect examples:

#1) Season 2 - Episode 1: Why would you start developing an absolutely maniacal antagonist in the first episode who carved up Franka Potente's back in over-gruesome fashion only to have him killed later in the same episode?

#2) The basic camera filter used to shoot Season 1 depicted a period piece beautifully, and you could tell in the first 3 minutes of the first episode in season 2, that awful over-sepia-toned filter would throw audiences immediately off who had been eagerly anticipating the show to pickup right where it left off at the end of season 1.

#3) Kiara Glasco...this young lady playing Annie Reilly was brilliant in playing a very difficult young character, and she held her own in nearly ever episode. Her role was minimized in season 2 and an obvious void was apparent.

I could go on but these are my top 3, and they are absolutely inexcusable. Whoever deviated so drastically from the success of season 1 should be ashamed of themselves, and they owe Tom Weston Jones a HUGE apology for taking away one of the new great period characters American audiences have seen and will see, in a long damn time.

Just a shame.

-DSC

I was hooked by the promos. Although I like period dramas, usually my preferences tend more toward much earlier times. The atmosphere, the setting, even the costumes on "Copper," however, bespoke something unusual.

The actors are spot-on. Their characterizations are very human, making them both likable and unlikeable. Justice is often dispensed based on situational ethics rather than word of law. This is refreshing, since we don't have to root for every one, every time.

The writing, production values, even the editing make the show compelling and the unanswered questions persuade me to come back each episode to see how the plot is furthered. While we still don't have the larger answers, there is enough going on in the foreground so that this is not a drawback. It makes the denouement worth waiting for.

I have favorites among the characters, of course, but have a couple of unfavorites, as well: Eva, the friends-with-benefits "businesswoman" who, apparently doesn't mind snuffing out any potential rivals for someone who, in the end, will never be hers, anyway (she's quite awful: who would want to be?) and the evil child we've seen in so many horror movies that I, for one, can't muster up even a modicum of sympathy for. They and a smattering of others simply elicit the "Can't wait for this one to buy it" response.

It's outstanding in the current field. This, alas, means it probably will have a short shelf-life, as so many imaginative, non-generic shows do. I sincerely hope, however, that this proves the exception.

I love this show it has absolutely fascinated me with the story. I want to know what happened to Ellen, what will happen to everyone in it.

Everything that you think you know, you have to just throw it out when the next show comes on and it all changes. There is something so wonderful about watching it unfold.

The characters are so interesting; dark and deep. I cannot begin to know what will happen and that cannot be said for much that is on television. I love the unique flavour of this show,the gritty reality. So often people have romanticized the roles of saloon girls and cops and this show does not do that at all, sure some might find that too explicit but they can go watch the regular formula stuff on the bland networks.I find this whole series absolutely perfect. Can't wait to see it each week.

The historical evidence is correct. The cast is well assembled with unknowns in America. I sense Shakespearean acting experience in the deliveries of several of the cast members. This elevates the performances. I like the idea of the "mystery" presented in the first episode. This allows background to build along the way. Several openings were exposed for this material to grow. The beginnings of a budding city that will become a great city has major growing pains. The plot demonstrates this well. I enjoyed the artistry in showing the distinctions between the class system strongly evident in early America. The strength of the Irish element is excellently portrayed.