User reviews

''Bull'' doesn't reflect the cynical, violent vibe we usually get in 2010s shows. By its spirit, it belongs to early 00s or late 90s. With the shows of that era, it shares both its strenghts and its weaknesses.

The strenghts are idealism, friendship, romance and heartwarming optimism. And the weaknesses are its overly formulaic episodes and rather simple solutions to complicated problems.

I would say that the strenghts overcome weaknesses. It is a contemporary blast from the past, but one that makes you feel good and think about morality and humanity.

Its more like Person of interest meets Boston Legal. They have started off a great idea. I hope that it will get better as they go. As for now, the story line is acceptable but everyone except Michael Weatherly seems to be a bit lost. If they could change at least a couple of the supporting actors to somebody who can pull the character off that would make a huge difference. For now, i will keep watching the series. This is also the first time i am writing a review on IMDb. I couldn't stand the show being rated really low and a huge effort has been made and it is interesting and not like what people make it out to be. I urge that people take a view before going through the reviews and not watching it. Maybe you will like it, maybe you wont but you wont know unless you actually watch it.

I watched and somewhat enjoyed this show for the first 3 and a half seasons. The individual episodes are fine. They tell a story, Bull always wins for whichever side hires him, and the following week they start all over again. That's the problem. That and the utter lack of character development. I need the latter to enjoy any show I watch. However, if the former is all you need to enjoy a show, then by all means, enjoy this one. Each episode is a one off and taken individually, they're pretty much 7 star good. It's just not my thing.

Despite the rush of people on IMDb who seem strangely desperate to trash this new show; I personally, as a fan of procedural crime dramas and team "puzzle of the week" shows like House M.D, really quite enjoy Bull so far. The first episode had an intriguing premise, the second episode built up the team members' characters enough to at least make them likable, and I think Michael Weatherly is enjoying the role massively and it shows in his winning performance. The psychological aspect of the show is something I don't think we see enough of on television in general and even if some of it is pumped up into quick, flashy computer bites, it still aids the story which is really all it's meant to do. As shows in their infancy go, I think this one is off to a promising start. Bull is a well-shot bit of interesting fun and I will definitely keep watching!

Don't listen to the Naysayers, and cynics on this review status. This TV show Bull is good, but like many others along this line, you have to remember it is just getting started. Just like any new product that has problems and kinks, they have to be fixed and then rolled out again. Also, trying to care and mend people is a very well difficult and tasking thing to do, but he does it with a bit of style, grace … and oh, getting up in people's faces that deter him with a calm demeanor. Thus, with his experience, this is something he does to get a better scope or compass about them, trying to capture their character so he will know where to go next. I also like his crew, each one does a good job with all they need to do, and with a bit of spirited confidence and can-do attitude alongside of a small amount of humor and comedy.

The premise of this show is interesting, trying to get into the minds of people to see how they think and what moves them. This character Dr. Bull (Michael Weatherly) seems to care about these people, the defendant, the jury and everyone in between. He even takes the diamond in the rough, the little guy and even the underdog, and makes them become a little better than they were. Besides, I love how his character seems to take the problems that come before him with a cool and rational angle, even when he goes up against a bad guy. Together with his crew this drama, Bull, shows signs of definite potential. So give it a chance, even with its minor snags, you might just learn something about yourself.

So interestingly, several of these reviews talk about real science while watching a make believe show about make believe people, events and stories. If they want real science crack open a book.

THIS is a fantastic show (all of it is make believe) about fake drama and fake courtrooms. It is a great way to spend 45 minutes or so forgetting the real troubles of your life and practicing a little escapism. Despite the hokey way some of the stories are portrayed this is a good show and should be watched. I look forward to watching the other seasons.

I've watched 'Bull' since the pilot, I'm taking it in as good mind entertainment and enjoying it at that level. I don't need more gore, horror, terror and lots of crime to make for a solid program. I'm enjoying what is clearly a successful jump for Weatherly in character choice, a very tough thing to do after a long star turn in a very successful Bellesario franchise like NCIS. The invitation to do more of the same was, I am sure, the reason Weatherly waited as long as he did to make the jump. I'm taping to zip through the ads to keep the story line clicking along and I only do that for a handful of must-see shows. This one's going to get re-upped for a second season at the least.

I'm not usually a fan of this type of show but I gave it a go, I liked the first episode, and so I kept watching each one. A few episodes moved me which means I'll keep watching until they don't.

It's well written -- the plot usually involved some sort of injustice which is why we end up caring what happens.

There is good chemistry between the actors, so great casting.

I'll admit the show isn't that inspiring which is why this review is a bit tepid, but it's not a bad show in any way, just good solid, comedy/drama.

Give it a go!

The show goes on and on about what a genius Dr. Bull is with psychology and jury science and then every single case is won by his investigators finding evidence. It's just another run-of-the-mill court drama show that throws psychology terms around like glitter to make it look flashier.

There are so many crime, court and legal dramas! And most all of them are so contrived. The principle characters just move through the story like they already know everything because they've seen the case over and over again. I just can't stand that, so another such show is white noise.

This show started with an interesting premise (trial science) but after a few seasons it's become a simplistic, formulaic and predictible and feelgood legal drama. Basic formula is (1) A client has an issue; (2) Bull's team select a jury; (3a) Bull's team noisily express exactly what's happening inside every jury's head with 100% accuracy; (3b) Bull's team struggle and look like they're going to lose; (4) New and compelling evidence is miraculously discovered by Bull's team, frequently showing Police/FBI/etc to be incompetent investigators (although this is not directly addressed); (5) Bull's team wins case while Jason Bull commentates his lawyer's brilliance in whispers.

It's a very simplistic show, which might appeal if that's what you're after, but could also be really annoying. For example, time scales are completely fictional. Bull's team is always urgently gathering evidence during a trial. They frequently break laws, hack computer systems, and invade people's privacy. ALL of these actions are brushed off as inconsequential and a justified means to an end for their client. His team made up from former employees of the FBI and Homeland Security are idolised as if those organisations are faultless.

Earlier episodes spent considerable time talking about juries, but there's no detail... just someone in a room staring at screens and expressing what are supposedly 100% accurate explanations of what each juror is thinking. Uncertainty is very rare.

I'm not very familiar with trial science but it's hard to imagine that it hits this degree of formulaic perfection. Maybe a disinterest in looking at that is why what is meant to be the main premise of the show is brushed over so superficially. If a show had to be based on trial science, there would be so many interesting things it could focus on: accuracy, ethics, just getting it to work, the list goes on. Bull doesn't. It's just an excessively simplistic legal drama.

Every other case now deals with a friend or family member. Boring and lazy writing. Basically they are piling up in my recorded file and are going unwatched.

I loved this show till Chunk passes the bar first year and no work becomes a TOP LAWYER that never loses. Now I am hating this character. Not for the character but for the fact the writers are hurting my brain.

I loved the trailer and decided to catch it as soon as it came out. I ended the first episode disappointed as there was little character development or excitement. From the second episode onward, there was a much harder emphasis on character development and it has worked wonders for the show. As the season progressed, I found myself rather absorbed by the characters and the chemistry between them. Particularly, Dr Bull and his team. It was brilliant to watch. Even though the plot is more in the unbelievable territory most of the time, the characters and their relationships and the great one liners make it a worthy watch. Afterall, those were the things that made the three CSIs and the many NCISs work. Michael Weatherly is practically the same as he was in NCIS and I think for this character, that's exactly what was needed. I loved the first season to a certain extent and am looking forward to the second season. If the quality of the writing does not considerably improve, I believe we won't be getting a season three. Which would be sad.

This show has gotten such poor reviews and it has been my favorite series to watch. I am on my second time through it. I disagree with all of the negatives. The characters all have background stories that make them interesting. It's a great way to escape for 45 minutes. Sure it's a t.v. Show and it may be formulaic, but it's t.v. I think it's very well acted across the board and as a bonus the music is fantastic. I much prefer Michael Weatherly in Bull to N. C. I. S. I love the story development between Bull, Izzy, and Benny. There's nothing I would change about this show at all. Thank you to the cast, crew, and writers for their hard work.

Dr. Jason Bull (Michael Weatherly) is an expert trial jury consultant. He and his band of loyal misfits replicate jurors to generate winning strategies. His team includes his former brother-in-law prosecutor Benny Colón (Freddy Rodríguez), neurolinguistics expert Marissa Morgan (Geneva Carr), former NYPD detective Danny James (Jaime Lee Kirchner), hacker Cable McCrory (Annabelle Attanasio), and fashion stylist Chunk Palmer (Chris Jackson).

This is a solid network show. It's a standard legal procedural with a charismatic lead. It lasted six seasons which is a good run for most shows although I do wonder if it had a few more good years in it. The show ran into controversy with one of its recurring actors. They rely heavily on the personal charms of Weatherly and the issue ran directly at that main pillar. There is inevitable decline with any show and there is no way of knowing how much can be attributed to what. It's a case of a good, not great show that survived a controversy but not really. In the end, it's a good meat and potatoes TV procedural.

From jury selection and the number of challenges, to opposing councils sustained objection-hand slap by judge-Benny's apology-judge tells jury to disregard-Bull's muttering through his mike that it doesn't matter that the jury heard what the defense wished them to.... Oh god hire new writers!!!!

How bout this two people fight and one dies but not before dishing out a black eye in their loosing effort and would you be shocked to see the shiner still on the defendant when the trial starts in what appears to be a week later?

Dear writers and producers, you're killing this show with predictability (we laugh about it in my house) and the lack of realistic portrayal of court procedure. Sure people watch it sometimes but do you really want them rolling their eyes at this lazy stuff? Cut and past script writing? Can a writer really plagiarize themselves? Good acting, interesting cases and that's about it, the rest is lazy nonsense.

An original series that (at this point and time) is highly underrated. Weatherly proves his excellent acting ability (once again) and makes this show tick. The casting is very good. The show is different than any other, finally a breath of fresh air. Intelligent, well thought out and excellent writing. The show is a drama, not a comedy-drama, which might disappoint some viewers who tune into to see the playful Tony DiNozzo character Weatherly played for so many years on NCIS. A far cry from NCIS, as excellent as that show is, you will not see DiNozzo in this show. Weatherly plays a mega-intelligent psychiatrist who puts together juries to win. Gathering information on each juror from many sources, including social media, to make sure the jury "fits" his client to win their case. Weatherly has the ability to pull off the character with ease. An excellent show, I highly recommend.

Although the premise of Bull may have some merit, which is the story of a very good looking Dr. Jason Bull (starring Michael Weatherly) who owns a company named Trial Analysis Corporation, and whose life ambition is to be able to read people, including lawyers, judges, perpetrators but especially prospective jurors so that his clients will win their trials regardless if they are innocent or guilty, there is just a bit too much hocus pocus involved to pique my interest.

Like many other drama/crime series the writers tend to draw their audience down a certain emotional path and then in the last 10 minutes of the show (before the last set of another over extended commercial break) they not only show up with the star of the show and save the day by revealing how smart they are to the rest of the TV series cast, they end up showing how stupid they must think their audiences must be to spend the better part of an hour drama series filtering through an endless supply of TV commercials only to witness a very disappointing ending that you will so quickly forget that you won't even be able to repeat the dumb scenario to your friends at work the next day during lunch break.

I will give this series the benefit of the doubt and I will watch a few more episodes in case the scripts improve, but I don't hold out much hope if I have to base my assessment on the pilot episode.

So far I give Bull ** out of **** stars.

Entertaining. Engrossing. Well-written. The plot portrays seemingly credible situations. I give this show an 8.0 on a 10-scale. And I'll probably rate it higher in a few weeks if they can keep up the quality. And the lead actor --- Michael Weatherly who plays Dr. Bull --- is really excellent. Mr. Weatherly makes Dr. Bull out to be a little cocky but still a very likable person. And let me make it clear that I ain't no fan of the real Dr. Phil who is the actual model for the fictional Dr. Bull. (I find Dr. Phil's overbearing personality a little hard to take.) The sad truth, however, is that real jury consultants and "hired-gun" expert witnesses charge such high fees that they can only work for big corporations and wealthy clients. People who are not nice and have bad stuff to hide. Such as companies that pollute rivers. And nasty banks that cheat plain folks with toxic mortgage deals. Etc.