Falling Water

I'd be interested in to know the backstory on why the critics have taken such a negative view of this series right off the bat. The Rotten Tomatoes consensus (dating from the very first episode) is "Falling Water attempts complexity and intrigue but churns out an unimaginative concept lacking a redeemable payoff."

The fact is the concept is highly original--I have spent my life reading and viewing science-fiction and have never come across this theme before. And how can they possibly know that it is "lacking a redeemable payoff"?

Is it possible that these reviewers receive a whole series plot development along with the copy of the first episode? I mean, if they know how the series develops and,for that reason, they know it is a dud, this should be acknowledged up-front somewhere.

So I've never written a review before so bare with me.

Falling Water's preview was intriguing. Dreams, the sub-conscious mind, connecting on another level along with the required dose of mystery and the hint of coming answers. It looked to have all of the necessary ingredients for a tasty, high intellect sci-fi drama soufflé.

So, my highly intellectual, overly dramatic sci-fi loving mind insisted that I take a bite.

Bittersweet.Or rather "sweetbitter". It swirled around in my head like a slightly old chunk of dark chocolate would on my tongue, but in reverse.

For what little you get from the first episode the idea is very sweet having most of the qualities a TV series of this genre should.

But then you get the bitter.

The writing is harsh to say the least. Cliché, dis-jointed and seemingly lacking much direction. It just didn't flow very well and that took a toll on the episode as a whole.

I'll watch a few more episodes with the hopes that this was noticed by whoever is in charge of the writing and can somehow remedy the cheesiness. Maybe have the writers watch a few old Chris Carter X-Files episodes to get a "taste" of some excellent episode writing.

So, to summarize, you should take a bite of this treat but expect the bitter taste of sub-standard writing along with the sweet aroma that the premise creates.

Bon Appetit. ;)

Season 1 was ethereal, engaging, full of promise. Season 2 was formulaic, commercial garbage. It wasn't aided by changing the production staff, and supporting characters, with a weak story.

Watched the first 6 episodes now, and i absolutely love it.

It is not the standard kind of series, it is unique in the way that it tells the story. You have to make some effort to follow, especially during the first episode you need to accustom. But that is why I love it: not just another one of the many TV-shows around, it is not straight to the point and all predictable. It is dreamy, mysterious and bewildering. Sometimes you even don't know for sure whether the characters are awake or dreaming.

A must see I think, at least if you are capable of absorbing a different style of TV- making :)

The show is about 3 strangers who are all subconsciously connected through their dreams. The characters are a mother who is looking for her lost child, whom she is told by the hospital doesn't exist, a man looking for his missing girlfriend & a detective trying to cure his catatonic mother.

The directing is great, it plays out like a movie. Fortuately it does not resemble Inception, except for the fact the the theme revolves around dreams & the subconscious. The acting is also good too, especially by one of the leads, Lizzy Brochere who plays Tess.

This seems like one of those shows that will be a long mini-series, or play out like an extended movie, because it's difficult to see how the plot can carry out more than 1 or 2 seasons without the mysteries being resolved. It's a unique plot and very entertaining to watch. The pilot already had a few twists!