Damages

(sarja)
Draama / Rikos / Mysteeri / Jännitys
Yhdysvallat, (2007–2012), 47 h 13 min (Pituus: 40–90 min)

Sävellys:

James S. Levine

Näyttelijät:

Glenn Close, Rose Byrne, Tate Donovan, Zachary Booth, Ted Danson, Anastasia Griffith, Michael Nouri, Noah Bean, Željko Ivanek, Casey Siemaszko (lisää)
(lisää ammatteja)

Suoratoistopalvelut (1)

Kaudet(5) / Jaksot(59)

Juonikuvaukset(1)

Vastavalmistunut, fiksu ja kunnianhimoinen asianajaja Ellen pääsee harjoitteluun menestyneen ja riskejä pelkäämättömän asianajaja Patricia Hewesin toimistoon. Mikään ei kuitenkaan ole sitä, miltä se ensi silmäyksellä näyttää... (Sony Pictures Home Ent. Fin.)

Arvostelut (2)

claudel 

kaikki käyttäjän arvostelut

englanti Finally a proper series set in a legal environment!!! I am absolutely thrilled by the clever screenplay and top-notch acting performances - Glenn Close as lawyer Patty Hewes is absolutely convincing, Rose Byrne as Ellen Parsons presents to me one of the most likeable TV characters ever, and two seasoned TV actors - the lovable father of Marissa from The O.C. Tate Donovan and Jack Bauer's adversary from the first season of 24, Zeljko Ivanek, complement the main female duo perfectly. I consider the character of Ray Fiske played by Ivanek perhaps the most tragic in the whole series. Another big plus lies in the realistic depiction of characters - none of them are presented as strictly good or strictly bad. Even the angelic Ellen has her dark side, just like the "evil" Arthur Frobisher can act generously or humanly. By unfolding in two or more time dimensions, the series requires the viewer's heightened attention and must not miss any episode. I also really like the opening theme song and the music that underscores it. I can't think of anything to criticize about this series, so in conclusion - bring on the second season already! ()

DaViD´82 

kaikki käyttäjän arvostelut

englanti They plot, manipulate, intrigue, play psychological chess with everybody in all situations, ethics mean nothing to them and they are willing to go over the edge of the “imaginable"... A cold, calculating, heartless world of corporate lawyers as Michael Clayton showed it in the series, which is good to approach like one whole movie founded on the psychology, development and actions of the characters and not like a thirteen part classic crime-lawyer series, where each episode can stand alone. Each season comprises one case, it’s about invisible months of meticulous work in the background, about a solid criminal element and primarily about perfectly illustrated characters on both sides of the barricades. It has been the fashion for some years now that characters are not depicted “in black-and-white", but nobody has yet gone quite this far without leaving the realm of convincingness, which makes it easy to think to yourself: “these aren’t just characters, but people made of flesh and blood". And this doesn’t apply only to the central duo who are btw the best and strongest women’s team in a (not only) TV production. The above applies primarily to season one (5/5). Season two (4/5) isn’t at all bad in itself, but the creators failed to pluck up the courage to depart from the original concept (two timelines that draw closer and closer to each other with every episode, meeting at the ending) and to come up with something new. It suited last season and made sense, but here it is redundant. Although the case itself is more interesting “on paper", it isn’t as thought out to the last detail and nicely set up as last time, also it focuses more on “thrilleroid" plots that sometimes seem a little incongruous than on suspects. You can hear paper rustle a couple of times, but mostly it works as it should and it is outstanding again, I’m telling you. Again, mainly thanks to the characters and their psychology. In season three (4/5) the creators at last realized that there is no point in trying to live up to season one using “its weapons" and they approached it a little differently; that is, the same but in a different way. They completely abandoned the “thrilleroidness" of season two and returned to focusing on the case at hand and its ins and outs. But despite the changes, psychology, intrigue and rights (to money) still play center stage, it wouldn’t be the same without that. What trips up this otherwise splendid season is the ending which lacks tension, too much happens and the whole denouement is so hurried that it loses all effect; and it remains strangely open-ended. Season four (2/5) changed TV stations and came under the wing of a small station which adapted the format to ten episodes, each of which are about ten minutes longer. At the same time it is evident that they poured less money into this, which doesn’t necessarily matter in a series founded on characters and dialogs, but in view of the fact that the creators of Damages never feared exteriors and filmmaking approaches, this cold interiors, void of people, home video look is really sad. The main theme well chosen and current, but unfortunately killed (like the whole season) by the drawn-out beginning when nothing at all happens in the first episodes and, when it does, it is boring and predictable. Here and there suspense, intrigues, emotions or thumb sketches of behind the scenes in big cases. Here there we get just empty yapping with no result; the main trio at least tries a little to do something about this, but with no great success. It’s true, toward the end it gets (a little) better and traces of the good old Damages are to be seen, but the problem is that traces are all that this season ever gives. While the previous seasons forced you to watch them all in one go, with season four it’s hard to force yourself to put on the next episode. () (vähemmän) (lisää)

Mainos

Kuvagalleria (577)