7 replies on “Chuck Discussion – Pilot”

  1. cabrubak says:

    Not Bad – mini review – spoilerish
    I watched this downloaded legally a week ago (via Tivo and Amazon one Box).

    At first I thought this was going to be a clone of Jake 2.0, but Chuck only has the all the information gathered by the FBI, CIA etc, and the ability to analyze the data, and make conclusions.

    Chuck himself is likeable and geeky (he plays video games, know Star Trek, etc).

    My complaints: Its not sure to know besides Chuck who the good guys are. Both government agencies represented are more ruthless then I’d like to imagine them.

    Also while Chuck information is useful now, I’m not sure how the series can continue much fast the first year, unless somehow Chuck keeps getting more data downloaded into his brain.

    • hossman says:

      Re: Not Bad – mini review – spoilerish

      Also while Chuck information is useful now, I’m not sure how the series can continue much fast the first year, unless somehow Chuck keeps getting more data downloaded into his brain.

      One of the ideas they seem to be laying the ground work for is that his "utility" is not just that he has the data, but that since the data is in a human brain it can make links that might not otherwise be made. He doesn’t have to get a lot of new data "downloaded" into his brain, he might just hear topical news on the radio, or see recent events on TV that his mind can combine with some more general longer-living factual data he already has downloaded to his brain (like the the topography of a city’s water supply, of the layout of the national powergrid, … things that aren’t going to change drastically in a 5 year timeframe) to synthesize pertinent intelligence.

    • hossman says:

      Re: Not Bad – mini review – spoilerish

      My complaints: Its not sure to know besides Chuck who the good guys are. Both government agencies represented are more ruthless then I’d like to imagine them.

      I rewatched it tonight and double checked what you mean, and actually really like this nuance…

      1) Keep in mind that bryce was a rouge agent who broke in, stole all of this info, destroyed the computer, and emailed it to chuck. The NSA and the CIA have no idea why he did it — not even his secret agent girlfriend knows. as far as the government is concerned, the odds are that Chuck is a terrorist.
      2) "Good guys" don’t always act good, and it’s nice to see a show that even while being a comedy still makes it clear that sometimes spies have to do the kinds of nasty despicable things that would totally freak out a nerd working for buy more (like at the very end of the episode when he "remembers" a video of his new hot girlfriend shooting a bunch of guys in a street).

      • Babbster says:

        Re: Not Bad – mini review – spoilerish

        2) "Good guys" don’t always act good, and it’s nice to see a show that even while being a comedy still makes it clear that sometimes spies have to do the kinds of nasty despicable things that would totally freak out a nerd working for buy more (like at the very end of the episode when he "remembers" a video of his new hot girlfriend shooting a bunch of guys in a street).

        Besides, who would want to see Adam Baldwin playing a nice guy? His performances as "bad good guys" are awesome.

        I thought the show was excellent. The action pace and interesting camera work made it "pop" for me. The stuff inside the store was particularly cool in that they made it look just like a Best Buy commercial (I actually felt a kind of deja vu when I noticed it). Of course, whether they can maintain the style in future episodes when McG isn’t doing the directing himself is a question I hope gets answered with a "hell, yes."

        It’s definitely one of the better first episodes I’ve seen in a while, and I hope it proves to be a worth successor to the late, lamented Jake 2.0.

        • valen1260 says:

          Re: Not Bad – mini review – spoilerish

          Besides, who would want to see Adam Baldwin playing a nice guy?

          Someone who doesn’t want him typecast forever. ;)

          • Babbster says:

            Re: Not Bad – mini review – spoilerish

            Besides, who would want to see Adam Baldwin playing a nice guy?

            Someone who doesn’t want him typecast forever. ;)

            Heh, well, that seems more like his problem than mine. After all, we didn’t even get a full season of Firefly, so I figure if this show maintains some quality and stays on the air a couple years I’ll have gotten my Jayne [with a brain] fix and THEN he can move on as an actor. :)

    • y42 says:

      It’s sad that people forget that Ossama is a CIA angent.

      the FBI, CIA […] Both government agencies represented are more ruthless then I’d like to imagine them.

      Watch this little cartoon: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3zBV44vggM (pirates and emperors)

      During the Reagan administration, members of the executive branch sold weapons to Iran, an avowed enemy, and illegally used the profits to continue funding anti-Communist rebels, the Contras, in Nicaragua.[1] Large volumes of documents relating to the scandal were destroyed or withheld from investigators by Reagan administration officials.[2][3] The affair is still shrouded in secrecy. After the arms sales were revealed in November 1986, President Ronald Reagan appeared on national television and denied that they had occurred.[4] A week later, however, on November 13, Reagan returned to the airwaves to affirm that weapons were indeed transferred to Iran.

      On October 15 1984, six days before the second presidential debate between President Ronald Reagan and Walter Mondale, the Associated Press reported that the CIA had written a manual for the contras, entitled Psychological Operations in Guerrilla Warfare (Operaciones sicolóogicas en guerra de guerillas). The ninety-page book of instructions focused mainly on how "Armed Propaganda Teams" could build political support within Nicaragua for the contra cause through deceit, intimidation, and violence.[1]
      The CIA manual described the proper instances when violence and terror was to be used against certain targets, including court judges, mesta judges, and police officials.[2]
      The CIA claimed that the purpose of the manual was to"moderate" activities already being done by the Contras.

Comments are closed.