Melanie Bouvet The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

Sameer Callahan It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

Kayden This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

screenidol Full disclosure: I only watched one episode (I couldn't take more than that). What's embarrassing is to have a cast of long-time respected actors (George Segal, Jessica Walter and George Wyner) in such a series. There were certainly some funny lines, but someone decided that EVERY line was not only funny, but hysterical, so the entire episode is filled with distractingly uproarious laughter start to finish. An example: guy at the bar on the phone wants to impress nearby woman with his name-dropping and refers to Warren Buffet as "Buff-hay." Hysterical laughter. He goes on to explain that man is the inventor of the buffet (again, "buff-hay"). Hysterical laughter. Then his friend comes over and "explains the joke," saying, "It's Warren Buffet" (correct pronunciation). Hysterical laughter! I'm sure Buffet didn't invest in this one.

foundsomefun Being a fan of George Segal's old movies I wanted to like this but can't beat a dead horse anymore. It is now in its second season and I tried to watch it again thinking that maybe it got better. Sadly, I could not have been more wrong.There is no timing or flow to their dialog or interactions. If you just sit and watch you can almost see each of them running their lines and stage directions in their heads. When one person finishes speaking there is an unnatural pause and then it is like the other person "wakes up" to the fact that they must respond either with verse or action.To each their own little bubble and they never connect. No chemistry, no comedic talent and poor direction. Bury it already it is really starting to stink to high heaven.

jobbyjoe2000 I'm writing this review for one reason. This thing turned itself around hard. I have no idea if they got new writers or what, but after the first two episodes I was like everybody else and ready to bail on the show. But I gave it one more shot and it totally swayed me. They've aired 4 episodes as I write this and the last two are hugely better than the first two, which were kind of all over the place and not very funny.The show seems to have settled down and figured out what it wants to be, which looks like a throwback comedy with some basic conflict and a cute resolution at the end. And I'd say it does that slightly better than average.One thing I will say though, in reading some of the early stuff on here, the guy who plays David, Johnathan McClain, seems to have caught some heat, which is crazy to me. I think dude's the best thing about the show. I read a review of this series in The Daily News which called his work solid, and I totally agree, and in the last two episodes he's far and away the funniest part of the show. He seems natural and comfortable on screen, and frankly looks like he's putting way more effort into making the thing work than George Segal and Jessica Walters. Somebody I read said they should have gotten Matthew Perry, which is weird because to me dude seems to be playing a cross between Perry and Schwimmer, which is kind of how the part's written, so I think the guy's doing great.I mean all in all, it's not like amazing and it's not gonna change TV, but I don't think that's probably the point. My girlfriend watches Hot In Cleveland, which I kind of sit through, but then this comes on and I've got no problem watching it before we go to bed.If it keeps going in the direction it's headed, I think it could go from being pretty good to just plain good. We'll see.

larissapola Like its predecessor, "Hot in Cleavland" this show lacks chemistry between the actors and both sitcoms have terrible writing. Neither sitcom elicits a smile let alone a laugh. Very boring, contrived (mostly sexual connotations) jokes and stupid story lines. What happened to sitcoms like TV Land shows like "Sanford and Son", "Roseanne", "All in the Family", granted the writer's of some of these older shows may not even be alive today, but these new writers need to do something else with their time. The producers of both shows should invest some valuable money in getting better writers and perhaps these shows might have a chance. Just because they both have good casts, does not mean that either sitcom is not a dud.