Anyone else disappointed w Eli Stone ?

It's totally lame, painful to watch!

It was so promising, but those visions constantly occurring at the worst possible moments are such cheap shots! Like clockwork, the most embarassing times possible is when it happens.

I keep yelling at the tv for him to ignore the visions, just don't dance along with them. But nooooooooooo, he can't stop himself.

What a lame premise, that he has a brain aneurism and he keeps working, his company keeps on someone who's obviously having serious mental problems, there's no way lawyers would ignore the liabilities!

It is Ally McBeal at its worst!

It's worse than just "too Ally McBeal". The pilot episode made a huge point about the alleged connection between autism and childhood vaccinations, just two nights after ABC News ran a headline story that there is no such connection. And "Dr. Shen", when he told Stone who/what is God -- SHEESH! I almost threw up!!

I agree, and I thought I was the only one. It seems like everyone else just loves this show. It is a total Ally McBeal knockoff, I wasn't impressed.

Yeah, I agree and am eternally disppointed with the show because it doesn't look like it's going to get any better. When I first watched the pilot episode, it had glimmers of brilliance that have since been lost.

The problem isn't with the acting, I don't think. Johnny Lee Miller doesn't seems to be so suited to lead the show (it would have been wiser to have Victor Garber in his place), and his admin is insufferably incompetent! Willingly staging ex parte meetings (two times in five episodes!)? If she were my assistant, she would have been fired a long time ago.

Anyway, the direction the writers seem to be trying to lead us in is that the firm Stone works for is a bad company and its clients are evil. The evidence hasn't shown itself yet and Stone is looking like nothing more than an embittered sap who is sick of his workplace. What exactly is wrong with an employer not hiring someone because they look like they forgot to shower? How exactly is that discrimination?

The writers seem to want us to sympathise with some of the most unlikable clients in the history of legal shows! Seriously, a woman in the armed forces suing for custody of her son in a conspiracy with her husband to get out of her VOLUNTARY service? How exactly are we not supposed to root for her involuntary discharge?

What's funny is that the show seems to be pushing to phase out Natasha Henstrige's character who is actually more likable and together than the lead. We get maybe a few minutes of air time from James Saito who seems to be the only character with any real depth so far. The character who seemed nothing more than a half-witted twit all of a sudden is more likeable than the lead character. And the writers seem to be trying to push an affair between Stone and what is probably the most incompetent television attorney from any show ever (an attorney who doesn't know how or when to object!).

I miss what I saw in the pilot episode. It wasn't perfect, but it showed potential. Unfortunately, most of what ELi Stone has been putting out week to week has been crap.