Rookie Blue Review: How Shallow Can It Get?

at . Comments

Typically, Rookie Blue offers up various cliches throughout an episode. It's not exactly the most creative show on television.

But "Broad Daylight" took a different, unoriginal tact: it tread in stereotypes for an entire hour.

The episode started with the late-night, post-coital sneak out. Then, it moved on to the scared groom. The intimidating father-in-law. The easy flight attendants. The single friend lying about his sex life. The single mother trying to juggle her job and her child. The rival son and step-father.

It really felt like the episode could have been written in three minutes, as there was no attempt to create a layered storyline or character. It was all shallow, all obvious, on-the-surface drama. Take Diaz, for example.

Broad Daylight Scene

He's been dating the same woman for seven years. In fact, he's only kissed one other person in his life... yet he seems utterly taken aback by the concept of marrying her and doesn't think he can do it. Why not? Why has he stayed with her this entire time in that case? Is there a profound reason that reveals more about this individual?

Who knows. The show never tried to answer any of those questions. It just gave us a contrived wedding day scene that saw the groom show up late, get chewed out by his soon-to-be father-in-law, and Diaz, of course, be shaken by witnessing this scene.

It wasn't just a (boring) storyline filled with stereotypes; it was a storyline filled with negative male stereotypes, concluded by Epstein apparently taking back his criticism of marriage. Why? Because Denise is hot, of course.

The developments with Tracy weren't any more original or logical.

Her son is six years old. She's been training to be an officer for years. Are we meant to believe she'd never considered how to juggle the two sides of her life before last night? That's what Andy told the woman who asked.

Again, the show doesn't make any attempt to go beyond the surface of these characters. Most are just one-dimensional caricatures of a certain archetype. In this case, the single mother struggling to have it all.

Moreover, the series doesn't even identity the city in which it takes place. There's no attempt to make it unique in any way. It's just Generic Area Where Crimes Occur.

In closing, we need to see consequences affect these rookies. Andy didn't load her gun and Tracy left the scene of a crime. Their superior was immediately understanding of Andy's mishap, and then we're led to believe that Andy sticking up for Tracy simply fixed that situation.

But those were enormous mistakes. Did the characters receive any punishment for them? Is every mistake just chalked up to rookies being rookies? If so, the lack of ramifications for their miscues removes a large amount of drama and realism from the show.

Rookie Blue still offers up the occasional funny line and its actors do the best with the material they have. But it too often feels like the writers have no grasp on the actual police world or the individuals about whom they're writing. They simply slap a stereotype or cliche onto a situation and take the most obvious direction possible with it.

What did you think of the episode?

Ready to Fight Crime


Editor Rating: 1.0 / 5.0
  • 1.0 / 5.0
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
User Rating:

Rating: 4.4 / 5.0 (58 Votes)

Matt Richenthal is the Editor in Chief of TV Fanatic. Follow him on Twitter and on Google+.


I only watch this show
for the ridiculously high amount of hot guys in it, eapecially swarek guy, and they make it enjoyable to warch. but I do agree the acting is not great, especially (I forget names) the pretty boy dark haired guy who was with Gail.


I love cop dramas - and thought I would give this a shot.
After watching the first 5 episodes from season one I just cant take anymore.
Its a pile of garbage - rookie actors and weak plots - AVOID!


Cliche. and gayest show ever. I don't mean gay as in "happy" or "homosexual"... I mean gay as in the last thing I'D EVER WANT TO WATCH IF I HAD A CHOICE.


The show really IS superficial and lousy. They've made it clear they are trying to do a soapy "Grey's Anatomy" take and I bet it came up in the pitch meeting. The writing is weak, and relies on a lot of old saws. "Third Watch" it ain't. But I think the leads are trying hard. Missy Peregrym and the Swarek actor are at least giving it a go. The gung ho kid is giving it the old college try. The rest of the cast is forgettable, and everyone's character has little depth. There is no realism to any of the precedings. It's a throwback to eighties style tv, in my view. But, listen. It's a Canadian show, shows the CN Tower. Talks about Toronto landmarks, and uses Toronto businesses and street names. They have said "Toronto" at least twice in my memory. It is NOT "No Name City" Americans just don't know the names, places and landmarks. I imagine they don't trumpet the name TORONTO at every opportunity because....that's retarded. What kind of dialogue were you hoping for? "Hey Swarek, let's stop at this Toronto Tim Horton's and get a Toronto cup of coffee. Then we can patrol the streets of Toronto while we remain Canadian and in the province of Ontario." "Good Toronto call, rookie. But first let's take down this Toronto perp, eh?"


I liked the review and I also like the show. My concerns are just two--I think the writers need to do much better to serve some very interesting characters and some excellent actors with improved and more creative scripts. And, I see one particular actor who in my view is just plain awful. Margaret Sullivan, playing "Gail" is just not talented at. all. She mugs, she moves awkwardly, she speaks in either monotones or in too heavily inflected patterns. The woman is just not a good actor, and needs dropped, soon.


I agree with some other people if you dont like thw show then simply dont whatch it?I on the other hand like that the show isnt so complex and i enjoy watching it.And obviously you've been watching alot of episodes for someone who doesnt even like it..... wtf>?


how come you can criticize shows, but we can't criticize your criticism without you getting all bitchy?


@ ML House, you make some good points but I actually wouldn't classify Rookie Blue as a realistic type cop drama, anymore then I would classify Greys Anatomy as a realistic image of a hospital. They are both meant to be more character driven then anything else. I consider them both guilty pleasures and enjoy the characters more then anything else, cliche or not. I guess it all depends on how you look at it though.

Matt richenthal

@Bux: Thank you for your comment. I think I do call out Pretty Little Liars for its many issues. I've slammed the Emily/Maya storyline from the start and I often say relationships and characters aren't drawn well on that show. But there is a difference: PLL is meant to be a far-fetched type of show. It's a guilty pleasure. Rookie Blue aims to be more of a realistic look at police life. The show are totally different.


I'm not going to say that this show ranks as one of my favourites or anything, but it's fairly decent. Indeed, it does have quite a number of dull or predictible scenes, and it could use better writing to some extent. I do get your opinions and you make some valid points in your reviews. More so, one of the things that I like about this site, actually the main reason I follow TV news and reviews on it, is that you guys point out both the good and the bad aspects of a show. As you are doing with Rookie Blue.
But let's be serious for a second, if you say this show is so bad and cliched and unrealistic, then why not say the same about Pretty Little Liars. You keep giving that show good reviews despite the fact that it's far fetched in plot development and often inconsistent in character evolution and dialogue.
All i'm saying is that you should at least give Rookie Blue a chance to develop,see where it's going before dishing out such harsh reviews.

Tags: ,

Rookie Blue Season 1 Episode 5 Quotes

Andy: What kind of workaholic is this guy?
Nash: The douchebag kind.

Diaz: Denise wants me to propose.
Epstein: Propose what?