MovieChat Forums > Bugs (1995) Discussion > Worst Episode

Worst Episode

posted 18 years ago by robugs
17 replies | jump to latest

Most of the episodes in this series were brilliant and all of them kept you on the edge of your seat. I suppose I should have put the subject as 'least best episode' as that would be more accurate. There's no doubting that Season Four is the weaker of the four seasons, and consequently it contains my least favourite of the entire series: 'Girl Power'. It's not a bad story, but it lacks the fizz you usually expect. It's got plenty to be glad about (the mask-stealing triple bluff, return of Dent and The Hive), but it just doesn't seem quite 'BUGS'-like enough. What does anyone else think?

[–] LiamABC 18 years ago

I'd agree on Girl Power being towards the bottom of the list. As to whether I'd put it at the very bottom, don't know. It's certainly in the frame. Another one that I've never cared for was - I forget its title - the one with the King Arthur excavations. Again in series 4. There's a fair few in series 4 I don't much care for, but other than that, series 1-3 were pretty solid - although in series 3 I'm not that big a fan of "Buried Treasure" or "Renegades" - the latter mainly because it seems Cyberax has just come back from nowhere after it was destroyed at the end of series 2. Still, that's quibbling . . .

[–] robugs 18 years ago

I thought it seemed quite plausible that Cyberax had been stored so the Government could use it to fight any future digital incursion - it threw up lots of questions, something that 'BUGS' didn't often do, about the logic of such an action. Ros argues that it should have just been destroyed, while Jan believes it is important to keep it and use it. Personally, 'Renegades' is one of my favourites - it has such a perfect mix of action, plot and character, that it just stands above many other episodes. What was it (apart from Cyberax), that turned you away?
Similarly I felt that 'Buried Treasure' was a well-crafted story. It gave us a little insight into Ed's past, we got some great fights and that whole teaser was mysterious and intriguing as the prisoners are released to a waiting black car. The Athena stuff was reminiscent of Season One's Icarus (the guy who was controlling planes), and Ed seemed really affected by Sasha's death. My least favourite from that season was probably 'Nuclear Family' which seemed a little lacking in the excitement stakes.

[–] Severus_Snape666 18 years ago

I think for me the most disappointing episodes were form series four, particularly Girl Power and the 2-parter series opener. I guess Absent Friends and Sacrafice to Science were disappointing because they showed how Bugs had dipped since the series before. I mean, it was obvious that they'd cut back on the budget (what the hellw as Ros' 'modern classic' car all about?)and also I felt that the storyline for why Ros was 'kidnapped' was quite weak, because there was no real reason why she coulnd't have told Beckett what she was doing, and Terry was a complete idiot anyway. Also, Ed's sudden change of character (he thought it was funny that Ros had kicked Beckett out?), the change of Gizmos and its storyline from the earlier series, strange plotlines within the episode that made no sense (what was that thing with Beckett/ Ros' pen from terry's to do with anything???)...there was so much to find fault. Not to mention Ros kicked Beckett out because Terry died, though she hadn't mentioned him for the last three series and it wasn't beckett's fault anyway...???
Girl Power also failed for me. A child (renamed Bunny Girl by me and my brother) who was so clever but fell hook, line and sinker into some plot by the baddies? And she was so annoying. I found myself hoping she would be killed off and although the viwers were supposed to warm with her, I just found her annoying. Besides, was it just me or did she look far older than she was supposed to be? And what exactly was that 'teenager' outfit supposed to be?
Clare

[–] robugs 18 years ago

At least Ros' classic got blown sky high (along with a few million quid), but then something bad always happened to all her cars! That makes me wonder: in 'Sacrifice to Science' was Ros driving the car in which she and Terry were pursued and ended up in the water? I guess she just wasn't meant to drive. Perhaps it's a sub-concious message to the viewers to encourage use of public transport?
I would agree that the 'kidnap' storyline was weaker than it could have been, and I didn't like the negative impact it had on the season - one of the reasons Season Four lost viewers perhaps - with the characters moping too much where in Season Three it had been about unrequited love rather than simply soap-style bad tempers. I think Ed would have teased Beckett, as that was a great part of their friendship, though I don't think Ed would have let Beckett walk out of the Bureau on his own - he would have gone with him.
The pen was the clue Beckett needed to link Terry with Ros. He saw the pen set in Ros' messed up flat and the missing pen in Terry's Gizmo's workshop. What I'd like to know is how Terry took over Gizmo's without meeting with Ros, as it seems like they haven't seen each other for years, but the team were still using Gizmo's until the beginning of Season Three!
Completely agree about 'Girl Power', it was my least favourite of all 40 episodes. It was a bit weak (but even then there were things to like such as the triple-bluff with the mask and getting to see Dent and his Hive again.), and I didn't like Carly either. I thought she seemed younger than the 14 she was supposed to be.
The whole thing with Ros chucking out Beckett was not their fault, it was the writers! I don't think that simply because Beckett was in charge of the operation at the time that Ros would have blamed him so much. Perhaps she had really fallen for old Terry and wanted to marry him, although we don't see any evidence in the episode. Another big reason why the season failed as it was integral to the character relationships throughout and if they had got the emotional core spot on it would have carried through much better. Perhaps the season would have been better received. Perhaps we'd still be watching it now. Season 10 anyone?

[–] Severus_Snape666 18 years ago

The thing about the pens. Still...what was the point? How did Beckett know that that pen set wasn't years old and Ros and Terry had one each? Or Ros had left one at Gizmos? Was the set supposed to be Beckett's? In that case, why would Terry have had the other pen? It seemed unlikely that if Ros rushed out her flat she would have taken a pen with her but even if she had, it w3ould have been wrecked in the water, so why would Terry have it? Or was there supposed to be something special about it? How did it proove anything to be4ckett at all?
OR....have I been thinkign about this in far too much detail?
Clare

[–] robugs 18 years ago

Perhaps Beckett recognised the pen set as the one Ros always used (even though according to the writers people weren't supposed to use paper!), and seeing it at Gizmo's on a workbench he guessed that Ros had been working there. Don't forget, Beckett was a little emotionally overbalanced and obsessed with Ros being alive. In real life the coincidence probably wouldn't have meant anything, but in 'BUGS' it just turned out to be the needed clue! And Beckett didn't need much of a clue to make the excuse that she must be alive...

[–] cow-facts 18 years ago

hmmm i agree that ros's kidnap storyline did have holes in the plot but i still really enjoyed it. its cruel to have a worst ep coz i still like it all. i think there was just a general, inevitable dip in series 4. it was the repelacement of ed (bless him!) that was the problem and it kinda went down hill from there. ur right, ed wud av stuck by beckett wen he left the bureau coz they work as a 3. and he wudnt av bin soo dismissive of ros being 'dead'. he also wud av made some more classic jokes but we had none of that- his sense of humour disappeared!
also, im glad someone else brought it up coz it confused me aswell...why exactly did ros kick beckett out? wat had he done wrong?

[–] robugs 18 years ago

It was a pretty poor way of putting emotional angst into the series really. If it had been Ed that died and Ros blamed Beckett it would definitely have more resonance. I'm glad someone else noticed Ed's lack of humour - he was basically a completely different character. In an interview in one of the mag's someone said that they had to have Ed back because of the storyline of Ros missing, which is why they recast Ed, but I don't understand that reasoning because they could easily have had something happen to Ed and still brought on Houghton as a new character. Then again perhaps we'd now be moaning about the fact that Ed disappeared off camera so perhaps it was better how they did it after all!
I don't think it's cruel to have a worst episode. As I said in the first post it's more of a least favourite because even the 'worst' episodes are better than some other series and have enjoyable stuff in them.

[–] LiamABC 18 years ago

"I'm glad someone else noticed Ed's lack of humour - he was basically a completely different character."

Me too - I spotted it straight away when season four aired. Well, not quite straight away, once the character was established, anyway. There wasn't really time to notice it in the opening two-parter, and for the next two episodes it could be excused by Ed's status as bureau chief (even Craig McLachlan wouldn't have been able to joke around too much in this position), but once things were back to "normal", with Beckett as boss, it really became very apparent.

[–] robugs 18 years ago

To be honest I can't imagine McLachlan's Ed as Bureau Chief and feel it would have been in character for him to turn it down and go off with Beckett (a huge source of nit-picking for regular viewers), but I also suspect that even in a position of importance he would have got his wisecracks out - if you remember it was always the least appropriate of times that he made the best jokes!
I did like the way they introduced the new Ed - typical 'BUGS' with an exciting action sequence, the night chase in the helicopter and it was a quick and stylish way to present the change. I suppose they could have come up with a storyline for Ed having to be genetically and aurally altered to explain his new 'look', but that would have just been too convoluted. I think that was the only time we saw Houghton doing the helicopter thing which was a shame - I put it down to the lower budget. He became the 'climbing' Ed.

[–] wixa-247 17 years ago

I totally agree with you. I think it should have been Ed who died, even though he was by far my favourite character, because it would have made Ros' reaction to the death make far more sense and also would have given Jaye and Jesse some emotional stuff to play that didn't revolve around the death of a character we'd never seen before and didn't care about. Dead Ed = Believable Conflict.

It was totally OOC for Ed to accept Ros was dead so quickly and just let Beckett go off alone to look for her. The remaining members of the original three should have stuck together on something so important.

I'd have had Ed dying (offscreen, even though its a cheat) in the helicopter bit at the start of 'Absent Friends'. He goes up to look for 'kidnapped' Ros then..... whoopsie!! No more Ed. Pile tragedy upon tragedy, give Ros something to really feel guilty about, and let the whole thing drive Beckett even further over the edge. THEN bring in Houghton or someone with some actual acting chops as The New Guy who no one trusts.

As for worst episode.... Girl Power by a mile. The teen actress in that made the kid in Pulse look like an Oscar winner.

[–] robugs 17 years ago

It's good to have a new voice added to the posts here! Your right about the young actress! On the other hand she was more annoying than anything else, so playing a young teen, it was probably quite a realistic portrayal! Love the way Dent gets them to come in to deal with her - he doesn't have anything to do with the Bureau and then one little problem and they have to help!

Rob

[–] skteosk 16 years ago

I thought the show went badly downhill in Series Three and especially Series Four.Taking a bunch of freelance amateurs who ran rings around the professionals and turning them into the establishment suggested to be that someone really didn't understand the series-although at least we got the gorgeous Paula Hunt as compensation.And losing Craig McLachlan was a major blow, Steve Houghton did his best but so obviously wasn't playing the same character(he didn't even come from the same country!).Oddly, the thing that really made me dismiss him was that only a few minutes into his first episode he suddenly calls Beckett "Nick", something that was so out of character they even made a joke the previous series about him not knowing that was Beckett's first name.

Oddly though the episode I really don't like is one from the first series-Stealth.The main problem is it features no sympathetic characters except the leads(the sisters are a couple of obsessed car thieves, the gang's client is a psychopath, even the bloke off Taggart runs out on them)so it's hard to care what happens.Not to mention the most ridiculous conclusion in history:The auto driver is programmed to avoid things.Except when they need it to run over the bad guy and bust a hole in the cage holding the hero.

[–] robugs 16 years ago

I don't think it's fair to say the series went downhill in Season 3. We got some classic episodes (such as 'Fugitive' where Ros is framed by SSD; 'Identity Crisis' where Jan gets to shine as an unlikely action heroine and of course 'Renegades' the one many fans have at the top of their favourites list. Even if you don't like the Bureau slant you have to admit that that one is an absolute corker and still holds up as excellent TV today!). The only one I felt was a bit lacking was 'Nuclear Family' with it's ineffectual baddies and slightly dull events (apart from the teaser and ending).
Season Four had it's troubles, but if you watch it through with hindsight and an open mind you can get quite a lot out of it (see the posts on here about re-evaluating Season Four).
The reason they shook up the series so much in S3 was because S2 had gone much more sci-fi (it's my favourite actually), which fragmented the audience a bit. The makers only had a third season guaranteed so they went for broke and it worked, earning them a fourth season unexpectedly (and annoying us all when we never got a resolution to Ros and Beckett being kidnapped!).
You said you didn't like 'Stealth', but I think there are quite a few good bits to it, not the least of which is the biggest and most dramatic explosion of the entire series. I suppose a lot of it is just a matter of taste though.

Rob

[–] gregforttmags 11 years ago

After the far fetched but epic Cyberax/Jean-Daniel story arc in S2, I guess the Bugs writers felt the need to make Season Three episodes (with the real exception of "Renegades") much more in the tone of Spooks instead of Torchwood or Primeval and stop the show getting too overblown. It worked to a fair extent, with the right mix of action-adventure and plausibility. On hindsight I really liked the introduction of Jan and Paula Hunt (the latter should've replaced a retired/killed off Ed).

However Season Four was not only crippled by a way too iconic core character like Ed being abruptly recast (Steven Houghton was not awful, but to start with he was a decade younger than McLachlan and was a different nationality!) and having a couple of terrible episodes (like that proto-Bonekickers nonsense with the King Arthur/Viking gravesite), even with the more solid and entertaining episodes it was clearly struggling with recycled, generic plotting and a noticeably reduced budget (even "Twin Geeks" could be seen as a faint echo of the superior "Pulse": ie quirky criminal mastermind siblings). And S4 took the ultimate dump on Bugs by ending it on a horrific cliffhanger that will never be resolved!

I wouldn't mind the BBC reviving Bugs with a new cast and setting after NuWho winds down.

[–] robugs 11 years ago

Revival! Revival! We want revival!

Rob

[–] gregforttmags 11 years ago

How would the Bugs formula adapt to the internet and mobile phone technology of the past few years? Computers and mobile phones have developed rapidly since the 1980s. In Bugs' time the public internet was still very new and top of the line mobile phones (still in their comparative infancy in the 1990s and a comparatively rare sight) had pretty much none of the undreamed of functions and power that even so-called "budget" smartphones have today.