Zoo

:

Season 1
  • Network: CBS
  • Series Premiere Date: Jun 30, 2015
Season #: 3, 2, 1
User Score
5.8

Mixed or average reviews- based on 98 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 49 out of 98
  2. Mixed: 21 out of 98
  3. Negative: 28 out of 98
Watch Now

Where To Watch

Stream On
Buy on
Stream On

Review this tv show

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

view
per page
  1. WestLil0
    Aug 6, 2015
    1
    What does it say about this show when the main evil character dies in episode five. The first couple of episodes based in Africa were very interesting. Now jumping from the U.S to Europe to South America to the pacific makes it choppy and confusing. And the characters are so lightweight they are not even keeping one's attention. It had potential but it got lost in its own lame script.
  2. WWHATSUPPP12
    Oct 2, 2015
    2
    First episode was okay. It got interesting and then 6 episode, no offense why do rich people open their back door and how the hell do you not feel a present behind you. The bear was breathing hard and this show just got stupid. Like They make it seem like americans are stupid lol
  3. Scoob_k
    Jul 31, 2016
    1
    Saw Season 1 and enjoyed it.
    Finding Season 2 to be annoying especially with the new characters being added. The script writers have made a serious mistake by adding a supposedly strong female character (Alyssa Diaz) who disobeys everyone and everything only to find she needs to finally listen. Very phony and very ANNOYING.
    This script just seems like every second program created by cb.    Saw Season 1 and enjoyed it.
    Finding Season 2 to be annoying especially with the new characters being added. The script writers have made a serious mistake by adding a supposedly strong female character (Alyssa Diaz) who disobeys everyone and everything only to find she needs to finally listen. Very phony and very ANNOYING.
    This script just seems like every second program created by cb. Regurgitated claptrap.    … Expand
  4. TVW
    Sep 6, 2016
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This picture started out great. Now, it has been reduced to sex, zombie looking people (trying to compete with those shows), and who knows what. what was the original theme? I thought it was animals taking over.… Expand
  5. BogKid
    Jul 2, 2015
    3
    I once read an article which explained why the Wolfman movies never made it big like Dracula or Frankenstein, etc., etc. The theory was that the Wolfman character simply looked to much like our own lovable dog or cat. He wasn't "different" enough to really scare us.

    And so it goes with the new TV show "Zoo". You probably know by now that the premise of the show is that wild animals    I once read an article which explained why the Wolfman movies never made it big like Dracula or Frankenstein, etc., etc. The theory was that the Wolfman character simply looked to much like our own lovable dog or cat. He wasn't "different" enough to really scare us.

    And so it goes with the new TV show "Zoo". You probably know by now that the premise of the show is that wild animals and (I believe later on) domestic animals turn on people and start wreaking havoc. Maybe if a monitor lizard came at me, but really, lions and tigers, and bears. Sure they are potentially dangerous but they are still lovable animals, still mammals, still like us. I always thought the Laurence Talbot, the Wolfman, was just a poor, misguided soul. The same with the lions in "Zoo". I will bet somewhere along the line those lions realize the error of their ways and make it straight to the writers' room to give this show's creators some of their own medicine. Just a spoonful of BS makes the medicine go down!    … Expand
  6. RichardGonci
    Jul 16, 2015
    2
    While I know there can be room for disagreement between people of good faith, giving this "show" a 100 rating begs the question of who is in bed with whom! The acting? By far, the best actors are the animals. The "writing?" Not much in evidence. The concept? Well, others have said it better than I. Male lions are slothful layabouts who expect the females to do all the work. Bats actuallyWhile I know there can be room for disagreement between people of good faith, giving this "show" a 100 rating begs the question of who is in bed with whom! The acting? By far, the best actors are the animals. The "writing?" Not much in evidence. The concept? Well, others have said it better than I. Male lions are slothful layabouts who expect the females to do all the work. Bats actually cannot fly above 5000' because the air is to thin for their thin little wings. This show could be improved with the hiring of a highschool freshman science advisor. The humans depicted in this show so far largely deserve extinction... by any means! All that said, my son and I watch it as a "guilty pleasure," it's kinda like the great "Mystery Science 3000" series in that regard. Watch it and make fun of it in real time!… Expand
  7. tweekbomb
    Jun 30, 2015
    0
    Horrible! Juvenile junk. Who decided to air this piece of crap? Terrible acting, terrible writing. Did actual writers script this or was it activists with a moronic point of view. Craptastic.
  8. Jrtlaktalk
    Jul 12, 2015
    3
    The show has an interesting concept, but quickly shoots itself in the foot quite early. It doesnt start off with a rogue manatee, horse or even a rhino, no, it decides to start off with the king of the jungle, being a male lion. A male lion, not a female lion. To top this off, the show then uses two male lions. So near the end of the first episode, what does it do to top the use of twoThe show has an interesting concept, but quickly shoots itself in the foot quite early. It doesnt start off with a rogue manatee, horse or even a rhino, no, it decides to start off with the king of the jungle, being a male lion. A male lion, not a female lion. To top this off, the show then uses two male lions. So near the end of the first episode, what does it do to top the use of two male lions? It uses 5 male lions. What, by the end of the first season it will use 50 lions to attack the protagonist? Season 2, 5 gazillion lions? It is absolutely ridiculous. Nevermind the fact that the female lions tends to be the hunters, and that there are more of them in the wild, no, this show decides to use a (relatively uncommon) male lion as a a sort of, what, zombie horde? The only thing the show has going for it is relatively decent CGI effects in where it blends the CGI lion footage with the actors. But I guess the show is, to a certain extent, bound by the content of the "book", if the book uses 5 gazillion lions, then the show must aslo. Though, there is no excuse basing a show off of a terrible book. With regards to the acting - it can be better.… Expand
  9. likes2sing
    Aug 17, 2015
    3
    I had some hopes for the show at first. The idea that the animals are banding together against humans seems interesting even if the science behind it is a little weak. But six episodes in I just want to throw a shoe at the TV. It's not the animal behavior that's the problem, it's the human behavior. It is so obvious that the producers are trying not to offend any sort of animal rightsI had some hopes for the show at first. The idea that the animals are banding together against humans seems interesting even if the science behind it is a little weak. But six episodes in I just want to throw a shoe at the TV. It's not the animal behavior that's the problem, it's the human behavior. It is so obvious that the producers are trying not to offend any sort of animal rights group that every episode doesn't show people fighting back at all. It's kind of crazy to think that people would not fight back against animals that are rising up against them, but that is exactly what's happening. Even in the episode where they do show people buying guns in a gun store, you never actually see any hunters doing anything. And there are so many times when it would be so easy to defend against these animals. Not only that but the people who are supposed to be scientist put themselves in ridiculous danger by going places where they know animals milescould easily get them. The plot holes are just so big, it's pretty difficult to watch. I'm giving a couple of points for the journalist and the big guy who are the only interesting human characters.… Expand
  10. Kalyani
    Aug 12, 2015
    0
    Terrible acting, bad casting! the animals are the only good actors. The worst is the girl playing the French whatever..she is so not believable. Too bad because the storyline is interesting. Will read the book.
  11. AnAlohacritic
    Sep 9, 2015
    1
    Awful - CBS can do so much better. Cut your losses and cancel this show quickly. The plot (if you call it that) is just sick and sad. I've tried to watch it a couple times as I like the she bookend shows but I always end up needing to change the channel to preserve my sanity. This is one of the worse shows I've seen come out in years. I'd suggest doing drug tests on the writers as theyAwful - CBS can do so much better. Cut your losses and cancel this show quickly. The plot (if you call it that) is just sick and sad. I've tried to watch it a couple times as I like the she bookend shows but I always end up needing to change the channel to preserve my sanity. This is one of the worse shows I've seen come out in years. I'd suggest doing drug tests on the writers as they must be severely impaired- no other explanation. Don't waste your time on this show not worth it. In the past few years CBS has had many great hits and has become my favorite channel but this show just is upsetting and disgusting.… Expand
  12. tmbradley
    Sep 13, 2015
    0
    While the story line started off somewhat interesting, as I watched more and more of it, it became unbearable. Not only is the writing so bad, but Nora Arnezeder, made me vomit and close my eyes every time she would talk or try to be serious. She was completely miscast as the character of Chloe. She is one of the worse actresses I have seen in a long time.
  13. Xaphan_Red
    Oct 13, 2015
    0
    This show has everything, inane plot, stupid non-sensical science, and wooden acting. Its good to see a show where the scenery and supporting animals move more than the actors. Just as an example of this stupidity, why would lightly furred bats with bald wings, not freeze and die near the south pole, when 2 heavily insulated clothed adult women, in a building freeze to death? CBS wouldThis show has everything, inane plot, stupid non-sensical science, and wooden acting. Its good to see a show where the scenery and supporting animals move more than the actors. Just as an example of this stupidity, why would lightly furred bats with bald wings, not freeze and die near the south pole, when 2 heavily insulated clothed adult women, in a building freeze to death? CBS would be better directed funding a show on competitive Origami.… Expand
  14. Chunksaflyn
    Oct 21, 2015
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This had potential. The idea was ok, the acting not bad, but that's about it for me. Aside from the fact that there are so many implausibilities, there are so many inane things that just don't make sense. I'm fine with suspending belief for the sake of some concepts, I do it all the time for movies and shows, but to ask me to ask me to throw belief out the window is another thing altogether.
    Not wanting to give away anything, but the critters that attack in Antarctica and cut off the solar panels....what, a research facility without a back up generator? I'm sorry but that's just one of many things that just rub the wrong way. Come on, if you want to make things happen, do a little research and make it believable.
    I've pretty much given up on this being a serious show and think I've found a new (unintended) comedy.    … Expand
  15. noleafcloverx
    Feb 3, 2018
    2
    The writes are absolutely awful. I can't stand to watch this show because every problem and every solution just reveal the ignorance of the writers. Almost nothing of what they do is even close to be possible. Also they definitely don't understand how long it takes to get anywhere, its like they just step into the next set in the next room...so bad.
  16. swahilivibe
    Aug 3, 2016
    1
    ha ha ha this show z so hilarious, please someone cancel this show. an elephant maximum can run with a speed of 15mph, and for an airplane to take off let say it requres 225 miles per hour approx lets not go that far how did that elephant manage to chase that van and a plane? oky lets say its that mutation thing but with those 5 Tranquillizers? hell no. but those angry polar bears atha ha ha this show z so hilarious, please someone cancel this show. an elephant maximum can run with a speed of 15mph, and for an airplane to take off let say it requres 225 miles per hour approx lets not go that far how did that elephant manage to chase that van and a plane? oky lets say its that mutation thing but with those 5 Tranquillizers? hell no. but those angry polar bears at the bus get down so easly with the same Tranquillizers but this time one Tranquilizer for each one of them ahggg. and I'm so tired of that triple helix chit chat its getting old and that stupid CGI plane, who wrote this again?… Expand
  17. travisd600
    Dec 3, 2017
    1
    Honestly, I used to really love this show between the first and second season.
    However, thanks to the third, I find myself becoming ever more aggravated with the repetitive nature of the show.
    They roll with the same thing yet again, finding five or six animals for whatever purpose. And then have some villainous plot CONTINUALLY toppling everything, making every victory just seem like it    Honestly, I used to really love this show between the first and second season.
    However, thanks to the third, I find myself becoming ever more aggravated with the repetitive nature of the show.
    They roll with the same thing yet again, finding five or six animals for whatever purpose. And then have some villainous plot CONTINUALLY toppling everything, making every victory just seem like it was a waste of all the hours you spent watching the show.
    The fact this show went from presenting a very good book, to milking it beyond that just to toy with your feelings when it comes to the drama and suspense, only to display you with a "EVERYTHING YOU JUST WATCHED DIDN'T MATTER IN THE END" just makes you feel insulted as a viewer.
    So really, producers of Zoo, just stop. Stop what your doing, invent a new story, perhaps a branch off of Zoo with new characters, a dystopian earth where humanity is scraping by after 100 years have gone by.
    Give us something new, and quit ruining a good story for the sake of money. If film makers spent as much time making a good story, as they do spending on it, we would have resulted with a much better show by now.

    But that's only my opinion, I still suggest you watch it before taking everything I say to heart. Least it deserves is a chance.    … Expand

Awards & Rankings

37
#37 Most Discussed TV Season of 2015
39
#39 Most Shared TV Season of 2015

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
55

Mixed or average reviews - based on 26 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 8 out of 26
  2. Mixed: 16 out of 26
  3. Negative: 2 out of 26
  1. The Wrap
    Reviewed by: Daniel Holloway
    Aug 20, 2015
    50
    While the pilot script excels in efficient plot building, it lags in dialogue and character development.
    Read full review
  2. Newark Star-Ledger
    Reviewed by: Vicki Hyman
    Jun 30, 2015
    75
    As with many a Patterson thriller, the breathless pace and spine-tingling what-ifs make it easy to get caught up despite your well-founded reservations.
    Read full review
  3. The Lincoln Journal Star
    Reviewed by: Jeff Korbelik
    Jun 30, 2015
    100
    The story will grab you, as we slowly see the animals begin asserting their control and the humans at a total loss as to what to do about it.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »