FeistyUpper If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

Tymon Sutton The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.

Taha Avalos The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

Marva It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

SaraNijeVo The show is very entertaining, the acting, production, sound, etc. are all top. This show, however, is let down by the outdated episodic/procedural format that TV is moving away from.The problem is that every episode becomes a formula, a case introduced, slight intertwining of case with personal life, twist and ending. Rinse and repeat.This formula was fine for Law and Order back in the 90's, but it gets boring very quickly. That's why many shows are moving away from that. Luther started with episodic and then went on to do to season-long cases (you guys call it series-long). Over in France, Engrenages (Spiral) is a season-long case. Denmark the same with the Killing, The Bridge and Follow the Money. Line of Duty is season-long cases. Justified also moved from episodic to season-long. Over in the law world, Suits also moved from procedural to season-long arcs and cases. A more serious show, The Night Of, also is a season-long story. Same with Better Call Saul.Procedurals have short stories of short threads that always end by the end of the episode. There's no suspense, no reason to tune in week-in week-out or to binge. You watch one, enjoy it and then you don't care anymore. Procedurals are now left behind for sitcoms or other weak dramas. Procedurals let you cover more cases, but you get less of them. You get flashes of a courtroom, quick decisions, it's like watching speed chess.There is no reason why this show couldn't do a major case every 3 - 4 episodes. Season 1 could've had 2 major cases, and have the multitude of small cases intertwine with the bigger ones, being a distraction or a chance to discover something.I've watched a few episodes now but the formulaic nature got me bored. I write this in hope that producers making shows stop with procedurals.

endura-1 This show does not disappoint. It is so well done that you might forget you're watching a TV drama not real life events. The characters are believable, powerfully drawn, but the undeniable star of the show is Maxine Peake - her performance just superb! As Martha Costello she is everything that you'd imagine a superior barrister to be. Can't get enough of her credible acting to be honest. The rest of the cast deserves a praise too because it is thanks to them that this BBC drama is so uniquely authentic. Filmed in London (I think), it depicts daily life at Shoe Lane chambers and the work of British barristers, clerks and solicitors. I am professionally interested in law and find it hard to point out any flaws in how "Silk" presents the legal crowd in London. I do see a difference between an American show of this kind and a British one. The former tends to be focused on achievements, career and quirks of personality and the latter...hmmm...basically on the job, meaning you get a believable picture of the life at the chambers. If you're into this sort of thing just see for yourself, you won't be disappointed.

TertiaryAdjunctofUnimatrix01 I have to disagree with a previous reviewer (Leilahali) about what they perceive as "more realistic" aspect of the show. The series is just as silk and clean as The Good Wife and younger too. I don't understand why every TV show needs to be compared to US television and not just stand on it's own.What the series does well is show the lives and stories of the lawyers as well as the cases they are working on. However, one the flaws is that they are nearly always defending someone who is innocent or not as guilty as you who think they are. Even though in the first episode Martha states 85% of their clients will be guilty. They are constantly defending someone whose being "fitted up" by the coppers rather than be outright guilty. The writers make an effort not to have clients that are too guilty or "bad/evil" as so to not turn the audience off.They don't know what to do with the Clive Reader character. When he is not being a jackass, he's as nice and loyal as a puppy. The lawyers are too young and attractive to reflect anything near real life. Tom Hughes is ridiculous to look at; he's too good looking to take seriously without thinking he is there to be obvious eye candy. There are lots of contrived moments.This isn't a topical legal show. Not many hot button issues. The critics are right about the flaws. Nevertheless I like it, but I like Garrow's Law better.

Leilahali I really enjoyed watching every episodes of this series. I also watch The GOOD WIFE but at times do get very irritated with that series. Not with SILK. My son is studying law and so the interest in watching these courtroom dramas. The acting in SILK was very good, and the lead character Martha, a very likable character. This series gives you an insight into how law is practiced in the UK. It's not slick like The Good Wife, but more realistic. I can't wait for series 2. If you want to watch a really good drama with some fine acting, good realistic courtroom scenes and some office politics and intrigues then go no further than SILK. I wish the BBC would produce more fine dramas like this.