User Reviews (21)

Add a Review

  • I decided to give Public Morals a shot and I was not disappointed. This show is great! It feels authentic to the times, everything from the accents to the set. Not too overdone either, it doesn't look costume-y nor doesn't it feel like they are trying to hard.

    Basically the show is about cops in the 60's and how they deal with crime. Actually, most importantly, it's about how they are a part of crime. They play the line between cops and criminals. Just in the first episode we see them taking bribes, lying, playing illegal games, etc. Yet (so far) they seem like good cops when it matters.

    I see it as a show about how people dealt with crime in a time when the law was too restrictive to be enforced. Even gay bars were illegal! These cops are trying to keep the city in order, knowing the law as it is can not be properly enforced. Of course there are some points that cross the line and have us wondering on which side they actually stand.

    With plenty of good characters, Public Morals explores not only the crime scene in 1960's New York, but also the family life, values, and the sense of morality of the times.

    The show has an interesting premise, and I for one am excited to see where it goes.
  • Sometimes, the commercials and the early build up is better then the actual experience. this is not the case here, as I thought it was better than the build up! This one gets my standing ovation for not being a "loser" series, like so many remake, make over and redone series, of late, which we're being bombarded with, over the last decade. Anyone can take a book or a movie and turn it into a slow role, fall asleep as yo go, TV series. This is all new material and doesn't feel recycled, even though its period and loosely based on past "plain clothed cops" in the big city. There are lots of surprises. Should be top of the line, highly rated TV series for many seasons to come, if there are no politics involved. Has the feel of several movies of this period, but seems to have real originality in that it may be taking from true criminal case files. I guess I should do some research, because I'm not sure of the background for the material. Not knowing, however, thats a draw for me. I do know, though, that for me, I always enjoy knowing a story has a link to a true crime, somewhere? I hope to see this as one of the draws, as this creates a dynamic feel. So far, I can see so many ways this type of series can go, and because it's period, there is numerous possibility for going forward in terms on chronological adventure. The writers are top notch, already accredited rights in their own field; nice character development as the plot and characters have plenty of well thought out preparation, execution and follow through, while actors chosen for each character is well cast and plenty of room for more diversity, plus every one of these people are a group of fully accredited and seasoned actors,with all of their own following, so no need for much "selling" or marketing, in this department. I do like how they've taken nostalgia and redressed it to look as if its a little further along in the forensics and policing field. I think we will see the writers pushing the envelope in other ways, as well, which will be adding a new slant on good times to be had by all in the late 60's early 70's as well as all the drama and social unrest felt during this period. Which reminds me, noted that there is diverse set of circumstances and social standings in the story line, family, group, etc... so a vast representation of all strata of cultures and morals situations will arise. We see where the first season has set up so many different pathways for the next season to follow, that I think there will excitement to be had in the writing room. This series is strong, diverse, dynamic, shows an inside slant on what unclothed officers might have done or could do in their position and how it might affect all around them, while giving us nostalgia to draw in all types of viewers, young and old. I enjoy that it feels edgy...no time for getting popcorn! The series Public Morals will gain public ovation, so forget popcorn! You'll be too into the story and each new weekly installment!
  • Although only 1 episode has aired on TNT so far 3 more are "on demand"on my cable system so I've seen 4, and while I love the 60's setting of the series I'm not sure where the plot is going.I've seen enough series to know a first season can often be that way so as long as the surroundings hold and the acting is good,stay with it for awhile.I'm hoping eventually for a Serpico meets Goodfellas or something along those lines down the road.The show seems to stand on Edward Burns as a actor and creator of the show with a push from Steven Spielbergs production company.So there's not much to say other than I feel good about its chances and recommend as a gritty NYC cops and criminals set peace
  • janetny31 August 2015
    Public Morals is an excellent new show that takes place in the 1960s. The attention to detail and authenticity to the era is truly remarkable. There are plenty of new faces in this series and I am impressed by the acting. The interaction between the police and the gangsters is fraught with tension and suspense. Most cop shows deal with solving crimes, but this show is different because it shows how the police interact within society.

    What is also interesting about Public Morals is the family dynamics of the police officers. Some of my favorite scenes include Ed Burns dealing with his young son and his interactions with his beautiful wife.

    I have viewed all four of the episodes which are available On Demand and on TNT. The series gets better with each episode. I look forward to watching them all.
  • so far so good. it starts off slowly, finding its legs, a bit too self conscious of getting it right, the era, the cars, the clothes - did a NY cop ever drive around in a VW beetle?! - but by ep 2 it is motoring along nicely. maybe a bit too close of a homage to the tom hanks paul newman gangster flick of a few years back but hey, its imitation is also sincere flattery. & any series that uses the great ronnie drew version of the parting glass has to be pretty sound. but oh edwards burns, the mis spelled whiskEy on the paddy's bottle.....ouch. enough to make my father, a loyal devotee, turn over 10 times................. looking forward to the next 6 episodes
  • If you want to know who writer, director Ed Burns is please see the wonderful, recent story on CBS Sunday Morning. Burns is a great example of being persistent in following his dream of being a writer. Along the way he was resourceful and self deprecating which helped in his success. Public Morals is set in NY in the 1960's and revolves around the Public Morals Division in the police department. I love it when I barely recognize the cast as it gives us an opportunity to see fresh faces and their work. Some faces will resonate like veterans Brian Dennehy and Timothy Hutton. Public Morals with it's mature theme, language etc is for adult audiences.
  • When I saw the previews I expected just another cop show set in the past.. This is a great series.. How great it truly is will be lost on some folks.. but if you grew up in N.Y.C. in the 60s you will know exactly what I mean.. They even had a Skelly's board in the street.. The emerald and black cars.. There were little things that were off that only someone who lived through it would pick up.. and one scene where they had a 68 Impala, which of course did not exist in 1965.. but some of that is to be expected.. The park benches and the street signs were off but they did an absolutely amazing job of transporting you to 60s N.Y. The writing is good.. the acting is very good.. and the story has a lot of potential. I like what they did with the music also.. there was one scene where someone was singing a Sinatra song.. It was not Sinatra but the singer sounded like him... and they did that with some other songs from the times.. to great effect. I look forward to seeing where this series will go... it has a lot of potential.. Michael Rappaport finally has a role that goes beyond a character role and every time I see him in this (I watched all 3 episodes On Demand and saw the first two twice..) I cannot help but think of Popeye Doyle. Must be the hat. I would not be surprised if I see some kids playing Ringolivio or playing in the Johnny Pump when things move into summer.. Ed Burns has done a great job with this .. and the strong supporting cast makes this series in my opinion one to watch. If you like crime shows.. and period pieces.. this series is for you. It actually does a better job of taking you back than a certain recently finished series about advertising moguls.. This series is the next best thing to Mr. Peadody's way back machine of you want to get a glimpse of life in New York City in the 60s..
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Excellent new series with good characters and a compelling story line and attention to detail. I hope this will run for a long time. the music soundtrack with sixties hits fits in very well and adds to the enjoyment and the atmosphere. I think that this series stands out from most of the new series out at the moment. An excellent cast list of actors. I find echoes of boardwalk empire and blue bloods two great shows I may add producing everything I enjoy watching. This show deserves to be a hit.All and all, however, the series looks very good and if they build on the strengths of the great cast and compelling characters they should have a fine run . If you are looking for a new show to watch, I highly recommend public morals.You will not regret watching it. After being hooked on this series just after the first episodes, my addiction grows stronger by the week. I give this show a definite 10 stars and recommend you allocate 60 minutes of your time for this superb production.This show has great potential.I really enjoy this program.The top notch acting by the majority of the cast is just the icing on the cake
  • I really wanted to like this show a lot more than I did. Found the characters to be rather one-dimensional and stereotypical. Acting is spotty and production leaves something to be desired. Writing is uninspired, dialogue is cliché and story seems predictable - not expecting too many surprises going forward... Hope they can turn this one around 'cause it actually could have the potential to be an interesting a new twist on the ubiquitous "TV Cop Drama" genre if it were done right... Not to mention, (and now I'm just nitpicking) how do you start a show about the police "set in the early 1960's in New York City" with a song by The Doors?
  • OK, I'm not saying this is the best show on TV but it does have potential. As with all TV shows first episode it's setting the scene. This is 1960's new york... there is corruption which in my eyes can lead to thrilling story lines. Let us hope this show can deliver.

    I vow to give this show at least another two episodes before considering ditching. I don't think it's fair to write off any TV show after the first episode unless it's about something you have absolutely no interest in.

    On the down side I do think the "fight" scenes could have been better done. They looked too fake.
  • cwsmccoy9 September 2015
    I expect better from Edward Burns. The writing is mediocre. They are apparently unaware that there are pedantic old folks who are still alive who remember 1962-63 and they take enormous liberties with hair styles, clothing and music. Very sloppy.

    They get the men right for the most part but there were NO GUYS wearing shoulder length hair in NYC then and certainly no hoodlums- "hey Mary- nice hair" would have been the least of it. The skirts are too short and colorful paisley prints were 4-5 years in the offing.

    The Doors and Los Bravos (awesome song Black is Black) also a few years away. Nobody was "hanging out" in 1963. It's all too distracting from what had the potential to be a good show.
  • I wanted to love this series. I was even an extra in three of the episodes and I love era pieces. I binge watched the entire series on TNT over Labor Day when all episodes were made available and I was truly disappointed. Had all the episodes not been available I probably would have quit after the third episode. Some really great character actors and some great set design and wardrobe but the story line did not interest me. perhaps Ed Burns should have focused on either directing or acting and perhaps employed some professional screenwriters who know how to carry episodic television. The actors were great, Brian Dennehy, Michael Rappaport, Kevin Corrigan, Keith Nobbs. Tim Hutton, Elizabeth Mascucci but the lines they delivered were just not interesting or even that believable. On an ecoomic level for NYC and for some BG acting days, A second season would be nice I just wont be watching.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    A cliché but a damn watchable one. Edward Burns has written a terrific miniseries and even better, has assembled a great cast including Michael Rapport, Ruben Santiago-Hudson, Neal McDonough, Austin Stowell, and Brian Dennehy. On a recent cable upgrade, I was entitled to a DVR. Big nothing, I thought. But I set it to record Public Morals and when all the episodes were recorded and there was nothing on TV, my wife and I shrugged and thought why not. We binged through the episodes in two days and thought what a great invention—the DVR—and how lucky it was I set it correctly. You know the plot: the mob is making money off of vice and everyone is happy—the mob is making money, the police are getting a taste, and no one is getting hurt. But things are changing. Vince Latucci (Waas Stevens) has been letting some of the goombahs slide on their payments; Christine Muldoon (Elizabeth Masucci) wants to move out of their crime ridden neighborhood and move to Queens.; Charlie Bullman (Michael Rapport) is struggling with being a single parent and with an attraction to a prostitute; and Rusty Patton (Neal McDonough) feels his mob boss father isn't letting him in on the action and is planning, if necessary, to take the old man out (Brian Dennehey). And the murder of local boss Mr. O (Timothy Hutton), then requires vice cop Terry Muldoon (Edward Burns) to try and cope with the crumbling status quo.
  • There is a lot wrong with this but there's also a lot right... I'm a big Edward Burns fan and I like what he did with this but you cannot compete with the other television shows now days without cliffhangers. The story was good, acting (from most) was good but there just wasn't enough to keep the viewer wanting more. Which would be th reason why it was renewed for a second season. It also copped a lot of criticism for its authenticity, though I had no problem with it I thought the set, clothes and cars seemed all pretty legit. This show isn't for everyone but if a 1960 tough, corrupt cop show appeals to you give this one a try.
  • The objections I have to this work are many, and they are technical in nature. The scripts are poor--they don't resonate. The parts are too broadly played. Further, the costuming is even worse--full of anachronisms. The cars on the street aren't even right. The series likes to pretend it is accurately representing the era, but anyone who was alive back then knows better. How hard is it to hire someone in their sixties--or (gasp) their early seventies with a little attention to detail? Or simply check the DATES on things?

    This is a bad production that gets worse with each episode, and there's no reason that it had to be so awful. If you spend a lot of money on a series, at least try to find someone who won't put 1970s cars in a production that takes place in the sixties, women dressed like they are ready to go to the disco in the seventies, present-day 'five o'clock shadows,' and plastic- looking leather coats back in the sixties when these things were not part of the scene.

    This could have been good--instead it is dreadful. A crying shame.
  • We get it. We really really get it. Working class Irish Catholic New Yorkers with big loud complicated families and all their Irish Catholic stuff. I feel like Burns needs to stop doing the same thing over and over. In his world you're a cop a crook or a sheet rock guy. Your dad's a drunk your mom is probably dead and 4 of your 9 brothers are gangsters or ex cons. All the women are blond and understanding but some odd reason haven't popped out 4 Irish Catholic of their own. Except for that one sister who's Irish boyfriend beats her. The hookers are all pretty sassy black girls. The men all drink whiskey. There's probably bagpipe music at some point. The only place social gatherings is the bar and no one's moved out of the neighborhood they grew up in. Everyone was an altar boy at St. Shamrock's. The original priest is retiring next month and the new priest has a new way of doing things.
  • Script is excellent, there are a lot of details filled up. You can feel how each one connected to others. The dialogue is realistic/funny/rational. (I can watch over and over again)

    Casting and Acting are great. All leading roles & Supporting actors/actress are perfect well done to the roles. It is so good to bunch of characters in police department, well perform on each role.

    Cinematography is superb as always. For "Long-Shoot Take", you can find it in most of Edward Burns films. This can take much more effort to do including talented acting.

    Everything else in this film are outstanding, such as lighting, costume, etc.

    "Thank you" to all staffs and crews that made this happen. Your work is excellent...
  • I was ten yrs old in 1962, 12 in 64, 14 in 66 - get the picture. I see so many in discrepancy in the background colors, the hair-dos, the cars, and especially the music. We were not wearing mini skirts in 1962! They arrived in 1965 along with Go-go boots! But, of course, I was on the west coast in California. There's a character with long hair! This did not happen until 1966 on the West Coast, let alone the East coast. Some music is 50s Sammy Davis, which is great, but some is 68 R&R. By the way, houses were not painted in turquoise! If anything, it would have been avocado, pimento and brown. But all walls were ivory unless a tenement. Sorry, but you need a real life 60's elder to give you some advice. Ed Burns, relinquish some control.
  • kintoriwin9 November 2015
    This series is one I did not miss each week. Fine cast headed up by Edward Burns and Michael Rapaport. Supporting roles filled by excellent actors who fit their characters to a T. Multiple story lines that all worked. Excellent writing, so the dialogue is crisp and true.

    The show looks at the problems of policing vice, the "soft" crimes of human appetite and weakness that trouble every society. In 1960s New York, the approach was, keep it controlled and everybody does well, including vice cops.

    But then human appetite and weakness cause it all to begin to slip out of control, and we see the drama of cops and criminals trying right the balance so their comfortable but always dangerous worlds do not implode...in the process destroying their families and those they love.

    The final episode was the weakest of the ten, so I expect Burns didn't feel the need for a crash-bang ending to the fascinating first season. He'll pick up the story next year.

    If there is a next year, which I sincerely hope there is. Nothing on TV in the gritty, crime category is as compelling as "Public Morals."

    "Justified" ended last year, "Public Morals" fills the bill.
  • zekeblack5 November 2015
    Predictable Ed Burns... Love it or Hate it. This was a real ego-work. It was like he wanted to cartoon the era he was portraying. A collection of stereotypes, hookers with hearts of gold, long suffering wives, most of all men, men, men. The good guys are clear, the bad guys are clearer. Worst of all, by my consideration, was the dialog. Each line was classic James Cagney style, predictable--cliché -- and therefore boring as hell. It was classic Burns. I should not have expected subtlety. I am torn on how to rate it. I did not like it. I watched 10 episodes, hoping for redemption. But it was clearly written for Burns' ego, not for the sake of being a true period piece. I lived those times, although not Hell's Kitchen. This is no more than a cartoon from his imagination. Most of all men, men, men--- with relentless clichés. if that was what he wanted he succeeded wonderfully. I really disliked it immensely. Not my style.
  • Although I have to agree with another review that the authenticity of the series is quite good, from the locations, to the clothes, to the interiors, and even to the smoking (whew.. I was 12 in 1965, but I do remember a lot of people smoking). The acting also is good/very good, with a few over-the-top actors (and accents...). But I have an issue where there is no clear 'good' guy(s) here, and so there is really no one to cheer for. The cops are almost as crooked as the gangsters, and they rationalize what they do by saying that the crimes are 'victimless', and that people will participate in gambling, prostitution anyway. Bad rationalization there, and it's been used before. I can't believe that all the cops were assholes, as depicted in this series, and also can't believe that were that many on the take. Cops are depicted badly here, regardless of why they are doing what they're doing. Some would say they are only human... I think is also a rationalization. Anyway, I will keep watching for a while to see where the series goes. Hopefully, one of the cops will come along that we can root for, that at least becomes conflicted what he/she is doing. For the most part, this series seems like a vanity project for Ed Burns.