my major pet peeve with shows is the way writers choose to create conflict and tension in the story. In The Code Jesse Banks is mentally defective in some manner, kind of an idiot savant almost. You expect him to make really poor decisions, and he does. But the writers make his 'normal' brother Ned Banks elect to make poor decisions as well. They do this so the viewers will see the danger and the ramifications of those poor decisions ahead of time and become emotionally invested in the story.

And that is OK as long as the writers don't overplay it. But they nearly always do over play their hand. It makes the shows lack verisimilitude; viewers can't relate the actions of the characters to their experience of the real world and stop buying into the story, stop being invested in it. We develop an attitude of no longer caring very much what happens to the idiots who stubbornly, willfully blind themselves to the danger and walk straight into it anyway. In S1 Ep 5 Ned learned that "they" had kidnapped Hani and were holding her ransom for the "files" on laser enrichment of uranium. Ned by this point had made government contacts which he could now rely upon. Why didn't he call them for assistance or backup? Earlier Hani's father made no effort to stop the madman from waterboarding Hani, electing to stand there crying and begging for him to let her breathe again, over and over. With a little more effort I think writers could keep the stories believable and still create the conflict the stories require.

The Code is an interesting series and I will keep watching it. Thankfully I am catching it on Netflix where I can tab forward through the maudlin silly scenes.