Seriously, in conception, performance, and execution, this guy was one of the most inexcusable zeroes I can remember in more than three decades of watching television. I’ve seen revolving doors with more backbone, paperweights with more charisma. Daniel Lanagin’s dog, the one that jumped into the swimming pool after Frank’s steak, demonstrated more savvy in 30 seconds of screen time than the elected president of the United States did in two seasons.
I don't review television anymore but I still enjoy reading great television criticism. Andy Greenwald's one of the best around at the moment.
Season Two of House of Cards was more like Game of Thrones: shitty soap opera using sex and violence to excite rather than propel the story.
The laziness of that 'story telling' is illustrated perfectly in the weakness of President Walker. This man was no impediment to Frank Underwood's destructive stroll to the Oval Office. They showed no fight in him. Everything was surface. Every President in 24 was more nuanced.
The UK version of House of Cards was not a very subtle or nuanced tale, but it at least had a sense competition to get behind.
More importantly, though: Just because something is not very good doesn't mean that you aren't allowed to enjoy it. Many people sat down to immerse themselves in season 2 and when they came up for air were perfectly content.
But when the final scene closed I groaned and picked up a great book to fill the hole it had dug in my soul.