The World's Best would be so much better if it wasn't so complicated

Variety

What's supposed to separate CBS' new global talent show from America's Got Talent is its wall of 50 experts from around the world who make the final call. "So very much of the show boils down to the show explaining itself and stretching out the 'judging,' which mostly just consists of the panelists gushing and gasping in awe," says Caroline Framke. "Plus, given the way the averages tend to work out, there’s rarely much tension as to whether or not someone will move forward. In fact, even just the first two acts — a choreographed group karate team and a trio of tween boy singers — both moved on with combined scores of 99 out of 100. That doesn’t exactly leave much room for future acts to blow our minds, nor does it make all the emphasis on how this show’s supposedly singular judging is any better or more interesting than any other’s. If The World’s Best wants to be 'The World’s Best,' it would do better to stop trying to tell us that it’s so mind-blowing and let its acts do the talking."

ALSO:

• There's nothing wrong with copying America's Got Talent, but this was a bad copy
• The World's Best isn't perfect, but it's a perfectly serviceable entry into the reality-competition landscape