Tonight, Anthony Edwards returns to television. Will his new TV series, Zero Hour, last for many seasons like ER or will it be cancelled like Last Resort? Is it worth watching?

On Zero Hour, Edwards plays the publisher of a magazine that debunks myths and cracks conspiracies. His wife disappears and he finds himself pulled into a compelling mystery that goes back centuries and has world-wide implications. While he and his team try to find answers, they must keep what they learn out of the hands of a sinister, mysterious man known only as White Vincent. The series also features the talents of Addison Timlin, Carmen Ejogo, Dylan Baker, Jacinda Barrett, Michael Nyqvist, and Scott Michael Foster.

Sound interesting? Here’s what some of the critics think:

Time: “If you last this long, you will probably ask yourself how this show made it on air. No doubt it sounded great in a pitch meeting: a little Lost, a little Dan Brown, and the pedigree of the creator of Prison Break, which was at least good crazy before it went bad crazy. But we’ve seen this over and over again: a series built around an elaborate concept, dressed up with a spooky mythology, then filled in with characters so poorly conceived, they may as well be called Kidnapped Wife Lady. All that said, while I think life is too short for hate-watching, this is the kind of show you might want to watch a few minutes of just for the experience. ”

LA Times: “A terrific pilot does not guarantee a terrific television show and there is a corollary to that — sometimes a bad pilot can morph into a good show. Zero Hour has decent enough bones, with the added benefits of a built-in Da Vinci Code fan base and a likable star. Once the quest gets going, things seemed to grow a bit less clunky, or perhaps it was just a case of ‘resistance is futile.’ Either way, it’s difficult not to hope Zero Hour gets better. And miracles do happen, especially here, at the end of days.

Salt Lake Tribune: “I was excited to watch the Zero Hour pilot. It promised adventure, mystery, bad guys-vs. good guys and – hopefully – fun. Boy, was I disappointed. It was pretty much a big ol’ bore. And the parts that weren’t boring were amateur and lame.”

Washington Post: “For a brief bit, I tried to enjoy Zero Hour as accidental camp, something so bad that it’s actually entertaining. That didn’t work either.”

USA Today: “Part of it is the writing; too many of the breakthroughs tonight are made by other people, with Hank just following along. But part of the blame goes to Edwards, who sometimes seems oddly unenergized for someone who suddenly finds himself battling homicidal, Nazi-loving, clock-stealing conspirators to rescue his wife and save the world.”

Boston Globe: “Come on, network TV. You’ve got to be smarter than Zero Hour if you want to hold your own against the cable revolution and the Internet-TV power move that has begun in earnest with Netflix’s House of Cards. ABC’s Zero Hour is a conspiracy drama that makes you wonder if network programmers are running their own conspiracy — to lose viewers in a Producers-like act of self-sabotage. This new ABC action-suspense series is really weak. The acting is half-hearted, the characters are paper thin, and the dialogue and plot development are embarrassing. It’s as sophisticated as Jonny Quest.

Hollywood Reporter: “Despite a mystical storyline with potential for over-the-top silliness, this is a rare network drama that takes risks and therefore is worthy of viewers’ attention.”

What do you think? Do you like the sound of Zero Hour? Will you watch? If you’ve already seen it, will you watch again?