I believe that when you subscribe to Netflix, your initial first month is free.

You could create an account, watch the first season and then cancel before your 30 days are up.

In all its abyssimal mediocrity, I really like watching Comic Book Men, but I guess it doesn't count. But at least, unlike Constantine, it still is on...
I kind of enjoy Gotham in its ambition, but it's deeply flawed.
I saw daredevil and couldn't see anything ambitious in it, just telling once again a story we've read so many times...
Haven't seen Supergirl and only The Flash's pilot, which left me pretty cold even if it looked competant.
I find arrow a pretty fun watch, but it is probably amongst the stupidest things I watch on telly.
Walking Dead is kind of the same, with one of the worst lead actors currenctly on the air. Agent of SHield I gave up after 2 episode, Agent Carter after one, Constantine after 11, all of which I struggled with from the first minute...
So I guess that my vote goes to Jessica Jones, even if I'm only 5 episodes in and didn't like the pilot that much, but at least, it's growing on me, and most of the acting is good.

I just don't have the time to get into most of these. I tried Daredevil for two episodes because everyone raved about it, and it was well done, but just too dark for what I was looking for. Of course, that's the post-Miller Daredevil for you.

I've wanted to try Walking Dead but, six seasons in, the learning curve is just too steep. And again, I look to TV to pick me up, not bum me out.

So I'm currently trying Supergirl. It's upbeat, new, and accessible. If I continue to enjoy it, I might branch out and try The Flash next.

I'd say either The Flash or Jessica Jones.

I've never watched Gotham or Constantine. Gotham just doesn't look like something that I'd like. Although I've accepted the changes in the mythos for various other comic adaptations, for some reason the idea that various villains were active even when Bruce Wayne was a little kid bugs me.

I watched Supergirl when it started, but I've already missed an episode. All the Greg Berlanti produced DC shows have moments of cheesiness and illogical plotlines, but Supergirl has the most. I don't the constant focus on protected Kara rings true, when she's more impervious to harm that most anyone on Earth. I like Melissa Benoist and Laura Benanti, but I'm the fence with the other cast members. It's simultaneously superficial and heavy-handed in its efforts to work in feminism. Jessica Jones does feminism a lot better by showing rather than telling.

The Flash is strongest Berlanti-verse show right now. It's the one that works best with the tone they try to bring to the shows. It's also the one that works the best with how they rework and mix up the mythos for television. They do a good job at picking villains and casting them. They also did a good job of pacing plotlines through the first season (although they used up a lot of stuff that they could have played out over multiple season). Most of the cast is good, although sometimes it gets a little cheesy/soapy. Occasionally, subplots seem contrived to create false drama that doesn't ring true. One example is the lengths Barry & Joe went to keep Iris out of the loop (supposedly for her own protection) when almost everyone knew. It was a stupid strategy and showed lack of respect. The other is what they did regarding Henry Allen this season. I'm hoping there a plan there.

I only started watching Arrow a year ago, so I binge watched two and a third season to catch up to the current shows. Arrow would've been higher on the list earlier in its run. Paradoxically, while I feel the Flash benefits from being part of a larger universe, I feel like Arrow suffers the more they tie in the Flash or other DC stuff. Arrow worked a lot better when it focused on somewhat realistic organized crime. The more they bring in metahumans, the supernatural elements of the League of Assassins, magic, etc., the weaker the series gets. I also think they're juggling too many characters in Team Arrow. Also, many of the actors seem limited as the series goes on. My opinion of Stephen Amell and Emily Bett Rickards has dropped over time. I like Felicity in the beginning; now I find her annoying. I liked Willa Holland because she's really attractive. I'm bummed that her range seems pretty limited. Laurel, who used to bug me, might be my favorite character now. Some of the characters that are gone now (Moira, Tommy, Roy) are gone now. I was never a huge fan of the flashbacks, but I think they were a lot better in the first two seasons. I wish they didn't move those off-island.

I enjoyed Jessica Jones a lot. The acting and writing were both really good. There's a good balance between humor, psychological thriller elements, and action. Krysten Ritter is really an acting genius. I hoping that Emmy voters will overcome the snobbery against super-heroes/action to give her a nomination. The other major roles are very well done. Things can a bit more dicey when you get to supporting characters, because I think the series needs more likable supporting characters. I like how the series weaves in themes without over-explaining (a la Supergirl) to the audience. One main drawback is that the dark tone could wear a viewer down if your not in the mood. However, I'm glad that unlike a lot of shows that are dark in tone, it doesn't go with literally dark cinematography where you can't see anything. Another demerit is that Jessica sometimes comes up with crazy plans, but that may be intentional.

Walking Dead varies widely. I've been really engrossed with it at times (season 2 is my favorite). But there have been times that I've gotten sick of it and missed a month or more. Then, it gets good again and I have to catch up. Although a lot of the action set pieces are really well done, sometimes I get sick of the can-you-top-this walker scenarios. The biggest turnoff for me is the "moral of the story" that seems to be emphasized more and more. It really seems to be pushing a Randian message of the morality of selfish more and more. The show keeps telling us that it you should be distrustful of other people. Other humans are increasingly shown to be a bigger threat than walkers. Teaming up with the "weak" leaves you worse off than going it alone. It's a very negative view of humanity. If a zombie apocalypse was a real thing, I think the opposite would be true. I think being altruistic, helping the supposedly weak, and trusting strangers to try to build up a big group of survivors would be a successful. I think "tough" people who distrusted those outside their core group would suffer. At this point, I'm almost rooting for Rick to die as a repudiation of the Randian ideology. Sorry for the giant rant.

Totally disagree about The Walking Dead.

It's a world where walking, cannibalistic corpses outnumber humans a million to one. Civilization has totally crumbled, even the most basic of resources are extremely scarce, and it's obvious that the world has drastically changed for good.

To not be weary of strangers in that scenario would be utterly foolish.

And when the world goes back to its most primitive, I think the old addage of "only the strong survive" certainly rings true.

I still wan to know who mows all the lawns.

I would have to give it to Daredevil as well. Hands down, the best thing Marvel has done for sure. Everything was on point for me as a fairly big DD fan. I loved the actors, loved the story. It was well filmed too and the fight scenes were fantastic. I cannot wait for the second season.

For runners up, I would have to say Agents of Shield is just good fun. Nothing amazing but good solid action. Gotham is third...I feel its sets outshine its actors. Some are on point (I like the kid playing Bruce, I like Alfred but I cannot love Gordon's character). I have still not started Season 2 though and am waiting to get into it once I have time to finish Jessica Jones first. It is also very good so far although not as amazing as DD.