Apple TV+ shows promise
Reviews are in for all the shows, including ‘The Morning Show’, ‘Dickinson’ and ‘See’
Apple might dominate the market for phones and computers, but when it comes to making TV, critics are suggesting the tech giant is a little behind the curve.
Reviews are in for all the shows leading the charge ahead of Apple TV+’s much-anticipated launch tomorrow, and the general consensus has been lukewarm at best. Even The Morning
Show, the forthcoming streaming service’s timely flag-bearer starring Jennifer Aniston and Reese Witherspoon, has elicited mixed reactions.
Four series are set to premiere by week’s end, and all signs point to a slow start. But despite its flaws, some still argue there’s content worth watching in the four new shows.
Here’s what TV experts are saying, from Dickinson to See.
Feedback for the broadcast news drama, which sees Aniston’s Alex and Witherspoon’s Bradley navigate the politics of TV journalism after a Matt Lauer-esque figure (Steve Carell) is ousted from the network, has softly sung the praises of its two leads and not much else.
Entertainment Weekly called the Friends alum’s small-screen return “an exquisite showcase” and lauded Witherspoon’s ability to harness the power of a “‘hyper-articulate Southern firebrand’ like none other,” while pointing out Bradley’s inconsistencies as a character. According to Time, it’s “the most polished” of the service’s content so far, but still “doesn’t have the same depth or experimental spirit as the top tier of TV in 2019.”
The Hollywood Reporter was less kind, especially knocking the programme’s “brutally dull” pilot episode while admitting its later entries offer some “value out of leading ladies Jennifer Aniston and Reese Witherspoon.” Fellow trade mag Variety similarly argued that even the show’s powerhouse stars “can’t salvage this politically muddled, underthought and underwhelming streaming misfire.”
Reactions to Dickinson, a modernised, pseudo-biographical, ultrafeminist take on the life of poet Emily Dickinson, played by Hailee Steinfeld, were more mixed.
Once again, the Hollywood Reporter and Variety were not impressed, with the former dismissing the lavish semiperiod piece as “bloated,” “tonally incongruous” and lacking “any definable jokes,” while the latter argued, “It wouldn’t be the least bit surprising” if Steinfeld’s young poet “emerged from her stately Amherst home in a Forever 21 shirt emblazoned with ‘#FEMINIST.’”
See, the post-apocalyptic drama starring Jason Momoa as the leader of a village of survivors who have all lost their sight after a virus wiped out much of the human population, has been largely accepted as, if nothing else, the service’s weirdest and most actionpacked entry. But it’s perhaps a little too weird for mass viewing.
While celebrating the rugged drama’s “cool” fight sequences and “rapid” pacing, IndieWire ultimately lamented creator Steven Knight’s strange plot choices, which “rarely evoke an intuitive consequence from his apocalyptic premise or a clever way to maximise the bold new world he’s trying to build.” Last and least well-reviewed is For
All Mankind, a work of historical fiction with an ensemble cast that explores what would have happened had the Soviets beat the Americans to the moon. Once again, responses were lacklustre, with most agreeing that the space epic’s innovation ends with its logline.
TV Line pinned the series’ shortcomings on an excess of characters, all underdeveloped, while giving it points for a “gripping premise” and “rich period detail.” IndieWire lamented the programme’s lack of imagination beyond its initial historical twist.
One relatively strong review from
Variety hailed the revisionist piece as a “workplace drama above all else, and a fairly sharp one at that”.