There is a lot to like about Killing Eve, but in the end, it's spread too thin and there just isn't enough to justify what happens (or doesn't) in the story. Some reviewers describe this as a cat-and-mouse game - and to some extent it is - but such a description suggests a taut thriller that keeps one on the edge of one's seat. This does not. Make no mistake: the best part - and the saving grace of the show - is Jodie Comer as Villanelle, the psychopathic killer whom Eve tracks. She steals every scene, with her frightening facial expressions and the intensity of her gaze. While I'm not a Sandra Oh-o-phile, as many here seem to be - I like her, but her character is too straight-laced (as written) to carry the show. She's vanilla . . . the straight-man to Comer's colorful characterizations.
Beneath the thin characterizations, after binge-watching eight episodes in 24 hours, I'm not sure that Ms. Phoebe Waller-Bridge has a idea where this is going. It wasn't difficult to predict where the "twists" were - who was double-crossing whom - and the big reveals felt more like cliches. At the end of the day (which would take us into Season 2 or later), I'm not sure the seeming layers of espionage will amount to much because I think the purpose of narrative devices employed was to shock and "keep us guessing". But those narrative twists were neither shocking nor were they meaningful enough to keep us guessing. Why? Because there was little other than the thin reveal to hold the suggested enormity of the exposure. Ideally, in a show like this, one would constantly be left guessing - who is who and what is what? Are the good guys really bad? Are we rooting for the right team? Is what we think we know really the truth behind what's happening? To the extent that the story builds that tension - constantly keeping us guessing, with multiple possibilities, all supported by the weight of the evidence - that drives us to a thrilling conclusion (or, as is in this case, cliffhanger). Instead, it's a fairly simple narrative with a lot of red herrings that aren't meant for anything other than the simple man's fancy.
The more I watch Ms. Waller-Bridge, the less I enjoy. She's the darling of the so-called alternative mainstream these days, and I find her work rather thin. Fleabag was perhaps her best work, also predictable, but it was only 30 minutes per episode and it was billed as a comedy (not really, though). The hour-long (minus commercial interruptions) format has proven too daunting. She struggles with narrative and she's terrible with character development. Pretty much everyone and everything is the same at the end of Episode 8 as it was at the beginning of Episode 1. Sure, things have happened, but no one has grown. Our sympathies haven't shifted. Our concept of right/wrong, good/bad, right/left is exactly what it was when we first started watching. Season 2 might begin in Croatia or in Bermuda - it really wouldn't matter - and that's all narrative anyway. In these supposed thrillers, the season ideally would have ended with the viewer not having any idea what was what and where this would possibly go. Guess what? It'll just be more of the same. What's more, who cares?
At the end of the day, this show is better off stripping it for parts. The acting and the production values are far better than the narrative concept, and that is the basis for this show's reception. Perhaps it wouldn't be as obvious were one to watch as a weekly serial show. It's good enough mind-candy, I suppose, but it's not nutritious. It doesn't really satisfy. It's a frozen dinner at best, and even it's organic, it still only a $3.99 meal with 450 calories that one pops into the oven when one doesn't feel like making a more elaborate spread. Perhaps I'm being too critical because this show was over-hyped. Had I simply discovered it on my own, I would feel the same, but it wouldn't have been touted to be the next-best and latest-greatest. Yes, it's better than a formula-procedural (like Law and Order, CSI, or NCIS), but those shows are terrible and literally are the same show every god-forsaken week. Clue here, interview there, mix together, put in the oven, and voila - crime solved. The best of the procedurals is a snooze-fest after a handful of episodes because every episode is the same . . . like going to a Chinese restaurant with only one sauce. Chicken, beef, or lamb - at the end of the day, it's more or less the same flavor.
Killing Eve could have been so much more. Is it a waste of time? Sort of. The Tom Clancy's Jack Ryan on Amazon could have - should have - been better, but it was more interesting than this. That, too, suffered from narrative unidimensionality, but it wasn't intended to be a psychological thriller inasmuch as it was an action-based one. In Killing Eve, not much happens, so the dialogue (not tight) and the psychological games needed to carry the show. They were absent. Eight episodes is a long time for nothing to happen and our minds not to be toyed with.
Will I see Season 2? Unlikely.
Beneath the thin characterizations, after binge-watching eight episodes in 24 hours, I'm not sure that Ms. Phoebe Waller-Bridge has a idea where this is going. It wasn't difficult to predict where the "twists" were - who was double-crossing whom - and the big reveals felt more like cliches. At the end of the day (which would take us into Season 2 or later), I'm not sure the seeming layers of espionage will amount to much because I think the purpose of narrative devices employed was to shock and "keep us guessing". But those narrative twists were neither shocking nor were they meaningful enough to keep us guessing. Why? Because there was little other than the thin reveal to hold the suggested enormity of the exposure. Ideally, in a show like this, one would constantly be left guessing - who is who and what is what? Are the good guys really bad? Are we rooting for the right team? Is what we think we know really the truth behind what's happening? To the extent that the story builds that tension - constantly keeping us guessing, with multiple possibilities, all supported by the weight of the evidence - that drives us to a thrilling conclusion (or, as is in this case, cliffhanger). Instead, it's a fairly simple narrative with a lot of red herrings that aren't meant for anything other than the simple man's fancy.
The more I watch Ms. Waller-Bridge, the less I enjoy. She's the darling of the so-called alternative mainstream these days, and I find her work rather thin. Fleabag was perhaps her best work, also predictable, but it was only 30 minutes per episode and it was billed as a comedy (not really, though). The hour-long (minus commercial interruptions) format has proven too daunting. She struggles with narrative and she's terrible with character development. Pretty much everyone and everything is the same at the end of Episode 8 as it was at the beginning of Episode 1. Sure, things have happened, but no one has grown. Our sympathies haven't shifted. Our concept of right/wrong, good/bad, right/left is exactly what it was when we first started watching. Season 2 might begin in Croatia or in Bermuda - it really wouldn't matter - and that's all narrative anyway. In these supposed thrillers, the season ideally would have ended with the viewer not having any idea what was what and where this would possibly go. Guess what? It'll just be more of the same. What's more, who cares?
At the end of the day, this show is better off stripping it for parts. The acting and the production values are far better than the narrative concept, and that is the basis for this show's reception. Perhaps it wouldn't be as obvious were one to watch as a weekly serial show. It's good enough mind-candy, I suppose, but it's not nutritious. It doesn't really satisfy. It's a frozen dinner at best, and even it's organic, it still only a $3.99 meal with 450 calories that one pops into the oven when one doesn't feel like making a more elaborate spread. Perhaps I'm being too critical because this show was over-hyped. Had I simply discovered it on my own, I would feel the same, but it wouldn't have been touted to be the next-best and latest-greatest. Yes, it's better than a formula-procedural (like Law and Order, CSI, or NCIS), but those shows are terrible and literally are the same show every god-forsaken week. Clue here, interview there, mix together, put in the oven, and voila - crime solved. The best of the procedurals is a snooze-fest after a handful of episodes because every episode is the same . . . like going to a Chinese restaurant with only one sauce. Chicken, beef, or lamb - at the end of the day, it's more or less the same flavor.
Killing Eve could have been so much more. Is it a waste of time? Sort of. The Tom Clancy's Jack Ryan on Amazon could have - should have - been better, but it was more interesting than this. That, too, suffered from narrative unidimensionality, but it wasn't intended to be a psychological thriller inasmuch as it was an action-based one. In Killing Eve, not much happens, so the dialogue (not tight) and the psychological games needed to carry the show. They were absent. Eight episodes is a long time for nothing to happen and our minds not to be toyed with.
Will I see Season 2? Unlikely.