A Murder at the End of the World

Most excellent. .... More than anything else there is Corrin, who played Princess Diana in the fourth season of “The Crown” and has an electric presence even in repose. .... Darby remains very much at the center of the story. Go find her there.

Aan absorbing, eerie brain twister that delivers a shocking denouement. (I’m sworn to secrecy). For mystery lovers, it doesn’t get much better than this.

Corrin and Dickinson are outstanding and carry the story on their shoulders. It takes on a lot, thematically, but I admire the big swings. This is a tech-centred story and its big appetite for interconnected ideas feels very online. It may not be flawless, but I found myself completely seduced by it.

“A Murder at the End of the World,” for the most part, makes sure we remember who matters — while still keeping us guessing to the very end.

It’s a tricky needle to thread, trying to construct a whodunit that deprioritizes the who in favor of the people behind the it; mileage will vary on how successfully you think it’s pulled off. At its worst, the series moves the way Andy’s titans talk, circling its gloomy central concerns without seeming to get much of anywhere for long periods of time. But at its best, it channels Darby’s anguish over existing in a world that can feel unbearably beautiful in one moment and intolerably painful in the next.

This thriller is Marling/Batmanglij at their most accessible, if at the expense of surprise. It’s another showcase for Corrin, an actor who only gets more interesting.

Beyond its first two episodes, “A Murder at the End of the World” just isn’t thrilling. Twists and turns fizzle into bland exposition dumps.

Brit Marling can't do no wrong. Got me interested since the first minutes. It looks like everything is not what it seems. Characters are interesting, and the world-building is awesome. It's like Glass Onion but without the comedy.

This stylish series takes place in an interesting locale and is well made, however it's more successful as a love story told in flashbacks than as an actual murder mystery or techno-thriller. The suspects lack depth or development, there are loads of red herrings to mislead viewers, and the present day investigation takes a back seat to the aforementioned flashbacks.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

The good: Great cinematography and setting. the bad: Pretty much everything else. Really not sure who the target audience for this show is, but it definitely treats them like their idiots. Some of the character decisions are completely out of character for the arch type they are portraying. No, it's not subversive, for your world class detective to ask Hotel-Siri "which arm do most drug addicts use to inject?" given we've been told she is an expert in dead bodies. Or that the the goddamn Astronaut does not know that speeding on black ice might be a bad idea.... Either this is a part of a massive reveal that these people are acting stupid for some greater purpose, or -likely- it's bad writing. The love story between the victim and protagonist is neither cute nor endearing, it's just plain boring. Keep hoping the side characters will pull attention for the main actress, but no we spend most of the time with her. yay How did they mess this up so bad? The premise, the setting, the supporting cast, all should have knocked this out the park. So disappointing.

The show centers on Darby, a young hacker with extensive knowledge of forensics who solves murders. It seeks to channel Agatha Christie but it's full of implausibilities, and it takes itself too seriously for them to be forgotten. The show doesn't let you forget that Darby is Gen Z, but it seems no one under the age of 40 was consulted in the writing process. She has an ipod classic, fine, maybe she has a flair for retro electronics. She posts sensitive information on reddit, because as we all know that's where the tech savvy kids hang out these days right? She's great at finding clues for cold cases by googling terms like "Jane doe silver earring". Her MGK-lite boyfriend can hack into street lights, apparently, and make them communicate in morse code. Streetlights function on timers, by the way, they're not connected to a network you can hack (traffic lights can be hacked sometimes, so maybe the writers just got their Google searches mixed up). Her tech genius role model, instead of saying "access the cameras, they're on a wireless network" says that video footage is "inside" of the characters? As if wireless networks just continuously project the content of security cameras into our bodies when we're in range? I would like to say the writers' ignorance is limited to tech, but it seems they also don't know how criminal investigations work.