Psylen

Such an average TV show that I watched it last year, forgot all about it, and it took me 3 episodes to remember I'd definitely seen the whole thing. Average on every single level except for the decent acting.

Truly awful. It's like a bingo full house of writing sins, every single episode. A meandering, nonsensical, pathetic waste of potential. These writers should never work in the industry ever again.

Positives: - The script isn't terrible. - The overall plot is actually pretty good. - Somehow it feels more faithful to the Pennywise of the books, than the more recent movies. Negatives: - Horror sections are too on-the-nose. - Not in the least bit scary. -The Pennywise makeup is the same as the recent movies, which looks goofy as hell.

Arguably the worst season yet. Episode 1 is decent but not great. 7/10 Episode 2 is nonsensical and a little bit ridiculous. 5/10 Episode 3 is dull, full of plot holes, and poorly acted. 3/10 Episode 4 isn't terrible, but it's pretty unimaginative. 6/10 Episode 5 is actually good, but not "Black Mirror" enough for me. 7/10 Episode 6 is a let down. 5/10

Why would you give such an amazing show to a writer who evidently has no idea what made season 1 so great? Season 4 is corporate garbage, filled with cliche pop song covers, a story that goes nowhere interesting, and a double plot twist that's just incredibly underwhelming. The characters are very well written, but that's all!

Excellent show. Allow me translate the "0" score reviews for you: "Woke agenda!" = They get upset every time they see a person with a different skin color. "She doesn't look like Ellie!" = They wanted to fantasize about an underage actress, but now they can't. "It's boring" = They have no attention span, no appreciation for atmospheric build up, and a low IQ. "Just play the game" = They hate that non-gamers are getting to experience a story they enjoyed. "Generic zombie show" = They have no appreciation for story TELLING, and only care about plot summaries, because they are stuck-focus dullards.

So far it's far and away a better show than Interview. Firstly, because it fulfills where Interview did not: the lingering and creepy atmosphere. Secondly, because the main characters aren't insufferably smug and off-putting. And thirdly, because it understands what made the source material great and it leans into that, despite the changes, rather than leaning away from the actual hooks of the original novels. Excited to see more, whereas I only made it 2/3rd of the way through the first Interview season before wondering why I was even watching anymore.

Look, it's a good vampire show. Louis is excellent, some of the changes are fairly welcome, the dialogue is pretty on-point, and it's incredibly high budget. So why the 6/10? Well, I'll start by saying I don't care that Louis is black. It works. I mark the show down because of a few things, and all of them at their core have to do with the fact that I don't feel as though the creators really GOT what made the gothic charm of the original book so powerful. The pace is all over the place. They spend too long in America, but it doesn't linger scene-to-scene. And Vampire Chronicles should really linger, with haunting quiet moments of reflection, slow scenic shots, and moments where they are showing - rather than telling - every emotion on the face of the characters. That's the one area the previous movie did well, which this show does so poorly. There's no pause for reflection - just a string of stitched-together scenes with all quiet cut out, like a mid 2000s YouTube video. But Interview should be quiet in between the storms, to reflect the life of the immortal beings it focusses on. My second major complaint is that they sexualise the characters. An absolutely marvellous thing about the books (and movie) was that it is a romance without it being about sex, gender, age ... anything. It's simply eternal love. The Anne Rice vampires were unable to have sex, and that really worked. Companions were companions, and it meant more than human love. I really don't care that they gayed it up by a factor of six. My complaint is that they changed the source material to move away from something which made Chronicles vampires so incredibly original and interesting. My last major complaint has to do with the casting of Lestat and Claudia. Lestat is supposed to be incredibly charming, but instead he comes off as poncy, smug, and unlikeable at times. The actor does incredibly well during scenes of anger or higher emotion, but scene to scene he doesn't work as Lestat. Meanwhile, this Claudia's performance pales in comparison to Dunst, but that's not my main issue with her. The biggest problem here - and perhaps time will tell it to be the biggest problem with the show - is that they got an 18 year old to play the part of a 14 year old, who was 10 in the movie and 5 in the books. Claudia's entire hook is that she's a child vampire. But she's not even that anymore. Further proof that the writers of this show don't get what made the books great. I'm excited to see where they take it, but seeing as Lestat is the most important character in the entire series, I'm not holding out a lot of hope due to the casting. They turned the Prince of Darkness into Pouting Prissy Queen (and not the good kind!), and that hurts right in the childhood.

Not scary, not that original, not even very well made. Each episode starts off with a done-to-death premise, and then shows way too much of the "horror" by the end, making it pretty unscary, and close to comical.