His and Hers, Netflix’s latest binge-worthy mystery, has been described by critics as a twisty, addictive ride — until the ending apparently brings the momentum to an underwhelming halt.
Set in the small town of Dahlonega, Georgia, the six-part thriller stars Jon Bernthal and Tessa Thompson as an estranged husband and wife who are both drawn to a shocking murder case as a detective and a news reporter, respectively. The cast also includes actors Pablo Schreiber, Rebecca Rittenhouse, Crystal Fox, Marin Ireland, and Sunita Mani.
The limited series, released all at once Thursday, is an adaptation of Alice Feeney’s bestselling novel of the same name by Eileen and Lady Macbeth director William Oldroyd.
Thompson, who also executive produced the show, said in a Netflix press release upon the show’s premiere: “From the second I heard what Will was doing with Alice Feeney’s brilliant book to the moment I visited the town where our story is set, I was hooked.”
However, the acclaimed source material and notoriously talented lead actors were not enough to save the adaptation from criticisms targeting its clichéd voiceovers, underutilization of its ensemble cast, and far-fetched plot that fails to stick the landing.
“It’s one of those stories that makes so little sense when it’s done that it makes you angry, wondering why you wasted so much time on what’s ultimately a pretty gross piece of storytelling,” Brian Tallerico wrote for Roger Ebert.
The Hollywood Reporter’s Daniel Fienberg called the show the “first disappointment of the new year” and slammed Oldroyd for “fumbling the mystery’s structuring device and failing to build any momentum on the way to an inept finale with two endings — one stupid and obvious, the other merely stupid.”
Fienberg went on to dub the series’ conclusion as “actively irritating,” rounding out the common theme of reviewers being frustrated by absurd plot holes that are left in the ending.
In addition to calling out one-dimensional characters and lazy writing, the most common trend throughout reviews from reputable outlets appeared to be the use of the word “glossy” — suggesting that critics are deeming the show as easily watchable, but not something with substance that sticks.
However, some enjoyed the one-two punch of the series finale and encouraged other viewers to not think too hard about the generic twists and turns.
TV critic Lucy Mangan wrote for The Guardian: “The twists, they are plentiful. The absurdities, they multiply. The viewerly enjoyment, it increases. The script – intoxicating mercenariness aside – is serviceable. The endeavor is bingeable. Nobody needs more, this early in the year.”
