I was really excited when seeing the trailer of this show, because I loved the book and I kept waiting for it to be turned into a movie for years. But I felt really really disappointed.
I will start by saying what I liked about the show. I loved the melancholic atmosphere, I really enjoyed the soundtrack (50 Cent, Gorillaz and Jet for example) and I think the show makers did a great job selecting some actors, especially Denny Love as the Colonel and Jay Lee as Takumi. I also really liked Dr. Hyde, the Colonel's mother and the Eagle. The setting was beautiful, I really liked the landscapes and overall the visual side.
But... 1) I was a teenager in 2005, there is no way the setting, the clothes, the technology are even remotely close to the reality. Every teenager I knew had a cellphone (with colored display) and CDs were no longer a thing, many people were already using mp3players. And I'm from Romania, not really the richest country. Also in my opinion 2005 fashion was not well represented, I remember clearly the highlights of 2005 being boho-chic style, skinny jeans, cargo pants and those funny colorful silicone cause bracelets. The clothes and technology of the show looked like they were from the 90's. 2) Lara Buterskaya is not a Romanian name, it's a Slavic one. And so was the name of the character's dog, sounded Russian. Not many people know this, but we are not Slavs, we are Latins and Romanian is a Romance language (Like French, Italian, Spanish and Portugese). I know that Lara's character was also poorly researched in the book. But it's sad that Hollywood talks so much about "representation", meanwhile the show makers couldn't take 10 seconds of their time to research Romania. I obviously didn't mind that the actress who played Lara was Russian but I think it would've been better if she tried a Romanian accent. 3) Which leads me to the next problem: Hollywood hypocrisy. Didn't care about researching Romania but shoved the whole 3rd wave feminism concepts, "white privilege" and "the patriarchy" down our throats. "Wokeness" was not a thing in 2005. Also, it was completely unnecessary for the story. Why change Alaska so much? It didn't add anything valuable to the show. 4) In the book, Alaska was flawed but charismatic. In this show she is just a pretty face but she is so annoying, it's unbearable. I read that the show makers were trying not make her a "Manic Pixie Dream Girl" but in my opinion, they failed miserably. There was nothing to love about her, she just had an unhealthy obsession with sexism and misogyny. I just didn't like Alaska at all. If she was not such a pretty girl, nobody would have liked her, especially not her guy friends. There was nothing to like about her. Like another reviewer said, in "13 Reasons Why" Hannah Baker was a well-written character in the show. She made viewers feel sympathy for her because she was likeable. Alaska on the other hand... well no point repeating myself. 5) The dialogue between characters were completely unrealistic. No sane teenager talks like that. They tried to make them edgy, philosophical and "cool" but the end result was taking the viewers away from the immersion into the story. It was so clear we were watching written dialogues, it felt so unnatural. 6) They changed so much of the story. The main point of the book (in my view) was to ask questions about the meaning of life and existentialism but in this show, apart from the horrible dialogues we just got a lot of lame pranks.
I think the show could have been great with more research, less virtue signaling and just more soul put into it. Too bad it wasn't the case.
I will start by saying what I liked about the show. I loved the melancholic atmosphere, I really enjoyed the soundtrack (50 Cent, Gorillaz and Jet for example) and I think the show makers did a great job selecting some actors, especially Denny Love as the Colonel and Jay Lee as Takumi. I also really liked Dr. Hyde, the Colonel's mother and the Eagle. The setting was beautiful, I really liked the landscapes and overall the visual side.
But... 1) I was a teenager in 2005, there is no way the setting, the clothes, the technology are even remotely close to the reality. Every teenager I knew had a cellphone (with colored display) and CDs were no longer a thing, many people were already using mp3players. And I'm from Romania, not really the richest country. Also in my opinion 2005 fashion was not well represented, I remember clearly the highlights of 2005 being boho-chic style, skinny jeans, cargo pants and those funny colorful silicone cause bracelets. The clothes and technology of the show looked like they were from the 90's. 2) Lara Buterskaya is not a Romanian name, it's a Slavic one. And so was the name of the character's dog, sounded Russian. Not many people know this, but we are not Slavs, we are Latins and Romanian is a Romance language (Like French, Italian, Spanish and Portugese). I know that Lara's character was also poorly researched in the book. But it's sad that Hollywood talks so much about "representation", meanwhile the show makers couldn't take 10 seconds of their time to research Romania. I obviously didn't mind that the actress who played Lara was Russian but I think it would've been better if she tried a Romanian accent. 3) Which leads me to the next problem: Hollywood hypocrisy. Didn't care about researching Romania but shoved the whole 3rd wave feminism concepts, "white privilege" and "the patriarchy" down our throats. "Wokeness" was not a thing in 2005. Also, it was completely unnecessary for the story. Why change Alaska so much? It didn't add anything valuable to the show. 4) In the book, Alaska was flawed but charismatic. In this show she is just a pretty face but she is so annoying, it's unbearable. I read that the show makers were trying not make her a "Manic Pixie Dream Girl" but in my opinion, they failed miserably. There was nothing to love about her, she just had an unhealthy obsession with sexism and misogyny. I just didn't like Alaska at all. If she was not such a pretty girl, nobody would have liked her, especially not her guy friends. There was nothing to like about her. Like another reviewer said, in "13 Reasons Why" Hannah Baker was a well-written character in the show. She made viewers feel sympathy for her because she was likeable. Alaska on the other hand... well no point repeating myself. 5) The dialogue between characters were completely unrealistic. No sane teenager talks like that. They tried to make them edgy, philosophical and "cool" but the end result was taking the viewers away from the immersion into the story. It was so clear we were watching written dialogues, it felt so unnatural. 6) They changed so much of the story. The main point of the book (in my view) was to ask questions about the meaning of life and existentialism but in this show, apart from the horrible dialogues we just got a lot of lame pranks.
I think the show could have been great with more research, less virtue signaling and just more soul put into it. Too bad it wasn't the case.