Humans: A Review of Reviewers


Looking through many of the reviews of the first US aired episode of Humans, there is a marked division among the writers.

The first group seems interested mainly in Rationality:  How plausible is the plot?  Haven’t we seen this before?  Nothing new here, etc.

The second group are Emotionally involved:  A look at ourselves.  A study in humanness.

It is the second group who have my admiration.  This is an art form.  It requires emotion.  It invokes emotion.  Among these, there is one who has stood out for me.  Kyle Fowle, Entertainment Weekly, has approached this series, even so early on, with an understanding of its intent and the manner of its execution.  An example:  The first group say “Anita kidnaps Sophie”.  Where is the ‘looking deeper’ in that judgmental phrase?

Kyle Fowle describes it as wandering into the night with the child in her arms.  One can feel the difference with no further explanation.


One comment on “Humans: A Review of Reviewers

  1. Twosocks says:

    Isn’t Humans supposed to be mysterious? Why would they give away everything right at the beginning? Where’s the drama in that? I’m with you, why are they looking for ‘rational’ from the first episode? Good scifi has never been about the wonder of technology. It’s about living beings. Which is why the first Star Wars movies were good and the last three were junk–Lucas forgot about that and became engrossed with his mechanical CGI creations. And I think PJ did the same with The Hobbit.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s