Apple TV's new crime thriller show features two of my favorite actors but not much else

- Rating: 2/5 Stars
- Verdict: "Lucky" promises a crime thriller centered on Anya Taylor-Joy's titular character. But its two-episode premiere is often a trope-laden copy of better crime thrillers. Worst of all, it fails to engage the viewer, though the climax of episode 2 offers some promise.
- Premiere date/time: Episodes 1-2 streaming now
- Streaming service/channel: Streaming on Apple TV
"Lucky" felt like an easy win for Apple TV. It's a crime thriller miniseries starring Anya Taylor-Joy, Annette Bening, and Timothy Olyphant. As evidenced by the 2026 Emmy nominations, Apple has done more with less. I was eager to see how this tense thriller would play out.
Unfortunately, a little under two hours later, I turned off the TV, underwhelmed and uninterested in watching more. While it has a promising premise, this series feels like one crime thriller trope after another. Aunjanue Ellis-Taylor's Agent Billie Rand is almost criminally uninspired. It brings nothing new to the archetype of a "hardass" cop that has a score to settle.
In this case, the score to settle is with Priscilla Matheson (Annette Bening). Though upon further prodding from Rand's boss, it seems the FBI agent really wants to take down Wayne Whittaker (William Fitchner).
Through the nearly 100 minutes we watch between the two episodes in this series premiere, Whittaker is perhaps the only intriguing character we're introduced to. We only get a brief scene with him, but he seems to have an evil within him that the others in this show don't possess. Which is saying something, given that even our protagonist, the titular Lucky (Taylor-Joy), is a con woman who stole millions of dollars and kills a man with a screwdriver in the first episode. There are no good guys here, and only a few good characters.
Spoilers ahead for "Lucky" series premiere (episodes 1-2)

'Lucky' feels like a book adaptation
Something really popular in Hollywood right now is to adapt popular novels. I probably don't even need to tell you this. Whether it's "Big Little Lies," "Little Fires Everywhere" or "Tiny Beautiful Things," adapting novels into movies and shows is more prolific than ever.
And I picked those three examples because they're all produced by Reese Witherspoon's Hello Sunshine company, which also produced "Lucky."
Now, I'm not here to say that this show is bad because it's produced by Hello Sunshine. Witherspoon's company also produced "Gone Girl," a certified critical and commercial hit. But this show feels like it's a book adaptation, and I don't mean that as a compliment.
The premise for "Lucky" is relatively simple. Lucky Armstrong and her partner/husband, Cary (Drew Starkey), have robbed someone of a suitcase full of cash. They have to leave the country the next morning or risk being caught. The next morning, Lucky wakes up late to discover Cary has left with the cash, leaving her to the wolves.
The wolves aren't just the police (or, more accurately, the FBI). There's Priscilla (Bening), who is not just the person Lucky and Cary robbed, but also Cary's mother. She has a past with two men: Wayne Whittaker, whose money was really stolen, and John Armstrong, Lucky's dad, who is also a conman and currently in prison.
Those are the bones of a compelling crime thriller. But for most of the two episodes released so far, we're mostly just following Lucky as she runs from the FBI and Priscilla. There are some scenes with other POV characters, but not many. Especially in the first episode, which is almost just one extended chase.
This felt like a case of the script following the book too closely. I wish the show had spent far more time with the other players in this game of cat and mouse, instead of an extended scene of Lucky playing pretend big sister for some girls out in the desert. It got to the point where I wrote in my notes, "Is this a book adaptation?" Sure enough, it is.
Verdict: This crime thriller's luck has run out
Maybe you'll have had a better time with "Lucky" than I did. Maybe I'm too harsh on it for bringing nothing new to the table. But ultimately, I not only don't want to watch another episode, but I'd much rather just watch something else.
Which is a shame, because there are a few scenes that show some promise. The final climactic scene of episode 2 is probably the most engaging of the entire series to date. So there is part of me that wonders if I shouldn't stick with it to see if things get better.
But a larger part of me senses that this crime thriller is afraid to break away from its source material. It's unwilling to be too different, even if it ultimately produces more engaging TV.
So, for the first time, I'm recommending you don't watch something that has Timothy Olyphant in it. And for those who know me, that's about as damning an indictment of a show that I can possibly give.
More from Tom's Guide
This is a preview from the original publisher. Continue reading at the source:
Read Full Article on tomsguide.com →
