Ben Halpern

Posted on Apr 23, 2020

[SPOILERS] Anybody watch Devs on Hulu? What did you think?

#discuss #watercooler

Top comments (22)

Ben Halpern • Apr 23 '20

I thought the show did a pretty good job of summing up some of the oddball themes of San Francisco and Silicon Valley. I think it got the tone right in a lot of ways.

The aesthetics of the compound were a lot of fun, as was the idea of this penultimate computer project being worked on by mad scientists of sorts.

Most of the logic was pretty flimsey and you sort of have to suspend disbelief for every detail. These kinds of mid-budget slow moving serious sci-fi shows are not my favorite genre but I definitely think it would appeal to anyone who is into this sort of show.

Ultimately I'm glad I watched it even though it's flawed.

I'd love to see Nick Offerman in a similar role in maybe a bigger budget movie that sands down all the rough edges.

Sonoya Mizuno was a believable lead character and played the part well for the tone they were getting at.

Stephen McKinley Henderson as Stewart was probably my favorite character and I wish they'd given him more to do or better explained his motivations.

Andrew Corsini • Apr 23 '20

I 100% agree with Stewart having a bigger role, or at least better explain motivations. For me, especially, in the end, it just seemed random.

Overall, it was a decent show in my book. Definitely surprised me a few times. But I was hoping for more in some way. I don't know where or how, but it felt like it could have delivered more.

Ben Halpern • Apr 23 '20

Yeah, that moment was super random and not set up at all. Stewart had some of the best scenes and is one of the only likeable characters really.

It's weird that they basically told us nothing about him but then he randomly dropped the elevator at the end.

...and yeah I definitely would have hoped for more. Ended up just taking it for what it was.

Richard Kichenama • Apr 23 '20

I agree that the show is good and I am glad that I watched the season. I would like to ask what part of the logic presented seemed flimsy, though.

From Lily's (Sonoya Mizuno) perspective, I get that being a prodigy attempting to find herself, a "bad boyfriend", and unintentionally finding herself in an existential debate between deterministic and many-worlds philosophy, did have me head scratching a few times. Often it was the horror movie trope of the final girl doing the thing that most risks her life rather than preserve it.

Forest (Nick "Epic Beard" Offerman) battling with guilt seemed a bit too obvious, but nearly perfect as a device to move the plot forward. Not being a "technical" tech entrepreneur, grief pushed him to essentially will a unit test on whether he could be at fault for the loss of his daughter (not so much his wife, though). Katie (Alison Pill) is the evil(?) genius that is enlisted at first to help ultimately takes charge in seeing the experiment to fruition. Forest gets the credit, but Katie is the actual mastermind that reinforces the shared passion.

That gets me to Stewart (Stephen McKinley Henderson). Though secondary or tertiary characters, Stewart and Lyndon (Cailee Spaeny) are essentially the more emotional mirrors to Forest and Katie. Katie initially is very driven toward determinism and Lyndon struggled with it as it introduced static, ultimately finding that 'expanding the parameters' to include many-worlds brought about higher fidelity. Forest, driven by negative emotions, wants to literally go back and, through dogmatic adherence to determinism, relies on the circular logic that he will be successful because everything has been leading up to his success. Stewart is in awe of it all, and the possibilities that lay in being able to go back and forth to see simulations of reality, but as time goes on, realizes that if you know the past and can see the future, the present becomes inevitable/predetermined.

Free will was central to all the characters growth during the season, but particularly Stewart. The laid back veteran coder, upon seeing the bigger picture of what Forest and Katie created, is put in the position of seeing a prediction of the future go from 4k HD clarity to complete static and concludes that reality would end at that moment.

Seanmclem • Apr 23 '20

Yeah Stewart's motivations confused me. Why would breaking the elevator stop the project?

I was confused why they died after falling until I remembered it was in a vacuum, so no air.

Isaac Lyman • Apr 23 '20

I've read quite a lot of hard sci-fi and speculative fiction lately. The whole genre is pizza to me. So Devs was a shoo-in for my watchlist as soon as I saw the first trailer. I really enjoyed seeing Offerman in a serious role, he's so much more versatile than I would have guessed. Overall, the series did a lot of things right, and the finale managed to be ambitious without venturing too far into self-parody.

There were definitely some plot holes along the way (I think Alex Garland expects audiences to ignore those in favor of the meticulously composed sets and soundscapes, and hey, I'm willing to do that). And the technological premise only reached the level of what I would call "Wikipedia-hard" science fiction. But still an enjoyable romp.

I appreciate a show with a beginning and an end. Too many good sci-fi shows end up falling apart when they have to build a plot beyond one season.

Michal Kunikowski • Apr 24 '20

Little similar to Westword Season 3 , there is also super computer with inteligence :)
Westword has better soundtrack :)
youtube.com/watch?v=TgBtBkW0u8Y
youtube.com/watch?v=iHICOq0b3Xg

OscarDOM • Apr 23 '20

Art direction is awesome: music, photography, sound, colors, locations... everything!
The story and the topic itself to me are super interesing. Also the execution of all of it. Maybe the TV Show starts on a futuristic sci-fi and evolves into a... kind of morale dilema but in any case to me it's super cool. I highly recommend it.

As mentioned on some comments already, the characters are not the main focus of attention so they are not deeply developed during the story but... to me... they do a good job!

securibee 🐝 • Apr 23 '20

I thought it was a nice watch, well made with great acting. The plot was interesting and how it tied in with real concepts.

A bunch of the cast were new to me. I also had no idea Nick Offerman had that range, ie I wrongly assumed he only did comedy.

What set it apart imo was the soundtrack. Overall I enjoyed the entire vibe.

Sharad Raj (He/Him) • Apr 23 '20

Seems like I need to watch now 🤓

Michael Lueckl • Apr 23 '20 • Edited

Although not my favorite it was kinda fun to watch, especially because of Nick Offerman.
The idea of what could be possible with this technology is really cool but the execution and the lack of technical detail was why it lost it's potential to be a great show for me.

I wished more shows would allow themselves to show more of the technical aspect.
Not every show can be as perfect as Mr. Robot, unfortunately ...

John Keers • May 1 '20

Binged watched all episodes! I liked it, yes it is a bit far fetched but a decent plot.

I'm sure there are some similar oddball characters in Silicon Valley dreaming of how quantum computing can change the world (and I'm sure it will one day but just not have the ability as the one in the show!!)