Evil Review: Pilot (Season 1 Episode 1)
Evil is off to a seriously scary and satisfying start.
The fright on Evil Season 1 Episode 1, “Pilot,” pulls back right before it crosses the line of too intense.
That is good because as a TV series, we need to know it’s safe to come back each week.
Unlike a film, a television show can’t go full horror in the first hour.
There are a few elements that don’t quite work on the new program, but there are more that do.
There is something creepy for everyone. For me, nightmare demon George (the least scary name?) pissing in the corner makes my hair raise. It’s so disgusting and in violation of her space. Blech, I can’t even stand thinking about it.
Others might find the stabbing or the whispery noises elicit their skin crawlies. There is a nice variety of angles to the creep out, in content and in the cinematography, and it works to the show’s benefit.
Though Evil legitimately scares me, its strongest suits are its thesis and its characterization of Kristen.
Mid-episode, the priest in training David Dacosta, played by the always excellent Mike Colter, summarizes what seems to be the key inquiry of the show.
DAVID DACOSTA: Science is only good for repeatable phenomena. And most of life, the most interesting parts, don’t repeat.
That is a life-changing reframing of science! It makes me think deeply about how we as humans study our world and the limitations of what we can know.
Kristen Bouchard played by Katja Herbers takes in this positing and doesn’t reject it. She is sturdy in her disbelief in demon and ghosts, but it doesn’t seem quite right to call her a skeptic either.
I would say that she is present.
The first episode splits the baby in regards to believers and non-believers of supernatural influences. The serial killer was never possessed but the truly evil Dr. Townsend influences him almost like a possession.
It leaves the outstanding question: can there be demons in human form that we can’t recognize as such because of modern life?
There are other deep, middle of the night, existential questions that the pilot touches on. In a landscape of many horror-inducing shows, the emphasis on what evil is, what God is, what humans are capable of, and what is real, is satisfying.
Evil gives us creme brulee when other shows are just giving us whipped cream.
The pilot episode takes time to introduce us to Kristen Bouchard and even with the devoted exposition, her life is brimming with complexities that couldn’t possibly be summed up in a single hour. I’m positively intrigued.
First of all, she has FOUR DAUGHTERS, who seem very close in age, that she is caring for by herself because her husband is off climbing mountains.
WHAT?!
That is so random on a supernatural crime thriller. Other random tidbits we learn include that grandma likes to party and mommy-Kristen does a really specific (and adorable) Sicilian accent.
And, of course, my very favorite, Kristen keeps her multiple fridges stocked with cans of margaritas! Hallelujah, this is the type of woman I need in my life.
I absolutely love the detailed strangeness.
Even though Kristen is facing some haunting circumstances, including those evil debt collectors, her presentation is warm.
I am thoroughly fascinated by her character and I am looking forward to learning what all of these idiosyncrasies mean for her journey into the supernatural.
The show does a poor job of lighting Mike Colter properly. Hopefully, future episodes will utilize the strengths of directors of color who have dark skin like Colter so the lighting can take full advantage of his physicality.
Along the same lines, the exciting cinematography with quirky angles and quick transitions could be dialed back a couple of notches. It is overdone at times and takes away from the excellent tension and suspense that the story builds.
The dialogue is also occasionally too simple or obvious, like with the discussion of social media connecting bad people. But, I think that pilots need that hammer-over-the-head type of content to let us know what the show will be about.
So, no need for any rosaries. Evil is forgiven.
The stumbles are nothing too worrisome. The ways in which Evil hits its stride in the very first episode are remarkable and make it one of the very best new shows of the season.
Confessional
- Aasif Mandvi as Ben Shakir is HOT! I would no be opposed to a love triangle.
- Hot Priest number 2!
- I adore all of the houses on the show. So interesting to see the different architecture.
- CANNED MARGARITAS. I repeat, CANNED MARGARITAS.
- I don’t really believe in demons, but I love that the show is considering all different types of things that go bump in the night. Good for a skeptic.
- Kristen’s husband is a full-on scrub.
- George looks too much like the Night King for me to take him seriously.
What did you think of this episode of Evil? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
Critic Rating:
User Rating:
Evil airs Thursdays at 10/9c on CBS.
Follow us on Twitter and on 
Instagram!
Want more from Tell-Tale TV? Subscribe to our newsletter here!
Janelle Ureta
Janelle Ureta is equal parts Veronica Mars, Raven Reyes, and Rebecca Bunch, but she aspires to add some Tammy Taylor to the mix. An attorney turned teacher, Janelle believes in the power of a well-told story. She is currently exploring how to tell short stories, 140 characters or less, on twitter. She loves to talk about TV, and right now she can't shut up about Timeless, Dear White People, Crazy Ex-Girlfriend, The 100, or Younger.
2 comments
I would not be opposed to* There! FTFY 😊
Ahh…
So you got screeners from CBS®, the flagship network( allegedly-popular-as “The Big Brother Network”*) or CBS® Television Studios( both concerns of a soon-to-be-restructured Empire)?
Because only THAT would seem to help reasonably explain why you called the episode title as mere “Pilot” and above all, why the full-name of Mr Mandviwala’s role is “Ben Shroff” in image-caps — a significant distinction from the finalised last-/sur-name( hat-tip for those totally alien to either of Arabo-Islamic and South Asian onomastics**), as reflected in the one-and-only mention of the character in this article’s in-body text. Which reminds me, interestingly: Changing the identity-markers of minority-characters at “last hour/minute” in Murican TV shows has turned into a breakout phenomenon, nowadays. I wonder why that could be the case, brain-teaser for spare-time: Thoughts? Any sociological factors behind these occurrences or..? I’m not willing to raise racial-angle( at least as of now) because as an overseas audience-member, “racism” is not the only type of ethnocentrism — certainly even across the “First World”***.
Or.. Have you just faithfully replicated the CBS®’ PR material?****
No words for him[ besides that drive-by note], though? 😔 Damn…! You should’ve. Sure, he got the least out of all 3( Mr Emerson’s doesn’t count because as an antagonist, it appears to be an artistic-discretion) — but his role’s beliefs on either side of the coin and his speciality were established, after all. I haven’t even watched almost any of Mr Mandviwala’s work, but I’ve heard about him a plenty — so that was my foremost-reason why I wanted to watch. Besides I haven’t got much to do in “Lockdown woes” and the show is available for free and from “The Kings”, anyways. I do agree wholeheartedly that he’s ♨️, though. From his very first scene[ the introductory shots through Kristen confronting the just-familiarised, then-strangers had him first before Mr Colter’s role], I was feeling( what’s-that-word? Errmmm.. Ha!) “vibes” coming off of him.
Must note: Not in a traditional/stereotypical way, though. To spell-out: He didn’t come across as a “model-hot” to me.( A fact I’m learning to appreciate in a world panculturally dominated by the interests benefiting the ‘Big Cosmetics'( no pun intended) industry, something which has pigeonholed cisfemales( if not outright oppressed) women because they had to be “presentable”( read sexually-attractive when the selective coverings are abrogated) to cisfemales and matriarchal authority-figures who just reinforced the tropes of patriarchy. No wonder, that it was eventually gonna harm cismale as well — sooner, or later.)
Moving on.. I found George as goofy, though. Not just pissing( which sold it!), but his mannerisms and phraseology whilst “talking to” Ms Kuhtyā’s character. Hopefully, given the hype behind the “King Size®” couple assumably antithetical to THAT ‘mediæval Anglo 🐉’ franchise by HBO®( as an avid non-viewer*****, I can confidently( perhaps arrogantly) take solace in the fact that I never could come across watching that show[ for an entirety of an episode]!), I hope( I’ve taken a side, on science — but only this once! 😜) that’s totally deliberate but not as some “comic-relief” or so.. He won’t be a surprise, unlike the[ TV’s] Night King.
I couldn’t notice the lighting problem you’re referring to, actually. But then..( PERSONAL-DISCLOSURE:) I’ve myopia so.. I’ll try to be on the lookout, hopefully.
I’m undecided on Kristen, as yet. But yeah.. Hopefully, “the Kings” won’t make her daughters blather simultaneously frequently — something I’ve come to know that they do so in high-frequency for characters in ‘The Good Fight®’. Whilst one might find an appreciation for their writing-staff[ potentially] wasting so many lines of[ arguably insignificant] dialogue, but for myself: It’s so annoying, that it has become THAT MUCH that it sounds as if I’m gonna get at least a nightmare anyday, now. Something which I don’t want, given there’s enough noise-pollution in my household already. If[ hypothetically] given the choice, I would rather welcome George! No, seriously. The brain is resting during the sleep, I don’t want that “rest” to be that exerting — as well. If that means making them all introverted, stereotypically-silent offsprings: Then I’m afraid to express that I’m actually gravitating towards that as a compro-resolve. And Believe It Or Not( nothing to do with a certain IP), I’m not one of those to actually get annoyed by fictional minors. I actually enjoy them, most of the time. Last, but not the least: Is CBS® pulling off a ‘Young Sheldon®’ in their[ maternal] granny, though? Seems exactly the route “The Kings” have chosen, for her.
⏎
*Pun intended, totally.
**Specifically, naming-conventions( ‘nomenclature’ is not a popular synonym, but interchangeable — nevertheless).
***Even though the term is so popular, that it gets thrown around a lot when discussing topics relevant to other forms of ethnocentrism and xenophobia. Like, a lot-lot. Not that I must blame.
****Actually, a very common cause for such goof-ups across the ‘pop-Interweb’ multiverse — as I’ve learned from the sum-total of my own personal observations.
*****At last, time for a[n] generic/off-topic trivia: I don’t consider a “fan[atic]”/“st[alking f]an[atic]” of anybody, or anything. Let alone “The Kings” or that fantasy adaptation.
You illustrate some forced statements.
Comments are closed.