This should be a 7.5 but I rounded but bc it's the nice thing to do especially because this is way better than a 6.4. I've read the user reviews and a lot of them bash the story telling, claiming to be very disappointed because they were very interested in the subject matter yet the show did not provide the straightforward clinical examination they were expecting. It seems as though the trailer may have created expectations that the show did not deliver. I watched this without having seen a trailer and was pleasantly refreshed by the choice to use this innovative style of docudrama. To all of the reviewers saying why on earth would they do this? Let's call it what it is: it's ripping off the Big Short, which was a hugely successful and applauded business film. The style of the big short made a story about finance accessible to people unfamiliar with the subject matter. I'm glad NatGeo tried to do something different. It definitely hits and misses. Certain aspects of it are great, while others, like some of the casting decisions, the rapping, super long dance sequences, cartoonish hypotheticals, fourth wall breaking (which I didn't hate) take the viewer of the story. Here's what I do applaud this series for and why I give it a high rating, and why it hooked me: the storylines. I have never heard of Michael Fenne, Pixelon or The Globe.com. If it weren't for this series, I'm sure I'd never have heard about these companies. Also, Netscape is usually second fiddle to other stories and I loved getting a deep dive. I'm a huge fan of the decision to focus on these stories. I find them very compelling and watching them dramatized with the real life talking heads worked for me. Steve Zahn as Michael Fenne is extraordinary. While it's stylistic choices may turn some off, especially those expecting something straightforward, I found myself looking forward to the next episode while watching this series and I personally can't say that for too many shows these days.
