Ryan Murphy’s new legal drama All’s Fair premiered on Hulu on Tuesday and drew overwhelmingly negative reviews from major outlets. Critics flagged thin writing, uneven performances and a lack of emotional depth, and as of mid-day Tuesday the series registered a 0% critics rating on Rotten Tomatoes. The cast includes Kim Kardashian, Naomi Watts, Niecy Nash-Betts, Teyana Taylor, Matthew Noszka, Sarah Paulson and Glenn Close, but high-profile names have not shielded the show from harsh press. Industry reaction raises questions about the series’ prospects on streaming and the creative direction of its showrunner.
Key Takeaways
- All’s Fair debuted on Hulu Tuesday and features a largely star-studded cast including Kim Kardashian, Naomi Watts and Glenn Close.
- By mid-day Tuesday the series held a 0% critics score on Rotten Tomatoes, an unusually poor start for a high-profile launch.
- Multiple critics described the writing and characters as thin or underdeveloped; The Hollywood Reporter called the show “brain dead.”
- Several reviews singled out Kardashian’s performance as stiff and lacking authentic emotional notes.
- British outlets supplied particularly caustic takes: The Guardian labeled the series “existentially terrible,” while The Daily Telegraph awarded one star.
- USA Today’s reviewer went further, naming All’s Fair “the worst TV show of the year” and giving it a one-of-four-star assessment.
- Critics argued the show seems engineered for viral moments rather than sustained dramatic engagement, raising concerns about long-term viewer retention.
Background
All’s Fair is a Ryan Murphy-created legal drama built around a woman-only divorce law practice in California. Murphy’s previous television work—ranging from genre hits to provocative ensemble pieces—has set high expectations for audacious storytelling and cultural conversation. The series’ concept and its roster of high-profile actors aimed to combine star power with topical themes around gender and wealth.
Streaming premieres for auteur-driven shows often rely on early critical momentum and social buzz to drive audience sampling and platform promotion. Given Murphy’s track record with series that generate strong critical and cultural responses, industry observers anticipated a robust launch and debate. The quick accumulation of negative reviews therefore represents a notable divergence from those earlier patterns.
Main Event
The premiere episode of All’s Fair reached critics on Tuesday and was widely panned for narrative weaknesses and flat character work. Reviewers repeatedly described the series’ arcs as flimsy and its emotional stakes unclear, arguing that the show fails to provoke either empathy or sustained interest. The Rotten Tomatoes critics score reached 0% by mid-day Tuesday, reflecting near-unanimous negative assessments among reviewers listed on that aggregator at that time.
Angie Han of The Hollywood Reporter summarized her view by calling the series “brain dead,” adding that the drama lacks both credible motives and recognizably authentic emotion. Several reviewers focused on Kim Kardashian’s transition from reality star and public figure into scripted dramatic acting; multiple critics judged her performance as stiff and largely unpersuasive within the material provided. Other cast members, despite notable resumes, were not universally spared criticism.
Across outlets the language varied from sharp disappointment to outright condemnation. Lucy Mangan at The Guardian wrote that the series fell well below expected norms for contemporary TV, while Ed Power of The Daily Telegraph awarded the show one star and criticized its tone. USA Today’s reviewer labeled the series “the worst TV show of the year,” a headline that crystallized the severity of the critical backlash in some corners of the press.
Analysis & Implications
For Hulu and its parent Disney, a high-profile failure can carry both publicity and commercial costs. Negative reviews can dampen subscriber curiosity, reduce word-of-mouth pickup and make platform marketing efforts more expensive or less effective. That said, streaming audiences sometimes diverge from critical consensus—controversial or maligned shows can still generate viewing spikes if they become conversation drivers on social platforms.
For Ryan Murphy, All’s Fair represents a reputational risk after a string of series that positioned him as a reliable creator of provocative, attention-grabbing television. A critically panned release may prompt internal reassessment of tone and development processes, and could affect future pitching leverage with streamers. However, Murphy’s track record of generating cultural conversation means the show might still achieve high visibility even with poor reviews.
Cast members’ careers are also at stake in perception terms. For established actors like Naomi Watts and Glenn Close, a single poorly reviewed series is unlikely to be career-defining; for newer or high-profile entrants from different media—Kim Kardashian among them—a widely reported critical flop can affect future scripted opportunities. Ultimately, commercial metrics such as viewership, completion rates and social engagement will determine whether critics’ assessments translate into audience avoidance.
Comparison & Data
| Source | Assessment |
|---|---|
| Rotten Tomatoes (critics, mid-day Tuesday) | 0% critics rating |
| The Daily Telegraph (Ed Power) | One-star review |
| USA Today (Kelly Lawler) | Called it “the worst TV show of the year”; one of four stars |
| The Guardian (Lucy Mangan) | Described the series as deeply flawed and “existentially terrible” |
The table summarizes early critical markers visible in mainstream outlets and on the major aggregator. Those immediate indicators do not measure audience behavior; subscription platforms will also weigh viewership, retention and social engagement before deciding on marketing spend or renewal prospects. Early critical metrics can, however, shape initial perception and hiring momentum for involved creatives.
Reactions & Quotes
“Brain dead.”
Angie Han, The Hollywood Reporter
Han used the phrase to criticize both the script and the emotional core of the series, arguing that characters lack credible motives and the show aims more for viral moments than dramatic substance.
“Existentially terrible.”
Lucy Mangan, The Guardian
Mangan criticized the program for falling beneath the expected baseline of television craft, calling the series a surprisingly low point.
“The worst TV show of the year.”
Kelly Lawler, USA Today
Lawler’s headline encapsulated a sweeping negative judgment, adding that the scripts and performances failed to reach even rudimentary standards of dramatic television.
Unconfirmed
- The claim that cast and crew “do not think the reviews are fair” is an assertion carried in some summaries but lacks direct, verifiable on-the-record statements from multiple production members at this time.
- Suggestions that the show was deliberately engineered solely for viral clips rather than as a cohesive drama reflect critics’ readings of tone; internal creative intent has not been independently confirmed in public documents.
Bottom Line
All’s Fair opened to a notably hostile critical reception, with aggregated and individual reviews highlighting problems in writing, character development and some performances. For a series with high-profile talent and a prominent creator, the degree of negative coverage is striking and will influence early audience expectations and platform promotion.
That said, critical consensus is one of several inputs that determine a show’s fate on streaming platforms. Viewer engagement, social discourse and internal platform metrics will be decisive in renewal or cancellation decisions. For the creative teams involved, the immediate priority will likely be damage control through marketing, selective rebuttal and, if possible, rapid creative adjustments to improve reception.