Categories
Reviews Web Series Reviews

‘From’ horror series is interesting & gripping, but how much patience can we have?

“From” is a horror series that grabs your attention with its eerie town and terrifying creatures, but after three seasons, I’m still left in the dark about the central mystery that keeps everyone trapped.

The slow drip of information keeps me hooked with its tantalizing hints, yet my patience is wearing thin as I wait for meaningful answers that never seem to arrive. With a fourth season on the horizon, I’m seriously questioning whether to stick around for more or cut my losses and move on to something less frustrating.

Why “From” Hooks You Right Away

“From” is a horror series that immediately hooks you with its unsettling atmosphere and high stakes that make every episode feel urgent. The show features a mysterious town you can’t escape, terrifying creatures that stalk the night, and relatable characters like Boyd, the determined sheriff who fights tooth and nail to protect the trapped residents.

From also shows how human beings organize themselves for survival

However, the core mystery—why this town traps people and unleashes monsters—remains frustratingly unsolved after three full seasons of twists and turns. At this point, it feels like the creators are toying with viewers, stringing us along without providing the satisfying answers we’ve been chasing since day one.

The show excels at building tension and delivering jump scares, with scenes that leave you clutching your blanket in suspense. Yet, the lack of progress in uncovering the town’s secrets makes it hard to stay invested, especially when the characters seem just as lost and confused as I am watching them.

I used to love the thrill of piecing together clues, like the strange symbols or the creepy radio transmissions, but now it feels like a never-ending puzzle with no solution in sight. The constant teasing of revelations that never materialize has turned my initial excitement into a growing sense of exasperation that’s tough to shake.

The Good stuff that keeps me watching

The performances are a highlight, particularly Harold Perrineau as Boyd, who brings depth and intensity to his role as the town’s beleaguered leader. His struggle to maintain hope while grappling with his own fears and doubts adds a layer of emotional resonance that makes the horror hit even harder.

The creature design is also impressive, with monsters that are genuinely frightening and creatively conceived, like the grinning ghouls that mimic human voices to lure victims. The show’s visual style, from the foggy, claustrophobic forests to the dilapidated buildings, enhances the sense of dread and isolation that permeates every frame.

But even these strengths can’t fully compensate for the narrative stagnation that’s starting to define the series. The show’s reluctance to provide substantive answers makes it feel like it’s prioritizing suspense over storytelling, leaving me wanting more than just cheap thrills.

The characters’ repeated attempts to solve the mystery are relatable, as they mirror my own frustration with the lack of clarity after so many episodes. Yet, their lack of progress—whether it’s decoding the talismans or figuring out the town’s rules—only amplifies the sense that the show is spinning its wheels with no end in sight.

Where it starts to fall apart

The third season introduced new elements, like the concept of reincarnation and a mysterious figure known as the Man in Yellow, which piqued my interest all over again. While these additions are intriguing and hint at a bigger picture, they also raise more questions without resolving existing ones, further complicating an already convoluted plot that’s tough to follow.

The show’s pacing is a double-edged sword: it builds suspense effectively with long, tense silences, but it also tests the viewer’s endurance by dragging out the story unnecessarily. After 30 episodes, the slow burn has become a slow crawl, and I’m not sure how much longer I can hold on without some kind of payoff.

The announcement of a fourth season has left me torn between curiosity and skepticism. On one hand, I’m eager to see if the show will finally deliver the answers I’ve been waiting for; on the other, I’m wary of investing more time only to be disappointed again by another season of vague hints.

Perhaps the show is aiming for a long-term payoff that ties everything together brilliantly, but I worry that by the time the mystery is revealed, I won’t care anymore. The risk of narrative fatigue is real, and I don’t want to be one of those viewers who sticks around out of obligation rather than genuine interest in the outcome.

Should I keep going or Give Up?

Some fans argue that the journey is more important than the destination, praising the show’s strength in its atmosphere and character development over plot resolution. While I appreciate the moody vibes and complex characters, I still believe that a satisfying resolution is crucial to making the journey worthwhile and not just a waste of time.

Others might enjoy the endless speculation and theorizing, diving into online forums to dissect every detail like the meaning of the crows or the origin of the monsters. But I’ve reached a point where I need more than just breadcrumbs—I want to see the characters make meaningful progress, not just react to the latest supernatural occurrence with wide-eyed panic.

Ultimately, my decision to continue watching will depend on whether the show can strike a better balance between mystery and revelation in the next season. If the fourth season promises to accelerate the pace and provide some closure—like explaining the town’s purpose—I might give it a chance; otherwise, I may have to bid farewell to “From” for good.

It’s a shame because the show has so much potential, with its talented cast, chilling visuals, and a unique premise that could set it apart from other horror series. If only the creators would trust their audience enough to share more of the story, “From” could be a standout hit instead of a frustrating tease.

Final thoughts on “From”

“From” is a horror series that excels in creating a tense and eerie atmosphere, but its refusal to reveal its central mystery after three seasons is a significant drawback that’s hard to overlook. The strong performances, like Catalina Sandino Moreno’s desperate Tabitha, and creative creature design are commendable, yet the lack of narrative progress makes it difficult to remain engaged week after week.

The show’s slow pacing and reluctance to provide answers may appeal to viewers who love ambiguity, but for me, it’s a frustrating experience that has me considering whether to continue watching. With a fourth season on the way, I hope the creators will address these concerns and deliver the revelations that fans like me have been patiently—or impatiently—waiting for.

In the end, “From” is a mixed bag: it’s gripping and well-crafted, but its unwillingness to move the story forward is a major flaw that overshadows its strengths. I’m left with a tough decision—stick around and hope for the best, or walk away and preserve my sanity before I get too burnt out.

For now, I’ll keep an eye on reviews and fan reactions when the fourth season arrives to gauge if it’s worth my time. Maybe the show will surprise me and make the wait worthwhile, but I’m not holding my breath after three seasons of dangling carrots.

Categories
Celebrities

Jerome Flynn: Acclaimed British Actor, Singer & Game of Thrones Star

Name: Jerome Flynn

Profession: Actor, singer

Born: March 16, 1963 in Bromley, Kent, England, UK

Nationality: British

Known for: Game of Thrones, Soldier Soldier, Ripper Street, Robson & Jerome

Biography:

Jerome Patrick Flynn is a British actor and singer born on March 16, 1963 in Bromley, Kent. Growing up in a family immersed in the performing arts, his father being actor Eric Flynn and his mother a drama teacher, he developed a passion for acting early on, alongside his siblings. 

He rose to prominence as Corporal Paddy Garvey in the ITV series Soldier Soldier, a role that unexpectedly paved the way for a successful music career as part of the duo Robson & Jerome. Their rendition of “Unchained Melody” topped the UK charts for seven weeks in the mid-1990s, marking one of the era’s most iconic musical successes. 

Flynn later captivated international audiences with his portrayal of the roguish Bronn in HBO’s Game of Thrones and as Detective Sergeant Bennet Drake in BBC’s Ripper Street. A committed vegetarian since the age of 18, he also maintains a deep connection to nature, a value reflected in both his personal life and diverse career across television, film, and music.

Awards and Accolades:

  • British Academy Television Award nomination for Best Supporting Actor (Ripper Street)
  • Screen Actors Guild Award nominations as part of the Game of Thrones ensemble

Interesting Facts:

  • Flynn’s leap from television acting to chart-topping music with Robson & Jerome remains one of the UK’s most memorable entertainment success stories.
  • His unconventional audition, featuring a distinctive rough look, helped secure his role as Bronn in Game of Thrones.

Social Media:
Twitter: Link

Categories
Movies

Can Bollywood Make a Movie on Maratha General Raghoji Bhonsle’s Dark Legacy?

Bollywood’s historical dramas often feel like superhero movies, where heroes slay cartoonish villains and history gets a shiny makeover. Films like Chaava and Tanhaji paint Maratha leaders as flawless saviors, while Mughal rulers are reduced to snarling tyrants. This one-sided storytelling feeds into modern politics but skips the messy parts—like how Maratha raids in Bengal killed 400,000 civilians.

Raghoji Bhonsle’s campaigns weren’t just battles; they were economic warfare. His cavalry, called Bargis, burned crops, drowned villagers, and even ransacked Murshidabad, the capital. A chilling lullaby from that era still echoes in Bengal: “When the children sleep, the Bargis come…”

Movies love valiant last stands, but what about invasions built on terror? The Bargis didn’t just fight soldiers—they extorted farmers, destroyed silk weavers’ looms, and left survivors with PTSD. Imagine a film showing villagers hiding garlic seeds to delay tax payments, as the lullaby describes. Would audiences cheer for that hero?

Maratha invasion of Bengal
Maratha invasion of Bengal

Bollywood’s formula demands a clear hero and villain, but history is a foggy mirror. Alivardi Khan, the Nawab of Bengal, wasn’t a saint—he crushed rebellions brutally—but his fight against the Marathas was about survival. If filmmakers humanize both sides, will nationalists call it “anti-Hindu”?

The 1741–1751 Maratha invasions weren’t quick raids; they were a decade of trauma. Gangaram’s Maharashtra Purana details how the Bargis drowned people, stuffed noses with water, and massacred entire families. Yet, this isn’t taught in Maharashtra’s schools—or shown on screen.

Raghoji’s story has everything Bollywood adores: battles, political drama, and a flawed protagonist. But it also forces uncomfortable questions. Why did he spare Calcutta? Rumors say the British bribed him, but there’s no proof. Would filmmakers dare suggest Maratha leaders took payoffs?

British-Maratha Alliance

Even the treaty ending the wars feels like a hidden chapter. The Nawab of Bengal paid ₹3.2 million in back taxes and ₹1.2 million annually to keep the Bargis away. That’s not a triumph—it’s extortion. Yet, Maratha textbooks frame this as a “victory.”

Bollywood thrives on jingoism, but real courage lies in showing the truth. A scene where Raghoji’s soldiers torch a temple while chanting “Har Har Mahadev” would shatter the myth of religious unity. Will any director risk that backlash?

Films like Padmaavat and Bajirao Mastani prove Bollywood can handle complexity, but only when villains are foreign or “Islamic.” Portraying Hindu kings as oppressors is taboo. Raghoji’s story challenges the “Hindu victimhood” narrative—so will it ever get greenlit?

Both Padmavat & Bajirao Mastani showed valor of Rajputs & Marathas but were stilled boycotted

The British filled history books with bias, but modern filmmakers repeat their mistakes. The Bargi lullaby is folklore, not a plot point. Imagine a movie where the hero’s theme song is a mother’s lament—would it sell tickets?

Even if a director tried, censorship might gut the story. The Central Board of Film Certification routinely edits “divisive” content. Showing Maratha atrocities could be labeled “anti-national,” much like Panipat faced protests for “disrespecting” Shivaji.

Audiences aren’t innocent either. We clap when Tanhaji kills 100 men solo but look away when history gets grim. Until viewers demand honesty, filmmakers will keep selling fairy tales.