TV Show Review – The X-Files

TV Show Review – The X-Files


Rating:  3 (out of 5).  Fox brings The X-Files back to television after 14 years. Mulder and Scully are back together along with some other familiar faces and a few new ones. This is just a six episode miniseries but it does all it can to make the show current while keeping the essence of the original. All the critics agree that viewers need to get past the first episode before this becomes watchable. After that things start moving along, and episodes are more like what fans are used to seeing from the show.

The Los Angeles Times writes “The revival is steeped in a kind of historical consciousness of the show itself, to the point that Mulder’s ring tone is Mark Snow’s “X-Files” theme.” They say “the first episode starts well enough, but it collapses into poorly motivated, out-of-nowhere speechifying, accompanied by stock footage of old puzzling phenomena” but “fortunately the other two episodes push the right buttons.”

The New York Times tells viewers to think of the first episode as “less as a new entry into the “X-Files” canon than as a reminder of what was great about the original.” They think “We get flashes of the old spirit in the second and third episodes of the reboot.”

The Cleveland Plain Dealer encourages viewers to not give up on “The X-Files” after the first hour. They say “the opening episode is admittedly a bit slow and stilted.” But don’t fear they say “the second episode is much better. It’s an exhilarating return to form and the third episode is even better.” They write “The X-Files revival has to overcome a rocky start. Both the dialogue and direction in Sunday’s opener are choppy, as if the team is laboriously shaking off years of ring rust. And maybe they are.”

The Wall Street Journal says “The new run of “The X-Files” may well, in time, encompass some more up-to-date conspiracies. If so, they’ll be welcome.”

USA Today says “wait until Monday when the series airs a second episode that’s a marginal improvement on Sunday’s dispiriting premiere.” They think “the only way you’ll make it through this six-episode run is if nostalgia — linked with devotion to David Duchovny, Gillian Anderson and the Mulder/Scully partnership returning producer Chris Carter created — floats you along. The slightest leak in that metaphorical boat, and X-Files sinks like a stone.”

The Columbus Dispatch thinks “The two-part premiere, despite some bumps, proves fun to watch, mostly because of the many old faces.”

The San Francisco Chronicle writes “Together, the three episodes represent what was good and maybe not so good about the original series. They also remind us that, somehow, even when Carter and company went off the rails, “The X-Files” was usually worth watching.”

The X Files describes it as “mess” and “tedious.” They say it is “a very underwhelming hour that will force even diehard fans to consider whether pushing onward is really worth the time.”

The Minneapolis Star Tribune states “Fans of “The X-Files” won’t be disappointed by its return — as long as they skip opening night.”

The Philadelphia Inquirer writes “I was really excited about it. Then I saw the first episode.” But hang in there because the following two episodes are better and “the third, in particular, is fantastic.”

The Atlantic calls this “inconsistent, messy, and promising.” They say “It’s little wonder then that things start out slow, especially given all the setup the show needs to do justifying its own existence. But don’t be discouraged by the utter incoherence of the first hour: The spirit of the show is still here, waiting to be drawn out, and each installment is better than the last.”

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.


HereisTV Newsletter

TV and VOD Picks delivered fresh to your inbox, everyday!

What I’m Watching



New on VOD