Critics’ reviews

Fellow Travelers (2023)

9 reviews from 9 publications. Critics’ score 67: 5 positive, 3 mixed, 1 negative.

Back to our review of Fellow Travelers

67
Positive
5
Mixed
3
Negative
1

Most critics come down in favour, and the praise gathers almost entirely around the two leads. Matt Bomer and Jonathan Bailey are credited again and again with a chemistry that carries a relationship across four decades, and several reviews call the result moving, even devastating. The frank sex scenes draw approval too, for telling us something about the men rather than decorating the story. There is broad agreement that the series takes gay history seriously and covers ground television has mostly left alone.

The reservations are about shape. Critics complain of a middle stretch that loses momentum, a muddled timeline and a history-lesson approach that crowds out the characters. The spread is wide, from the mid-80s down to the mid-30s. Vulture is the one outright negative, arguing the lesson swallows the people. Collider, more mixed, faults the series for romanticising a toxic relationship and sidelining Black, female and trans characters. The Hollywood Reporter, alone, picks out Allison Williams’s Lucy as the most compelling performance.

Evening Standard
23 October 2023 · Paul Flynn
85*

Flynn finds the series a moving, valuable journey through gay history, despite its glossy presentation taking time to break through. He praises the leads’ chemistry and the show’s account of histories denied to gay people.

Read the full review →
IndieWire
27 October 2023 · B+ · Ben Travers
83

The review finds the series an affecting, if familiar, romance that sustains its emotional grip. It especially praises Jonathan Bailey and Matt Bomer’s palpable chemistry and nuanced performances.

Read the full review →
The AV Club
24 October 2023 · B+ · Max Gao
83

The review finds the series a devastating, affecting love story, though its middle decades lose momentum. It praises Matt Bomer and Jonathan Bailey’s performances and their compelling portrayal of a relationship that evolves across four decades.

Read the full review →
Variety
23 October 2023 · Aramide Tinubu
75*

Tinubu finds the series largely exceptional, though one episode disrupts its pacing before the story recovers. She singles out Matt Bomer and Jonathan Bailey’s electric chemistry as the drama’s most moving strength.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
28 October 2023 · Benjamin Lee
60*

Lee finds the series overstuffed and uneven, but ultimately worth following despite its soapiness and muddled timeline. He especially praises the graphic, plot-important sex scenes for adding depth to the central relationship.

Read the full review →
The Hollywood Reporter
23 October 2023 · Daniel Fienberg
50*

Fienberg finds the series uneven, with effective emotional moments weighed down by familiar, sometimes stodgy storytelling. He praises the performances and chemistry of Matt Bomer and Jonathan Bailey, while singling out Allison Williams’s portrayal of Lucy as especially compelling.

Read the full review →
Vulture
27 October 2023 · Jackson McHenry
35*

The review finds the series faltering overall, with its history-lesson approach crowding out its characters. It praises the sex scenes for being hot, lived-in, and revealing of the characters.

Read the full review →
Paste
23 October 2023 · 7.9 · Lacy Baugher Milas
77*

The critic finds the series imperfect but important, with a serious and often plodding approach to queer history. She singles out Jonathan Bailey’s vulnerable, forceful performance as its beating heart.

Read the full review →
Collider
27 October 2023 · 5/10 · Erick Massoto
50

The critic finds the series enjoyable as a romance but ultimately inadequate in its treatment of its characters and historical context. He praises its depiction of the lasting effects of homophobia, while faulting it for romanticizing a toxic relationship and sidelining Black, female, transgender, queer, and intersex characters.

Read the full review →

Ordered by the weight we give each publication, then by score. Scores are normalised to 100; * means inferred from an unrated review. Summaries are ours, not quotations; follow the links for the reviews themselves. How we rate