Critics’ reviews

Scarpetta (2026)

8 reviews from 8 publications. Critics’ score 53: 3 positive, 2 mixed, 3 negative.

Back to our review of Scarpetta

53
Positive
3
Mixed
2
Negative
3

The reviews are split almost down the middle, and the spread is wide: three critics like it, three do not, and two sit between. The praise clusters around the two leads. Nearly everyone finds something to admire in Nicole Kidman and Jamie Lee Curtis, and the scenes between them are singled out even by critics who dislike the rest. The dual-timeline structure divides opinion: Variety and Collider find it well handled, while The AV Club calls it a failure that takes itself too seriously. The reservations cluster around tone and taste. The Telegraph is repulsed by the graphic treatment of mutilated female victims, and The Guardian dismisses the series as a dire mess with an odd AI chatbot element. The Hollywood Reporter sits in the middle, finding it alternately effective and bumbling. Several critics note overfamiliar tropes and too many red herrings. Digital Spy’s verdict, fun and campy in places, is about as warm as the middle gets.

Variety
10 March 2026 · Aramide Tinubu
85*

The critic calls it excellent storytelling that keeps viewers grounded in the crimes and Kay’s methodology despite a complicated narrative. They praise the seamless blending of timelines, graphic intensity, and exploration of misogyny, death, and monstrosity in many forms.

Read the full review →
The Times
11 March 2026
70*

The review highlights how Nicole Kidman brings new life to the forensic sleuth in this adaptation of the Cornwell novels, noting the dual timeline and Jamie Lee Curtis's wild performance.

Read the full review →
The Hollywood Reporter
10 March 2026 · Daniel Fienberg
50*

The review describes the series as alternately effective and bumbling, with some good adaptive ideas but predictable ghoulish flaws and overfamiliar tropes. It praises Kidman’s frazzled performance and the dual-timeline structure while criticizing uneven casting and source fidelity issues.

Read the full review →
The Telegraph
11 March 2026 · ★★ · Anita Singh
40

The critic is repulsed by the graphic depictions of mutilated female victims and questions why Kidman is in this over-the-top drama. It mixes past and present timelines but feels excessive and poorly judged on screen.

Read the full review →
The AV Club
10 March 2026 · D · Saloni Gajjar
37

The critic calls it Nicole Kidman's shoddiest show yet, a hot mess that takes itself too seriously and fails to deliver on its dark tale or dual timelines, with mismatched performances and lazy direction.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
11 March 2026
20*

The critic finds the series a dire mess with an odd AI chatbot element, though praises the chemistry between Kidman and Curtis. The adaptation feels trashy and weird rather than compelling.

Read the full review →
Collider
10 March 2026 · 7/10 · Aidan Kelley
70

The series delivers strong performances from its ensemble, particularly Nicole Kidman and Jamie Lee Curtis, along with well-handled non-linear storytelling that balances present-day and flashback timelines effectively. However, it stumbles with jarring sci-fi detours and too many red herrings in the central mystery.

Read the full review →
Digital Spy
11 March 2026 · ★★★ · David Opie
60

The critic praises the performances of Kidman and Curtis, especially their sibling rivalry and clashes, which elevate the show, along with some horror elements, despite flaws in plotting and dialogue; it's fun and campy in places.

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