Critics’ reviews

The Shards (2026)

10 reviews from 10 publications. Critics’ score 56: 5 positive, 2 mixed, 3 negative.

Back to our review of The Shards

56
Positive
5
Mixed
2
Negative
3

The reviews are sharply divided, with half positive and the rest mixed or negative. Praise clusters around the recreation of 1981 Los Angeles, the visual style and Igby Rigney’s lead performance, which earns approval even from some detractors. Supporters find a compelling mix of adolescent unease, nostalgia and lurid horror in the adaptation of Bret Easton Ellis’s novel. For them, its interest in youth and identity gives the excess something to work with.

The disagreement is over whether that excess remains entertaining or becomes shallow and tedious. Reservations centre on uneven pacing, tonal detours and unreliable suspense; even favourable reviews identify heavy-handed narration or a loss of focus. Variety praises the lead performance but argues that the changes undermine the novel’s mood and ambiguity. Vulture likewise sees an adaptation that loses the book’s nuance, finding neither sufficient fun nor compelling horror.

Radio Times
5 August 2026 · ★★★★ · Helen Daly
80

The critic finds the adaptation an intriguing mix of Ellis's detached blank fiction and Murphy's visual excess and horror elements. Rigney's lead performance is singled out as uncanny and fantastic, though one episode's dance competition detour disrupts the tone before the second half redeems the series.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
5 August 2026
80*

Murphy is back on form with this gorgeously curated, shot and scored adaptation of Bret Easton Ellis’s novel about a serial killer stalking privileged LA teenagers. The serial killer storyline pulls the story along, but its heart is in the longing for an era gone by, for youth flown.

Read the full review →
Evening Standard
· Martin Robinson
50*

This is a watchable, dreamily shallow series about watchable, dreamily shallow kids, made by a watchable, dreamily shallow creator, which occasionally delivers on the horror. Suspense though? Sadly not, and that’s the real measure of excellence.

Read the full review →
The Hollywood Reporter
5 August 2026 · Daniel Fienberg
50*

The series delivers the expected excess from the Murphy-Ellis team-up but is nostalgic, over-the-top and uneven, with a plastic first half faithful to the novel giving way to chaotic but more entertaining later episodes.

Read the full review →
The Telegraph
6 August 2026
30*

This adaptation of Bret Easton Ellis’s novel starring nepo-babies is full of coke, convertibles and crushing tedium, and it is hard to care about the monotonous world of privileged LA high schoolers.

Read the full review →
Variety
5 August 2026 · Alison Herman
30*

The review argues that bold deviations and additions derail the adaptation despite a strong lead performance. It fails to capture the novel's distinctive feeling or sustain its ambiguity and mood.

Read the full review →
Vulture
5 August 2026
30*

The critic calls the series a tragedy of adaptation that fails to capture the book's ambiguity and nuance. It shrinks into recycled storylines from Glee and Euphoria, becoming neither fun trash nor compelling horror.

Read the full review →
Den of Geek
5 August 2026 · ★★★★ · Kirsten Howard
80

The review praises the exquisite 1981 Los Angeles production design and strong lead performance by Igby Rigney as Bret. It notes the show is gloriously and compellingly trashy despite some heavy-handed narration.

Read the full review →
NME
5 August 2026 · ★★★★ · James Mottram
80

The critic praises the stylish, sexy, and lurid adaptation of Bret Easton Ellis’s meta-memoir as an LA horror story set in 1981, highlighting the paranoia around a mysterious newcomer amid serial killings and the strong eighties production design.

Read the full review →
Collider
5 August 2026 · Gabrielle Moss
70*

The review calls the series a stylish but restrained crime thriller more interested in the emotional horrors of adolescence and identity than graphic violence, commending strong performances especially from Igby Rigney while noting it loses focus in the final stretch.

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