The Unsuspecting Victim Grazes Happily On Caviar
The Beast In Me (2025) TV Series - No Spoilers Review
The Beast In Me (2025) TV Series - A Spoilers-Free Review
As a fan of both Homeland (2011) and The Americans (2013) TV series, when I saw Claire Danes and Matthew Rhys starring in what appeared to be a limited series on Netflix, I wasted no time jumping on the remote and binge-watching all eight episodes in a single day.
The result did not disappoint me.
It's a bit hard to describe the feelings that hit me during my between-the-screen reunion with the heroes of my younger days. Seeing the vestige of youth on their middle-aged faces made me oddly nostalgic, just like a high school reunion. Twelve to fourteen years is enough for everybody to feel like a completely different version of themselves, including yours truly…
Nonetheless, the two actors are as brilliant as I remember them.
Some internet trolls and low-bottom-drawer critics poke fun at the weird facial expressions Claire Danes is making on the show, but be that as it may, it only makes her even more suitable for the quirky, anti-social, and grieving role of Aggie Wiggs.
Matthew Rhys brilliantly captures the vibe of uncertainty that his character, Nile Jarvis, portrays in the early episodes. Until the bad guy is finally revealed, you never know if he's the m*rderer or the egocentric and crass rich guy situational scapegoat that the real k*ller hides behind.
In fact, that's the allure of the first four or five episodes. The combination of these two characters makes you doubt the premise of the story. Is Nile an actual psychopath, or is Aggie's suspicion the result of a best-selling author's nature to drive the narrative towards a gripping, nerve-wracking conclusion?
You'll only know by watching the show. Until then, let me whet your appetite by introducing the characters and a few non-revealing elements of the story.
"What the f*ck is so wrong with being selfish? Selfish is what gets sh*t done." - Nile Jarvis
Aggie Wiggs is a burned-out best-selling author whose career declined after the tragic, accidental death of her son. Unable to move on, she's slowly wasting away in a small neck of the woods rural area until she's jolted back to life by the arrival of her new neighbor, Nile Jarvis, a controversial millionaire who's the prime suspect in the mysterious disappearance of his ex-wife.
In the beginning, Nile's presence seems more intrusive than anything. The eccentric rich guy can't keep a low profile and live a quiet life, even though the whole reason he moved to the countryside was to fade out of public scrutiny. Although wary of a potential psychopath living next door, Aggie doesn't give him much thought, but a string of disturbances exacerbated by the desolate and vulnerable state her decaying old mansion places her in sets out a pretty thrilling atmosphere for a slasher movie.
What follows is a platonic version of the bad boy cliché, pushing a woman out of her comfort zone and enabling her risk-taking behavior, making her feel good about the worst side of herself, unlike a good guy who would only make her feel guilty with a holier-than-thou self-projection.
First, he takes a sharp jab at her best-selling novel, calling her out on her daddy issues and stating that it felt like a "love letter" to her POS father. He's rude, demanding, unapologetic, and speaks the first thing that comes to his mouth. He inserts himself not only in her life but also in her work life and passion by asking Aggie to drop her current project and write a book about his life.
Then, when he's facing refusal, Nile alternates between showing her a little bit of empathy and feeding her cynicism. Up to a point, there's this feeling that the two bring out the worst in each other.
But just as she's starting to warm up to him, her son's killer conveniently ends up missing, leaving a bogus su*cide note behind, just like his late wife. That's when Aggie decides to take him up on his offer and write a book about him as a pretext to find out the truth.
That's easier said than done. More people end up missing.
Nile plays the role of the misunderstood bad boy and makes Aggie doubt herself. Furthermore, the more she comes in contact with the people around him (a harsh and abusive father who seems to favor his siblings over him, an outlaw uncle who seems to be the family enforcer, a current wife who used to be close friends with his former wife, and former in-laws who seem not to hold a grudge against Neil for their daughter's weird disappearance), for a few episodes, the viewers get the feeling that pretty much anyone could be the k*ller. Even Aggie, as Nile claims he sees something dark in her, and that's the reason she's so drawn to this idea of him being the bad guy, a claim she doesn't rush to disprove.
"You don't care what I see in the mirror. You wanna know what it feels like, don't you?" - Nile Jarvis
Sadly, they reveal the culprit too soon, in my opinion. This is what prevents the show from being much greater than it is, but it's still an enjoyable binge, nonetheless. On IMDb, it has a 7.5/10 score, but I'll give it a solid 8/10 overall.
About the Creator
Adrian CDTPPY
Writer on various platforms. Boost nominator on Medium.
Keep reading
More stories from Adrian CDTPPY and writers in Geeks and other communities.
My Internet Cravings Turned Me Into a Copycat Asian
As a Romanian, I eat a lot of garlic. Over here, we serve it as a runny sauce - minced garlic "rubbed" in a bit of salt and oil until it gets a slightly paste-like consistency that we gradually "thin out" with veggie broth or just plain water, which we refer to as "mujdei."
By Adrian CDTPPY2 months ago in Feast
Marvel Zombie
The last entry into our 2025 superhero projects catalogue is Marvel Zombies. This was a show that was anticipated by absolutely no one and it disappeared from the public consciousness as quickly as it was released. There was nothing special about the project that made it a must see, or a must remember. In fact if anything it's a must forget.
By Alexandrea Callaghan16 days ago in Geeks
Journalist Naeem Hanif Publicly Apologises to Saba Qamar Over Defamatory Claims
An apology that reopens the debate on media ethics, accountability, and the lasting impact of misinformation In an era where information travels faster than verification, public apologies by journalists are rare—but when they happen, they spark serious conversations. Journalist Naeem Hanif’s public apology to acclaimed Pakistani actress Saba Qamar over previously made defamatory claims has become one such moment. Beyond the individuals involved, the incident has highlighted pressing issues around media responsibility, reputational damage, and the ethical obligations that come with having a public platform. Saba Qamar is not just a household name in Pakistan; she is one of the country’s most respected actors, known for her powerful performances in television dramas, films, and socially relevant projects. Over the years, she has built a reputation for professionalism, bold role choices, and advocacy for women’s empowerment. Any allegations targeting her character were bound to attract attention—and scrutiny. The Apology That Changed the Narrative Naeem Hanif’s apology, made publicly, acknowledged that the claims he had previously shared were unverified and harmful. In his statement, he expressed regret for the emotional distress and reputational damage caused to Saba Qamar, stating that his words crossed ethical boundaries expected of a journalist. Public apologies in media disputes are significant because they represent accountability. While legal notices and private settlements often remain behind closed doors, a public apology recognizes that the damage was public—and so must be the correction. For Saba Qamar, the apology served as a form of vindication. Although an apology cannot fully undo the impact of defamatory claims, it does restore some balance by putting the truth back into the public domain. The Human Cost of Defamation Defamatory statements do more than create headlines; they affect real lives. Celebrities, despite their fame, are not immune to emotional stress, anxiety, and reputational harm. In industries like entertainment, where public image is closely tied to career opportunities, even short-lived rumors can have long-term consequences. For female public figures especially, defamatory claims often take on a more personal and moral tone, reflecting broader societal biases. Saba Qamar’s case reignited discussions on how women in the public eye are disproportionately targeted and judged more harshly than their male counterparts. Supporters of the actress flooded social media following the apology, praising her resilience and calling for stronger standards in journalism. Many noted that while criticism of public figures is fair, character assassination is not journalism. Media Ethics Under the Spotlight This incident has placed media ethics back at the center of public debate. Journalism is built on credibility, verification, and fairness. When these principles are compromised—whether for clicks, attention, or personal opinions—the credibility of the entire profession suffers. In the digital age, the line between journalism and commentary has become increasingly blurred. Social media platforms allow journalists and influencers alike to share opinions instantly, often without editorial oversight. While this freedom has democratized information, it has also increased the risk of misinformation and defamation. Naeem Hanif’s apology serves as a reminder that freedom of expression comes with responsibility. Journalists are expected to verify facts, provide context, and avoid sensationalism—especially when reporting on individuals’ personal lives. Public Reaction and Industry Response The public reaction to the apology was mixed but largely supportive of Saba Qamar. Many welcomed the apology as a step in the right direction, while others argued it should have come sooner. Some media professionals used the moment to call for clearer ethical guidelines and accountability mechanisms within the industry. The incident has also prompted discussions about corrective journalism—how media professionals should address mistakes transparently. A sincere apology, experts argue, is not a sign of weakness but of integrity. It shows respect for the audience and the truth. Lessons for the Digital Age This case offers important lessons for both media practitioners and consumers: Verification matters: Sharing unverified claims can cause irreversible harm. Apologies are powerful but limited: They can correct the record, but prevention is always better than damage control. Audience awareness is crucial: Readers and viewers must learn to question sources and avoid amplifying rumors. For public figures like Saba Qamar, the episode underscores the importance of legal and moral recourse in defending one’s reputation. For journalists, it reinforces the need to balance speed with accuracy. A Moment of Accountability Ultimately, Naeem Hanif’s public apology marks a moment of accountability in a media landscape often criticized for avoiding responsibility. While the incident cannot be erased, it has opened space for reflection, dialogue, and reform. For Saba Qamar, the apology reaffirms her standing and resilience. For the media industry, it is a reminder that truth, ethics, and accountability remain the pillars of credible journalism—no matter how fast the news cycle moves.
By Fiazahmedbrohi 5 days ago in Geeks
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.