The Night Of: What Could Have Been

I had initially heard of this HBO Series only a week ago after its finale aired. It came highly recommended to me by my brother, sister and fellow screenwriting students at Brooklyn College. Highly unusual for me when starting a miniseries or television show, I went into this not knowing the premise or plot at all. When word of mouth reaches the ear though, those words must be substantiated, in television terms that usually means binge-watching. 

The first episode is one of the strongest pilots I've seen in a while, including for a miniseries, if this ends up being more than that is still unclear at present. It not only establishes the primary characters and the plot but sets a chilling tone that overlaps throughout the proceeding eight episodes. Young Muslim, Naz, living in New York City is dropped into a nightmare of all too real proportions when he's arrested for the murder of a girl with whom he had a one night stand.

The series presents a multilayered arc, diving into the personal lives of all those involved in the murder investigation: the detective, the DA, the lawyer and of course the accused man himself. The first three episodes of the series fair best, in my opinion, building tension and suspense as the plot, begins to thicken with intrigue and complexity. Will Naz be convicted of a crime he did not commit? Will this smart-mouthed, small-time, ailing lawyer be able to save Naz's life potentially? Who did kill this young woman? The questions hang in the air throughout the middle seven episodes, but when it comes time for the finale, they fall to the ground like metal beams held up with dental floss. 

What should've been a compelling storyline exploring our countries flawed legal system and skewed morals, especially in regards to race and religion, becomes a gloomy Law and Order-esque display of shock without awe, instead. Now, in order to go into detail about everything wrong with the series, particularly its finale, spoilers will have to be discussed so consider yourself warned. 

• Naz and one of his lawyers, Chandra Kapoor develop a romantic relationship that not only feels completely forced, but it is also unbelievably poor character development. Chandra is introduced and developed as a young, intelligent and cunning woman hoping to gain more respect at her boss's law firm. She believes Naz's innocence practically from the get-go and is dedicated to getting him out of prison. Why then does she fall in love with him, going so far as to smuggle drugs into jail for this boy she's barley known for weeks? A boy she is defending in her first real criminal case. Her reputation, her career and her life are all put in jeopardy in the name of what; Bad character development. Chandra is exactly what is wrong with female characters on television these days. We build them up to be indestructible and then give them character flaws such as lust or naivety so we can bring them back down again. It's as if the writers were uncomfortable with how strong of a female character, of color no less, they had created. Her choices are not only poor; they're illogical to any sensible viewer.

• Naz becomes acclimated to jail in Riker's Island far too quickly. His arc, once he is in prison, feels like some mediocre prison flick starring Dwayne Johnson. While prisoners must adapt quickly in order to survive, Naz just doesn't seem to go through a natural transformation. He's polite and meek one moment, then gritty and tattooed the next. If he is so sure of his innocence why is he allowing this place to pollute his soul so much? It's almost as if he's disappointed in leaving jail by the end of the finale. A devout educated Muslim would not become a drug-addicted thug in a matter of weeks, especially if his case were this high profile.

• The lead detective on the case, Dennis Box initially plays the sympathetic ear to Naz's plight. He doesn't seem thoroughly convinced of Naz's guilt early on, which is why it's strange that he waits until the finale to chase down a viable lead with a far better motive than Naz. Why does Detective Box wait so long to pursue this lead if he's skeptical from the beginning that Naz is the killer? The show doesn't seem to understand how proper crime thrillers are meant to be structured. We are given the true identity of the killer in the show's final half-hour after having no opportunity as an engaged viewer to put the pieces together ourselves because hardly any pieces were made available to us in the first place! The killer's motives, in the end, are boring and uninventive and the viewer is left with an indifferent feeling towards the dead girl whom we had come to care about quite a bit by the end of episode one.

These three main points are not the entirety of what went wrong with the series, but they were the most appallingly apparent to me upon my initial viewing. It's a shame to see a show excel so much in narrative velocity in its first few hours before burning to a crisp on impact by its last few minutes. John Turturro shines through the bleakness as the character of John Stone, and if this series does continue, my dearest hope is that it continues to follow him. Stone is the most fully realized character of The Night Of and his character arc comes off substantial and poignant throughout the whole season. 

Ultimately The Night Of offers us so much but delivers so little. It's a true disservice to television, but it's still an entertaining disservice nonetheless. It presents us with questions that should be asked but struggles very deeply at its core to answer them with the profound significance they require. By the end, Naz can't fully comprehend what went wrong, and to be honest neither could I.