Summary
- Despite a star-studded cast, the Netflix series
A Man in Full
fails to capture the book’s satire and social commentary. - The series features jarring changes to key plot elements, undermining character development and thematic depth, leaving the narrative off-balance.
- The show’s attempt at poignant social commentary falls flat. It lacks the satirical edge expected from an adaptation of Tom Wolfe’s work.
Based on the book of the same name by Tom Wolfe, A Man in Full follows Charlie Croker (Jeff Daniels), a wealthy Atlanta business tycoon who’s facing the possibility of losing his empire after the bank decides to call in his nearly $1 billion loan. A good ‘ol boy if there ever was one, Charlie’s overarching narrative is contrasted with those connected to his life either directly or by proxy.
Amid Charlie’s battle with the bank, his secretary’s husband, Conrad (Jon Michael Hill), is arrested for assaulting a police officer following a dispute over a parking violation. Along with that, Charlie’s lawyer, Roger White (Aml Ameen), is questioning whether he’s become the kind of lawyer he was meant to be and ends up representing Conrad in an effort to make a positive difference. However, he quickly realizes he might have bitten off more than he can chew.
Jeff Daniels Leads Netflix’s A Man in Full
Directed by Regina King and written for television by David E. Kelley, the series is chock-full of A-list names from top to bottom, which means the performances, as well as other aspects of the show, have the potential to be compelling. However, since the show premiered, there has been mounting criticism surrounding Daniels’ casting as Charlie. While his performance is captivating, many believe he fails to capture the character they remember from the book.
Whether such an observation is valid, the critique ultimately overlooks the biggest problem with the series. No matter how excellent its directing or acting may be, A Man in Full is unable to overcome the numerous uneven subplots littered throughout the show. Too much of the series deviates from its source material in a way that doesn’t improve the story. While there’s no real problem with changing portions of the book for television, doing so, in this case, ultimately made the series feel rushed, which in turn failed to convey some of the most important aspects of the book.
A Man in Full Deviates From Its Source Material in All the Wrong Ways
A Man in Full is meant to be a series that’s a bit tongue-in-cheek. However, the manner in which it chooses to deviate from its source material ultimately strips it of an opportunity to provide any compelling satirical commentary on race, wealth, and power in the South. The show clearly wants to include these dynamics but doesn’t try to dive into the sociopolitical reasons why those dynamics are so important to understand. Nor does it attempt to explore why not understanding those dynamics disproportionately negatively affects certain people. Instead, A Man in Full completely changes aspects of the book that are the most important for the kind of compelling and witty narrative the series aims to showcase.
By no means does Wolfe’s book hit the nail on the head in the most effective way, but the series doesn’t fix the issues in the book. Instead, it makes them worse. Most notably, the series drastically changes the chain of events that led to Conrad’s jail time. In doing so, the show removes an essential element of how the audience views Charlie and his humanity, or lack thereof. In the book, Charlie lays off a slew of his frozen warehouse workers, which includes Conrad. This was the catalyst for Conrad’s incarceration following his altercation with a police officer. However, in the series, Charlie is in no way connected to those events, which completely shifts the character Charlie is perceived to be.
Jeff Daniels Recalls the Madness Behind Making Speed & Dumb and Dumber in the Same Year
From Speed to Dumb and Dumber, Jeff Daniels breaks it down for us. He also says the cure for a broken wrist is to put an Emmy on it.
Changing how Conrad’s story unfolds entirely upends the point of his juxtaposition with Charlie. In the book, Charlie’s narrative, in contrast to Conrad’s, is meant to highlight the disconnect and effect his extravagant choices have on others. The series essentially humanizes Charlie and attempts to cast him as some sort of white knight who actually cares about the people around him. While it’s important to showcase the duality of people like Charlie, how it’s done in the series undermines the satirical commentary it attempts to achieve in the first place. Unfortunately, A Man in Full strays from its source material in all the wrong ways.
A Man in Full’s Satire Comes Across as Tone Deaf
Initially a book rife with satire and sharp social commentary, A Man in Full fails to convey such aspects properly. The series is unable to capture the same spirit of Wolfe’s novel, which makes it come across as tone-deaf more than anything. Charlie’s fall from grace juxtaposed with Conrad’s extremely traumatic subplot creates an unbalanced dichotomy that’s almost uncomfortable to watch at times. Because the show struggles to find an appropriate balance, its satire fails to work.
Netflix Hopes Live Streams and Video Games Will Save Them
Netflix may be the king of streaming regarding market share, but current trends and competition have made the streaming giant branch out.
Furthermore, A Man in Full strives to be something poetic but doesn’t even succeed as casual entertainment. Despite the quality performances and direction, the show never finds the right balance to offer anything thought-provoking. Given the heavy subject matter strewn throughout the show’s subplots, the series should have done a better job of providing apt commentary on race, wealth, and power. Instead, its attempt at satire remained completely tone-deaf. All episodes of A Man in Full are currently streaming on Netflix.
