Imagine an author writing a good start to a story, a whole season worth of narrative, then decides to write several different versions of how it turned out, so and so didn't die in version 2, so and so was actually a good guy in version 3, etc...then merging the various accounts all into "season 2" with half the people in one version, half the people in the other version and version 3 being some kind of bounce back and forth...that is why my previous rating of "man in the high castle" went from "really good show" to "isn't there a news rerun we can watch?"
The show is just a midlevel soap opera. Acting is forced, writing is trite, it is highly predictable and the man in the high castle will probably start looking for his red stapler Just finished watching episode 10, which will be the last one i watch because it is absolutely STUPID! Not bad, not trite, not predictable, but utterly DUMB! Nothing to do with the book. A monkey would've written a better screenplay.
Are the actions of the main characters designed to infuriate you? If so, then award this season 5 stars! At every turn: Juliana, Joe and Frank will have you scratching your head bloody with befuddlement. To say their actions simply don't make sense or that their motivations are "unclear," would be akin to saying "I thought War and Peace was kinda long" i.e., the understatement of the century. After Juliana had Kramered her way into another avoidable calamity I found myself hate-watching the remaining episodes.
In short, a once fitfully interesting series about the perniciousness of fascism lost its showrunner — because Amazon didn’t seem to believe its biggest show even needed a showrunner — and slowly but surely devolved into plot-heavy Nazi kitsch. Season two looks gorgeous, but it’s dangerous, like a well-designed fireworks display that sets a whole city aflame.
In season one, Spotnitz’s Man in the High Castle argued, repeatedly and provocatively, that if the United States were a fascist country, most of us would probably accept that fact. This idea was adapted from the Philip K. Dick novel of the same name the series uses as a loose inspiration — but to say it was accidentally timely is putting it mildly.
This Vox review sums it up correctly: In and of themselves, these discussion segments are nothing worth getting too upset about, but they exemplify just where the second season of The Man in the High Castle went wrong, and why Amazon, thanks to largely self-inflicted wounds, remains a second-rate pretender when it comes to making quality dramas. (The superlative Transparent is produced by the company’s comedy division.) There are still good performances and strong production values, but the series is now uninterested in big ideas or themes — as emptily provocative as the promotional ads Amazon cooks up for it.