by Mike Hilty, Contributing Writer
The opioid epidemic deserves more attention than it’s currently getting. With the recent news that the Supreme Court blocked Purdue Pharma’s bankruptcy deal that would give the owners immunity from any responsibility, the quest for justice remains unclear. Hollywood has told countless stories of characters struggling with opioid addiction, but not a lot of films or TV shows tackle the actual genesis of the national crisis. Hulu struck first with Dopesick and now Netflix is throwing their hat in the ring with Painkiller.
Every episode starts the same way: A family introduces the show by saying that its events are dramatized and may not happen the same way they did in real life. It also tells a brief story about what happened to someone who died of opioid addiction. The gravity of the situation is set at the beginning of each episode to remind the audience that this is affecting countless individuals across the United States. I applaud Netflix for making sure the focus of this should be on the families of those who have died as a result of Oxycontin being pumped into doctor’s offices.
The story structure of the series confuses me, though. Instead of a linear story where we see things happen in order, we deal with a deposition with de facto narrator Edie Flowers (Uzo Aduba). She recounts her investigation into Purdue Pharma and then goes back to show some key events. Flowers recounts different firsthand accounts from key witnesses from her investigation. One story, a sales rep from Purdue named Shannon (West Duchovny), makes sense, as we see the direct interaction with Flowers. Another story, a user of Oxycontin named Glen (Taylor Kitsch), has nothing to do with Flowers, so I’m wondering about the relevance of his inclusion to the overall story beyond showcasing someone who has become addicted to painkillers. Although I understand Glen’s inclusion is part of the point of showing someone’s journey into addiction, his story doesn’t connect at all with the series.
The characters present an issue for Painkiller, because there isn’t one that the audience can root for. Glen is the closest, because we’re rooting for him to get clean, and Edie is next in line to get the evidence she needs to convict Purdue Pharma with a crime. Shannon, and subsequently all the sales reps, are comic villain bad, with all of them just stopping short of swimming in a pool of cash à la Scrooge McDuck. The only other sales rep we get to know is Shannon’s trainer, Britt (Dina Shihabi), and she is in way too deep drinking the Purdue Pharma Kool-Aid. Even when Shannon inevitably has a change of heart, it feels disingenuous.
The entire company of Purdue Pharma, including executive Richard Sackler (Matthew Broderick), might as well be a literal evil corporation. They are so out of touch with reality that it becomes distracting. The tone of all the executives switches too much from farce to aloof. The moments when Purdue is talking about how to avoid Oxycontin being viewed as addictive feel like they intentionally mislead all these organizations just to make money. Because the characters all feel so unlikable, the performances are a bit too over-the-top. Suffering from poor writing, the talented cast can’t get themselves on firm ground to make anyone more than caricatures. Since the Purdue Pharma executives are the only real people we focus on, and everyone else is fictionalized, I found it hard to understand if Painkiller is actually saying anything of substance beyond Purdue is bad.
Painkiller tries its best to tell a compelling story about the opioid epidemic. Since it brings more light to the situation is the only reason this isn’t at the absolute bottom of my list. Between no likable characters, the odd story structure, and the flat performances, Painkiller is, dare I say, somewhat painful to watch. Do yourself a favor and watch Dopesick instead.
Rating: It Was Just Okay
Painkiller is currently streaming on Netflix
You can read more from Mike Hilty, and follow him on Twitter, Letterboxd, and Serializd