Here’s a bold statement: Pluribus is the kind of show that will leave you both laughing and deeply unsettled, all while marveling at Rhea Seehorn’s unparalleled talent. But here’s where it gets controversial—is Vince Gilligan’s latest creation a masterpiece of multi-genre storytelling, or a deliberately evasive puzzle that risks alienating its audience? Let’s dive in.
For years, TV critics have waged an annual campaign for Rhea Seehorn’s Emmy recognition, particularly for her role in Better Call Saul. The cycle went something like this: ‘Why Emmy Voters Would Be Dumb To Ignore Rhea Seehorn!’ followed by ‘Why Emmy Voters Were Dumb to Ignore Rhea Seehorn!’ It was a rollercoaster of hope and disappointment. Yet, one person who never doubted her brilliance was Vince Gilligan, the co-creator of Better Call Saul and frequent witness to Seehorn’s wry, romantic, and tormented performance as Kim Wexler.
Now, Gilligan and Seehorn reunite for Pluribus, a nine-episode Apple TV+ series that premiered on November 7. This is Gilligan’s first project outside the Breaking Bad universe since The Lone Gunman in 2001, and it’s a Rhea Seehorn vehicle through and through. But is it a triumph? The answer is a resounding yes—with a few caveats.
Pluribus is an intriguing blend of emotional drama, broad comedy, and unsettling horror, all anchored by Seehorn’s versatility. She plays Carol Sturka, a successful author of ‘speculative historical romance literature’ (think Diana Gabaldon) who is tired—tired of her genre, her fans, and even her own identity. But here’s the twist: as Carol returns home to Albuquerque, she discovers that the world—and its people—have subtly changed. Carol may be one of the few who remains unchanged, which is ironic, given her pre-existing discomfort with her own identity.
And this is the part most people miss: Pluribus isn’t just a character study; it’s a commentary on modernity. It explores themes of loneliness, disconnection, and the illusion of community in an age dominated by the internet, AI, and intrusive surveillance. It’s a show that asks: What happens when algorithms make us feel seen, but we’re actually just being watched and quantified? Bold, right?
The show’s pacing will frustrate some viewers. Information is doled out sparingly, driven by Carol’s perspective and her evolving curiosity. This deliberate evasiveness is both infuriating and intentional, mirroring Carol’s journey of self-discovery. But is it too cryptic? That’s where opinions will diverge.
Tonally, Pluribus is a peculiar mix. It’s part 3 Body Problem, part Last Man on Earth, with nods to Jacques Tati’s droll humor and Buster Keaton’s physical comedy. Seehorn embodies the latter, conveying sternness, sourness, and vulnerability with minimal dialogue. Her performance is a masterclass, particularly in the first half of the seventh episode, which is a must-watch for anyone who’s ever wondered why critics adore her.
But is Pluribus all about Seehorn? Mostly, yes. While there are standout guest performances—Peter Bergman, Samba Schutte, and Karolina Wydra all shine—the show is undeniably her vehicle. Yet, it’s also a reunion of Gilligan’s trusted collaborators, including writer-producers Gordon Smith and Alison Tatlock, cinematographer Marshall Adams, and composer Dave Porter. Their collective talent is on full display, especially in Gilligan’s direction of the first two episodes, which masterfully balance suspense, absurdity, and humor.
For Emmy purposes, Apple will likely submit Pluribus as a drama, despite its comedic brilliance. It’s a show that defies easy categorization, blending horror, sci-fi, and dark humor into something uniquely its own. But here’s the question: Will audiences embrace its ambiguity, or will they demand more clarity?
As for whether Pluribus is one of the year’s best shows, the potential is there. But only time—and the final two episodes—will tell. In the meantime, prepare for a new wave of ‘Why Emmy Voters Would Be Dumb To Ignore Rhea Seehorn!’ articles. And if you’re still on the fence, ask yourself: Can a show that’s this funny, this unsettling, and this thought-provoking truly miss the mark? Let the debate begin.
