THE STORY – John Creasy, a wounded former mercenary, is on a quest to get revenge for the loss of his only companion while defending the daughter of his dead colleague from the forces that tore her family apart.
THE CAST – Yahya Abdul-Mateen II, Billie Boullet, Scoot McNairy, Alice Braga & Bobby Cannavale
THE TEAM – Kyle Killen (Showrunner/Writer)
If anything, Netflix’s reimagining of “Man on Fire” is a near-perfect example of the downsides of streaming. The show is yet another entry in the growing epidemic of studios stretching films into bloated television series, desperately hoping fans of the original will flock to their couches and binge the whole thing in one sitting. Commercially, that strategy appears to have worked here. Since debuting, “Man on Fire” has become a ratings juggernaut for the streaming giant, with a second season feeling all but inevitable. The problem is that, beyond the allure of watching the immensely talented Yahya Abdul-Mateen II unleash himself as a vehicle for violence, the series has all the hallmarks of fast-food television without any of the flavor to make these empty TV calories worthwhile.
For those unfamiliar with Tony Scott’s 2004 adaptation of “Man on Fire,” the film follows suave yet deeply troubled spec ops soldier John Creasy (Denzel Washington), a man self-medicating his demons with alcohol while constantly flirting with self-destruction. It’s only through the help of a former colleague that a new job as a bodyguard gives him purpose again, reminding him of who he once was after the young child he’s sworn to protect is kidnapped. Here, the same narrative bones remain mostly intact, though showrunner Kyle Killen swaps the character dynamics around and trades Mexico City for Brazil. Creasy (Emmy winner Abdul-Mateen II) follows a similar emotional arc to Washington’s version, but this time an explosion in a densely populated high-rise kills the family of Poe Rayburn, leaving Creasy to protect her as he navigates the favelas of Brazil and uncovers a sprawling conspiracy that makes the mission far more personal than he anticipated.
To the series’ credit, none of its faults lie with Abdul-Mateen II, who proves more than capable of crafting a formidable action hero haunted by pain beneath the surface. Compared to Washington’s version, however, this Creasy is far less of a dangerously mysterious force of charisma and death. Abdul-Mateen II instead brings the emotional vulnerability necessary to sustain seven episodes of gradual transformation as the show predictably softens some of Creasy’s colder instincts over time. Still, the relationship between him and Billie Boullet’s Poe lacks any real depth beyond the now overused lone-wolf-and-cub dynamic recycled endlessly across modern action storytelling. The show is also padded with the expected side plots needed to artificially sustain a multi-episode format, particularly after the opening stretch. Much of that narrative bloat centers on Alice Braga’s Valeria Melo, a driver who becomes entangled in Creasy’s mission of protection and revenge. Valeria’s desperation to get her daughter out of a volatile Brazil ultimately shifts the focus toward surface-level explorations of the country’s criminal underworld, which begins to dominate the latter half of the season.
What makes the existence of this series particularly ironic is that reimagining films for television occasionally (and I do mean occasionally) improves upon the original work or finally allows an overlooked concept to reach its full potential. The legacy of the 2004 “Man on Fire” proves that time can radically reshape perception. Upon release, Scott’s film was heavily criticized during an era when critics were far harsher toward movies of that kind. But over time, opinion has shifted dramatically, with the film now viewed by many as one of the defining works of Scott’s fascinating late-career stylistic evolution. Looking at this new version, though, what exactly separates it from the countless similar shows currently flooding streaming platforms?
Whether you loved the original film or not, Scott’s visual direction was undeniably electric, and the action carried genuine weight and texture. Netflix’s version is about as drab as expected, reducing explosions and gunfights to an endless cycle of lifeless imagery. It scratches the itch well enough, but it pales in comparison to something like “Reacher,” a series that “Man on Fire” is clearly trying to emulate both stylistically and demographically. Ultimately, “Man on Fire” feels like the restaurant you don’t particularly like, but on a seven-hour road trip, it’s the only thing available when you’re starving. Does it taste great? Not really. But it gets the job done.
THE GOODÂ – Yahya Abdul-Mateen II brings an interesting spin to Creasy, balancing the cold-hearted killing machine with a much-needed depth. He’s given the platform to be a rootable action star.
THE BADÂ – While entertaining enough, this is symptomatic of everything wrong with television adaptations of popular films: too many uninteresting characters, a predictable plot, and not enough juice to sustain an entire season.
THE EMMY PROSPECTS – None
THE FINAL SCORE – 5/10
