 |
| Image: Facebook |
Popular Nigerian critic Daniel Regha has shared a detailed review of the recently released series To Kill A Monkey, describing it as a bold but flawed project that tackles real societal issues yet falls short in execution and balance. In his remarks, he acknowledged the effort behind the production, commending its focus on pressing problems like classism, workplace harassment, infidelity, poor healthcare, and betrayal, but insisted that these themes were not explored to their full potential.
According to Regha, while the storyline was initially engaging and raised valid questions about power structures and social inequality, the series ultimately ended on a disappointing note. He noted that the conclusion failed to tie up the narrative properly and instead promoted the idea of selective justice — where only certain individuals were held accountable, despite multiple people benefiting from or being involved in the central crime. Regha maintained that this approach does not reflect real accountability and sends the wrong message about crime and consequences in society.
Another major flaw he pointed out was the film’s portrayal of tribal identity in connection to criminal behavior. Regha observed that the entire crime arc was heavily focused on one ethnic group, including the corrupt police officer, which in his view suggested subtle tribal bias. He criticised this creative decision for reinforcing stereotypes and ignoring the diversity of corruption across social and ethnic lines.
In terms of character development, he found the lead character, Efe, to be poorly written. Regha argued that for someone who supposedly grew up in the streets, Efe appeared far too naïve and emotionally unaware throughout the series. This inconsistency, according to him, weakened the credibility of the character’s journey and made his actions difficult to relate to. He also noted that the film failed to offer Efe any real alternative or escape from his circumstances, even when he had a legitimate opportunity to sell his project. Instead, the narrative implied that crime was the only path available in difficult times — a message Regha strongly condemned for its lack of moral clarity.
Regha also highlighted several production inconsistencies and unrealistic details that took away from the believability of the show. He questioned why a poor couple gave birth to triplets in an expensive private hospital, and pointed out that Efemini’s wife, Nosa, who was portrayed as a struggling house helper, was shown with expensive nails and appeared too clean and well-groomed for someone meant to be physically and emotionally exhausted. He also criticised the over-extended nature of certain episodes, suggesting that some of the dialogue could have been trimmed and combined to improve pacing. Additionally, he pointed out a continuity error in a shooting scene where a character’s shirt showed no bullet holes after being shot.
Despite all these criticisms, Regha praised the acting performances across the cast. He said that every actor delivered their role convincingly and brought emotional weight to the scenes they were involved in. He made it clear that the cast was not the problem, but rather the story execution and thematic delivery.
In conclusion, Daniel Regha rated To Kill A Monkey a 6 out of 10. While he acknowledged its ambition and the importance of the issues it attempted to explore, he believes the series failed to present a complete and balanced message. He stressed that the show downplayed hard work and hope, promoted partial justice, and was hampered by tribal undertones and inconsistencies that ultimately weakened its impact.
“No offense,” he added, reinforcing that his critique was offered in good faith, aimed at encouraging better storytelling and representation in future productions.
#DanielRegha
#ToKillAMonkey
#KemiAdetiba
No comments:
Post a Comment