Close your eyes and imagine what it feels like to sit in an old movie theater, the ones with the red velvet seats and tall backs, planted firmly to the floor. There’s no faux leather that reclines, and instead of simply dimming the theater lights, maybe curtains draw back to reveal the movie screen. When the audience comes to a hush, only the whir of the projector can be heard. Suddenly, a black-and-white static screen is flickering in front of your face. This film quality comprises components of noir, something that “Sugar,” a new Apple TV+ series, overdoes in its first season. “Sugar” contains intricate plots, existentialist themes and black-and-white clips, but surprisingly has a noncynical hero. Just like in a traditional movie theater with a black-and-white film, this show is very dramatic but maintains the core elements of a classic mystery.
The series opens with John Sugar (Colin Farrell, “The Banshees of Inisherin”) shot in black-and-white, busting a perp for kidnapping a mother and her child. After the kidnapper is caught, suddenly, the show erupts into color. Audience members learn that Sugar is a private detective specializing in finding missing people. He receives a new assignment from Jonathan Siegel (James Cromwell, “Babe: Pig in the City”), a wealthy man and concerned grandfather, whose granddaughter has recently disappeared. The remaining episodes unfold with Sugar diligently attempting to locate Siegel’s missing granddaughter.
The show’s noir stylings are very prominent throughout. Not only does the show frequently switch from color to black-and-white, but the creators insert clips from old movies and TV shows intermittently during scenes. These clips appear as a description of what is going on in Sugar’s mind; we’re told that he’s a film junkie, one who greatly appreciates old detective media. When these clips play, we get a glimpse of the person Sugar wants to be — he seems to live in a fantasy world and is just posing like those people, when his true intentions might not be just like the actors in the films. From the audience’s perspective, this tactic is a little clunky and can make the scenes feel harder to follow. In theory, this technique could have added to the show’s artistic value. However, the frequency of these clips’ use causes them to feel overdone, cluttering the story with references rather than outright development.
Along with the noir-style production, certain shots in the show use strange angles and awkward camera movements that almost seem to mimic “The Office” in scenes where it wasn’t necessary or useful. During scenes between Sugar and Siegel, the camera positions itself normally, then zooms in quickly or pivots from perspectives unnaturally, almost as if the cameraperson is vlogging the series. While the word “colloquial” is commonly used to describe language, it can be applied here to characterize the series’ filming technique. To use this informal technique when examining such heavy topics seems incredibly misplaced. This, in combination with the overused noir elements of the show, causes visual confusion for viewers.
The plot of “Sugar” is undeniably intriguing — which is why it’s so disappointing that it is rendered confusing by the show’s questionable camerawork and other convoluted visual attributes. The plot is intricately woven, with storylines that reveal themselves very slowly to maintain viewer interest, pointing once again to film noir tendencies. Like any good detective mystery, each episode uncovers only one or two new elements of the mystery. The creators bait the audience with new clues and slowly reel in the fishing line towards the end of the season.
In addition to the mystery of Siegel’s granddaughter, Sugar’s past and current health is a mystery. In a voiceover, Sugar mentions how he’s glad the family of the granddaughter hasn’t looked into his past, but drops the topic immediately. These bombshell quotes occur frequently during the season with little explanation. It is clear that he is experiencing health problems: He spaces out, has bloody visions and his left-hand spasms. Sugar gives hundreds of dollars to an unhoused man, along with a cellphone to call his sister. When the man overdoses on drugs bought with Sugar’s money, Sugar responds violently, almost as if he is helping this man to make up for something in his past. The creators chose to parallel the mystery of Siegel’s granddaughter’s disappearance with Sugar’s present struggles, which lengthens the fishing line that they’re slowly reeling in.
Ultimately, “Sugar” has a solid plot, but not one interesting enough to make up for the show’s excessive artistic fluff. If you relate to John Sugar’s imagined movie personas, or you enjoy film noir, “Sugar” might just be the show for you. Sit back in your velvet chair and let the projector whir you towards amazement.
Daily Arts Writer Eliza Shearing can be reached at elizamae@umich.edu.