Dimakovtun

The ending episode just leaves the gaping plot holes as they are.

I found it dumb to add the move of replacing a couple of misguided villains with a single villain whose goal is exactly the same, but motivation makes no sense, being a variation of "Everyone is going to die, eventually, so I will kill you now because I am so righteous" or "if you live forever, the chance of you getting cancer gets pretty much 100%, so let's get the cancer now and don't cure it!".

The villain change neither affected the story, nor it was even logical. You could have just removed that plot line and nothing would effectively change except there'd be less cringe.

The end-disaster was also lame. Something advertised as a massive cataclysm with the events previous to the last episode reinforcing that point, turned out to be a an ordinary cheap enemy straight from 80s.

The series-closing logic also makes no sense. "You need to destroy all X everywhere, or bad will happen." Except we are told that it has to be done in all the alternative timelines, and we are explicitly shown that it did not happen in the alternative timelines, regardless of the actions of the heroes. Yet it got fixed anyway just because, huh?

I agree with the ending, but the taken actions would not lead to it. It looked like someone had failed, but you still count it as "pass" because you are too tired to care.

You'd think that with the 2+ years of footage of the invasion of Ukraine, everyone has a better idea how the war between the modern adversaries happens. Artillery, leveling down the buildings and town blocks, active use of drones, etc. Yet, this movie uses the typical Hollywood cliche that 95% of war is close quarter combat by the infantry.

Alright, maybe the journalist side is shown well? Again, no. The IDs of all the journalists are not even checked (never happens), there are 3 journalists per 5-6 soldiers in an assault team and they are quite interfering with the assault itself.

Maybe it is the details that are troubling, but the global story is good? Don't even hope for that. The lore is nonexistent. "Somehow the US is in civil war" is literally the plot and there is never any explanation. You end up seeing some B-rated movie about Iraq, except without the yellow filter.

The movie could be about Iraq or WW II, and it would be just another poor movie. But it decided to show the modern war, without anything modern in it, which is plain bad and a disappointment.

Fallout franchise had a few shifts in the lore and perception, resulting in even the fans arguing about "what Fallout should be".

While the series are not as gritty-depressive as Fallout 1-2, and followed a bit closer to the Bethesda's vision, the level of actual dedication to the franchise will make it liked by everyone!

The props are amazing, the lore is very fitting, the characters are matching the universe. In-game brands and characters are exactly in place. It is no Master Chief from AliExpress, but a great adaptation which does not retell the story of any of the games directly.

The storytelling will both properly introduce the universe to those who had never heard about it and please the fans. It is rare. But what is even more outstanding - even if Fallout games wouldn't exist, the show is highly entertaining.

Nowadays we see more and more game-sourced shows, and it is great Fallout joins Cyberpunk, Arcane and The Last of Us in the list.