Netflix has a very specific hobby: spending a lot of money on shows that look incredible, sound important, and then politely divide the internet into “this is brilliant” and “why did I watch all of this at 2 a.m.”
The Abandons proudly joins that club.
Released in December 2025, The Abandons is a gritty Western drama set in the 1850s that promises power struggles, brutal survival, and morally complicated people doing morally questionable things. It delivers all of that. It also delivers chaos, controversy, and enough dramatic close-ups to make you question whether the camera operator was emotionally invested.
Let’s unpack what The Abandons actually is, why critics are annoyed, why audiences are still watching, and whether this show deserves your time or just a tired sigh and a “maybe later.”
What Is The Abandons About?
At its core, The Abandons is a frontier survival story.
Not the romantic kind with sunsets and noble cowboys. The ugly kind with hunger, greed, violence, and people who lie straight-faced while planning your downfall.
The series is set in the 1850s Washington Territory, where a group of settlers are forced to defend their land against powerful external forces. These forces include wealthy elites, violent militias, and systems designed to crush anyone without money or influence. So basically capitalism with horses.
The story centers around Fiona Nolan (Lena Headey), a hardened woman trying to protect her family and community, and Constance Van Ness (Gillian Anderson), a wealthy, calculating figure whose power comes not from guns but from manipulation, money, and patience.
This is not a “good vs evil” Western. It’s a “pick your poison” Western, except no one is actually poison-free.
The Cast: When Netflix Decides to Flex
Netflix clearly spent its casting budget wisely, because the performances are the strongest argument for watching this show.
Lena Headey as Fiona Nolan
Headey does what she does best: plays a woman who has seen too much, trusts no one, and radiates controlled rage. Fiona is not written to be likable. She’s written to be necessary. Headey leans into that, giving Fiona a sharp, grounded presence that carries the emotional weight of the show.
You believe this woman has survived. You believe she will survive again. You also believe she might stab you if you talk too much.
Gillian Anderson as Constance Van Ness
Anderson is quietly terrifying. No shouting. No melodrama. Just calm, calculated power. Constance doesn’t need to threaten people. She lets systems do that for her.
Watching Anderson and Headey share the screen feels like watching two opposing philosophies of survival collide: brute endurance versus refined control. It’s easily the most compelling dynamic in the series.
Supporting Cast
Actors like Nick Robinson, Diana Silvers, Lamar Johnson, Aisling Franciosi, and Lucas Till fill out the ensemble with mixed results. Some characters feel fully realized. Others feel like they were introduced, traumatized, and forgotten within two episodes.
That unevenness becomes a recurring issue.
Kurt Sutter, Creative Differences, and the Elephant in the Room
You cannot talk about The Abandons without talking about Kurt Sutter.
Yes, that Kurt Sutter. The man behind Sons of Anarchy. The man who loves violence, family trauma, and extremely serious monologues.
Sutter created The Abandons, but he left the show before production fully wrapped. Officially, it was “creative differences.” Unofficially, it sounds like Netflix wanted edits, changes, and pacing adjustments that did not align with his vision.
This matters because you can feel it.
There are moments when the show feels raw, uncompromising, and brutal in a very Sutter way. And then there are moments that feel smoothed out, rushed, or oddly restrained. The tonal inconsistency critics complain about likely lives right here.
Netflix finished the show without him. Whether that helped or hurt depends on who you ask.
A Western, But Not the Nostalgic Kind
If you’re expecting dusty heroics and noble lawmen, this is not that show. The Abandons belongs to the modern Western tradition where:
- Authority is corrupt
- Survival requires moral compromise
- Violence is messy, not cinematic
- Hope exists only in short supply
This places the show alongside titles like Godless, Deadwood, and The English, but The Abandons leans harder into bleakness and social power dynamics than frontier mythmaking.
It’s less about taming the land and more about who gets crushed while others profit.
Themes: What the Show Is Actually Saying
Despite its narrative messiness, The Abandons has a lot on its mind.
Power and Land
Land is everything. It represents survival, wealth, legacy, and control. Those with money manipulate ownership. Those without it bleed for it. The show doesn’t romanticize land ownership. It treats it like a weapon.
Women at the Center of Violence
This is a Western led by women who are neither symbolic nor secondary. Fiona and Constance are drivers of the story, not reactions to male decisions. That alone sets The Abandons apart from many genre peers.
Community Versus Systems
The settlers operate as a fragile collective. The forces opposing them are institutional, organized, and well-funded. The show repeatedly asks whether unity can survive against structures designed to break it.
Spoiler: it’s not optimistic.
Critical Reception: Critics Were… Tired
Critics did not greet The Abandons with open arms.
- Rotten Tomatoes landed around the low 30% range for critics.
- Metacritic hovered in mixed-to-average territory.
The common complaints:
- Uneven pacing
- Thinly developed side characters
- Heavy-handed symbolism
- Visual spectacle overshadowing narrative depth
And yet, many reviews still admitted the show was watchable, even compelling at times. That’s the frustrating part. Critics weren’t bored. They were annoyed.
It’s the kind of show that feels like it should be better, which somehow makes its flaws more irritating.
Audience Reaction: Watching Anyway
Audiences, meanwhile, are doing what audiences do best: ignoring critics and pressing “Next Episode.”
Viewer reactions are more forgiving. Many praise:
- The performances
- The atmosphere
- The central rivalry
- The unapologetic darkness
Some viewers enjoy the messiness. Others feel the show improves as it goes. A common sentiment is “flawed but addictive,” which is basically Netflix’s unofficial mission statement.
Is The Abandons Based on a True Story?
No.
But also… kind of.
The series is not directly based on real people or events, but it draws inspiration from:
- Early American frontier conflicts
- Land disputes
- Proto-mafia and militia-style power structures
So while Fiona Nolan didn’t exist, the conditions she’s fighting against absolutely did. The show blends historical reality with fictional drama, prioritizing emotional truth over factual precision.
This is historical fiction that wants to feel true, not document history.
The Ending: Ambiguity, Obviously
Without spoiling specifics, the season finale does what modern prestige TV loves most: it refuses to give closure.
Major conflicts remain unresolved. Character fates are left deliberately unclear. Power shifts, but nothing feels settled. It’s designed to spark debate and set up a potential Season 2.
Whether Netflix renews the show remains uncertain. The mixed critical response doesn’t help, but strong viewer engagement might.
If Season 2 happens, it will likely determine whether The Abandons becomes a cult favorite or a forgotten experiment.
Who Should Watch The Abandons?
You’ll probably enjoy this show if:
- You like dark, serious Westerns
- You appreciate strong female leads
- You can tolerate slow pacing and ambiguity
- You enjoy morally gray storytelling
You should probably skip it if:
- You want tight plotting and clean resolutions
- You dislike bleak narratives
- You expect every character arc to feel complete
This is not comfort television. It’s “stare at the screen and quietly judge everyone” television.
Final Verdict: Worth Watching or Not?
The Abandons is messy, ambitious, frustrating, and occasionally brilliant.
It has excellent performances, striking visuals, and themes that matter. It also has pacing issues, uneven writing, and the unmistakable feeling of a show that went through creative turbulence.
If Netflix had committed fully to one vision, this could have been great. Instead, it’s good, sometimes very good, and sometimes painfully close to being better than it is.
Still, in a sea of forgettable streaming content, The Abandons at least tries. And honestly, effort counts for something.
