Criticism of the Netflix series "Break Point": Some light and a lot of shadows
The first episode of "Break Point" was eagerly awaited - the Netflix series about the stars of the ATP and WTA. But is the format really worth it? We watched the first five episodes and discovered a bit of light, but also a lot of shadows.
by Daniel Mueksch
last edit: Jan 17, 2023, 02:46 pm
The expectations could hardly be higher: With "Drive to Survive", US producers have presented a series about the protagonists of Formula 1, which has given an entire sport a push that was not thought possible - especially in the USA and especially for a young target group . Nothing less than a similar push is expected from the same producer team and their tennis version "Break Point". Too many expectations? After the first five episodes of the series, these five points stood out to us in particular:
1. The big players are missing
Of course, the cycle of a sport is always about showing new faces. Showing the future of the sport and not just celebrating the well-known greats for the hundredth time. Nevertheless: The fact that none of the three living legends Roger Federer, Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal is actively involved in the first episodes of "Break Point" is hugely disturbing. These three are (or have been) too dominating, too formative for tennis – each in their own way. It's simply not enough to only show clips from press conferences and statements from other TV interviews.
And that's not only negative for the men: Iga Swiatek is also missing. Since "Break Point" is fully focused on the 2022 season, there is honestly no alternative to the participation of this year's outstanding player. Maybe it can salvage the show's first season a little more by having the superstars appear in the second part of the season. According to reports, however, this is not the case. Incidentally, it was similar with "Drive to Survive". Max Verstappen also did not take part in the filming at the beginning. He was "convinced" when the series' success skyrocketed. That's not to be expected with "Break Point" after the first five episodes.
2. Only ignite the female stories
If you can't boast of the top stars, the stories of the other protagonists should at least be convincing. But that is not the case for men in particular. Taylor Fritz, Casper Ruud, Matteo Berrettini, Felix Auger-Aliassime: all three players provide nice insights into their careers, but they cannot captivate them. It stays at nice. With women it's a little different. The intimate insights into Paula Badosa's depression and Ons Jabeur's journey are very interesting and the highlights of the first five episodes. Sure, you've heard that before, but the two perspectives have rarely been told in such an emotional way.
3. Jumps in time that are too long
A big problem is the time between shooting and broadcasting. In episode two, for example, the focus is on the relationship between Matteo Berrettini and Ajla Tomljanovic. Quite exciting how you combine life as a couple and life as a tennis pro. Only: The two have been separated for over half a year. Of course, one cannot react to all current events in such a documentary. But with such a long lead time, at least a mention of the development would be desirable.
4. The tennis fan is almost irrelevant to the makers
After the first five episodes, there is no question who the makers want to reach with the series: NEW tennis fans. They should be won over to the sport with new stars and new storylines. You don't want to blame the creators for that, only: they won't trigger any euphoria among existing fans. If you follow the news of the tour and the stars on social media, you will hardly find anything new in the series.
5. Comic weighting of themes
This point follows on seamlessly from point four. If you've followed the 2022 season, you'll be shocked when the scandal surrounding Novak Djokovic is dealt with in a nutshell. The strangest thing is the topic weighting in the last episode, in which the French Open 2022 is the topic and, among other things, the path of Casper Ruud is highlighted. Logically, the focus is on the Norwegian, but the quarterfinals between Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic are not mentioned in a single sentence, undoubtedly the best match of the tournament. This also leaves the impression that one's own agenda is more important than an objective presentation. You can of course approach such a project, but then you have to accept that this series will have a difficult time with (existing) tennis fans.