On March 13, 2018, it was announced that FX had given the production a pilot order. The pilot was written by Alex Garland, who also directed and executive produced the episode. On July 23, 2018, Rob Hardy mentioned in an interview that he would serve as the cinematographer for the series.
TV show's Ratings
Production
Soundtrack
Devs (Original Series Soundtrack)
Different stars
- 1 Ben SalisburyPlainsong 1:14
- 2 The InsectsStranger Danger 2:01
- 3 Ben SalisburyAmaya Corporation 2:36
- 4 Ben Salisbury & Geoff BarrowEntering Devs / The Machine 6:28
- 5 Ben Salisbury & Geoff BarrowStealing the Code 2:45
- 6 Ben SalisburyTwo Concurrent States (Plainsong, Pt. 2) 3:36
- 7 The InsectsTramlines 2:47
- 8 The InsectsWere You Listening? 2:07
- 9 Ben Salisbury & Geoff BarrowSuffocation 1:37
- 10 Ben Salisbury & The InsectsYou're Fired 2:06
- 11 The InsectsChrist 1:35
- 12 Ben Salisbury & Geoff BarrowSudoku 2:21
- 13 Ben SalisburyAmaya's Theme (Version 1) 2:08
- 14 Ben SalisburyThe Visualisation Chamber 2:30
- 15 The InsectsReporting a Crime 1:30
- 16 Ben SalisburyAll Possible Worlds 1:03
- 17 The InsectsI'm a Tank 1:40
- 18 Ben SalisburySpecifically You 3:08
- 19 Ben SalisburyCrash No Crash 1:38
- 20 Ben SalisburyStay in My Bed 3:22
- 21 Ben Salisbury & Suvi-Eeva ÄikäsObject Input 2:10
- 22 Ben SalisburyAll Buddies Now 3:32
- 23 Ben Salisbury & Suvi-Eeva ÄikäsKeep Extrapolating 2:08
- 24 The InsectsSomeone Crazy 1:47
- 25 The InsectsAd Infinitum Ad Nauseam 2:00
Completed
15
| Country | |
| Spoken Language | english, chinese |
| Runtime | 54 min |
| Premiere: World | May 4, 2020 |
| Channel | FX Network (United States) |
| Digital: World | March 5, 2020 |
| Parental Advisory | Frightening & Intense Scenes, Profanity, Violence & Gore, ... |
| |
| Production Companies | |
About the film Devs
A computer engineer investigates the secretive development division in her company, which she believes is behind the disappearance of her boyfriend.Смотреть онлайн
Сast and Crew
Director
Camera
Writer
Videos Stills Posters Filming Promo Screenshots
- Premiere: “Devs” debuted in the U.S. on Hulu on March 5, 2020; episodes were released weekly, with the season (and story) concluding on April 16, 2020.
- Platform rollout: the weekly release schedule sustained ongoing conversation around the show’s plot and ideas across its entire run.
- Story format: it was presented as a limited series, so audience expectations were oriented toward a complete, self-contained narrative rather than multi-season continuation.
- Audience reception: the show developed a clearly niche fanbase; it was commonly praised for mood, visual rigor, and philosophical/scientific themes, and criticized for its deliberately slow pacing and high entry barrier.
- Critical response: overall critical reception was positive, frequently highlighting the ambition of its themes (determinism vs. free will) and its coherence as a finished statement.
- Week-to-week discourse: as episodes dropped, a major part of engagement became post-episode “breakdowns,” with viewers debating deterministic readings and many-worlds-style interpretations, keeping discussion active through the finale.
- Acting talk: viewer and critic commentary often singled out performances by Nick Offerman and Stephen McKinley Henderson, and frequently discussed Sonoya Mizuno as the story’s emotional anchor.
- Finale reaction: the ending drew polarized responses—some viewers saw it as the logical culmination of the show’s ideas, while others found it overly conceptual and emotionally distant.
- Awards-season visibility: “Devs” drew notable awards-season attention in the limited/mini-series space, boosting awareness beyond Hulu’s core audience.
- Impact on “serious” sci-fi TV: it reinforced demand for science fiction on television that prioritizes philosophical questions and ethical consequences over action-driven plotting.
- Cultural afterlife: the series is often cited as a mainstream-friendly touchstone for discussing determinism, predictability, and the implications of computation applied to human behavior.
- Genre consequences: its critical profile and sustained discussion helped validate the streaming-market appeal of finite, idea-driven sci-fi stories designed to end decisively.
What is “Devs” about?
“Devs” is a sci‑fi drama about Lily, a software engineer investigating her boyfriend’s mysterious death and uncovering a secret internal division called Devs inside a tech corporation. The story evolves into a debate about determinism, free will, and the cost of knowing too much.
Is “Devs” a miniseries, or will there be more seasons?
It’s a self‑contained limited series: it was designed as a complete story and resolves its main arcs by the finale.
What are the main themes and ideas?
Key themes include determinism versus free will, the ethics of near‑omniscient technology, the limits of scientific knowledge, and how trauma and guilt shape choices. Alex Garland leans into philosophy and mood more than traditional action.
Is the show more about technology or about people?
Both matter, but the emotional core is human: grief, trust, control, and the search for meaning. The technology acts as an amplifier for conflicts and moral dilemmas.
Do I need to know quantum physics to understand “Devs”?
No. The show uses scientific ideas as a dramatic device: it’s enough to track what the characters believe is possible and what conclusions they draw. If you want more depth, it’s a good prompt to read about determinism, interpretations of quantum mechanics, and reality simulation.
How many episodes are there, and what’s the runtime?
There are 8 episodes. Most run roughly 45–60 minutes, depending on the episode.
How dark and tense is “Devs”?
It’s fairly dark and unsettling, with slow‑burn tension. Think philosophical psychological thriller rather than fast‑paced action.
Does “Devs” include corporate‑thriller elements?
Yes. It portrays a sealed‑off tech‑corp culture: secrecy, internal surveillance, and how power and resources can rewrite the rules. The “individual vs system” conflict is a core pillar of the story.
Who is Lily, and why is she the central character?
Lily is a software engineer whose personal loss collides with a secret technology. Her refusal to accept the official story makes her the main engine of the investigation and the show’s moral choices. (She’s portrayed by Sonoya Mizuno.)
What is the Devs division within the company?
Devs is a sealed‑off, almost cult‑like research unit with extreme secrecy and its own rules. Its work affects people’s lives more than they’re willing to admit, and the ethical boundaries keep shifting.
Why is the company’s leader so obsessed with Devs?
His obsession is fueled by personal loss and the belief that technology can deliver answers ordinary life can’t. That’s the tragedy: the urge to “fix” the past becomes a willingness to pay with other people’s freedom. (The role is played by Nick Offerman.)
Are there religious or mythological references?
Yes, but subtly: they function as a vocabulary for characters to explain the “unknowable” and justify choices. The show plays on the border between scientific explanation and an almost mystical experience of knowledge.
Should I watch “Devs” if I like slow, atmospheric series?
Yes. “Devs” often relies on mood, visual metaphors, and dialogue about choice and inevitability. If you value atmosphere and ideas over constant plot twists, it’ll likely work for you.
Does “Devs” contain violence, and how graphic is it?
Yes, violence appears, though the show isn’t primarily a “bloody action” series. Still, some moments are tense and occasionally harsh, so sensitive viewers may want to keep that in mind.
Is the ending of “Devs” open to interpretation?
Yes. While the show provides a logical framework, it leaves room for debate: what counts as “real,” what is “model,” and where responsibility lies if the world is predetermined.
How is “Devs” different from other IT/startup shows?
It uses the tech world as a setting for philosophical sci‑fi rather than as satire of the industry. There’s less office‑life realism and more focus on reality, causality, and the power that comes with knowledge.
Which characters (besides Lily) are most important to understanding the story?
The story hinges on a triangle: Lily, the company’s leader, and the people trying to control the project’s fallout (including security and those close to the leads). Pay attention to who knows what, who hides what, and what they’re willing to risk.
Does the show have strong supporting performances?
Yes: supporting characters often serve as the show’s grounding force—raising moral questions and showing the cost of the leads’ decisions. Notable arcs involve Stephen McKinley Henderson, Jin Ha, and Cailee Spaeny.
Production
Sign up and you will see here
friends impressions of the TV show.
Friends comments and ratings
An ungodly drawn-out statement on the most simple idea «always make your choice.» Only this time everything is wrapped in the laws of quantum physics and the stone faces of the entire cast, whose characters only learned to talk yesterday. The composer and cameraman at least tried to drag it out somehow.
The show tries to be super smart to the point where it ends up doing the opposite. More like an action movie with elements of quantum physics.
An unreasonably drawn-out, emotionless mini-series with a very poor cast. 6.5 out of 10
For three whole episodes I was hoping that something interesting would start now, but it never happened. Oooh, very drawn out and visually poor. With Garland, it’s somehow 50/50 for me so far.
Dope science fiction with bad dialogue, stupid characters and a mountain of illogicalities. At least somehow the whole thing is saved by thoughts about determinism, a wonderful cast and, in general, a decent atmosphere. It doesn’t reach the level of «Ex Machina» and «Annihilation».
It may not be the most motivating series, but the attempt to reveal concepts that existed before the Enlightenment, the determinism in the series is commendable. I was interested, I watched it. Although the casting is unfortunate (except for Offerman, he would decorate any work).
Boring, boring, pointless and merciless. The lack of dynamics is not compensated for at all: no plot, no interesting characters, or even, at worst, soundtracks
From the very beginning they launch a strong intrigue, develop the idea and provide answers to all questions when necessary. The interactive and mysterious plot sometimes seems drawn out, but even these moments are done beautifully and do not irritate. The script is executed perfectly and reveals the story smoothly.
I’m very pleased with the first episodes. Garland paints his picture of the quantum picture of the world and asks age-old questions. I’m really looking forward to what’s next.
As already noted, it would have been just right to fit into half the time. Only the blasphemous increase in playback speed added dynamics to the series and motivation to watch it to the end – the idea is promising. But alas – it’s drawn out, strained, far-fetched… The rating is a stretch.
A good idea was ruined by its implementation: «holes» in the plot and weak acting.
Without exaggeration, a gorgeous «slowburner» series. Beautiful and stylish packaging contains an interesting philosophical statement about free will, the consequences of choice and how not to cope with the grave consequences of actions. And after the ending, you want to think about the questions raised.
Until the last episode, I tormented myself with doubts: whether I would like this series or not… waiting for something. But it turned out that everything was predetermined).
It’s true what they say: Don’t have 100 rubles, but have 100 friends. Especially if they are also movie fans. It’s like, without you, I realized that the series is not worth watching. Mercy.
Quite long drawn out. The idea won’t blow your mind, but it’s interesting. Even if it’s just old in a new wrapper. Most of the actors are completely stone-faced and not very interesting to follow.
Add a short review
280 characters