CIA Has All the Right Ingredients, So Why Can’t It Make Us Care?

Are you familiar with the frustrating feeling of trying desperately to make something work, and it never quite does regardless of the effort put in?

That’s what routinely comes to mind when I think about CIA and where it lands in the FBI franchise.

It has a season under its belt, with another on the way, and one of the few fascinating things about the entire series is its disconnect with viewers.

On paper, it feels like CIA should have everything that it needs to be a solid network procedural.

We have two relatively charismatic leads, one of whom has a handful of solid leading roles under his belt that have compelled and captivated audiences for years.

It falls in line with the FBI franchise, which is one of CBS’ most successful franchises, well, at least when it comes to the original series.

CBS is pretty much the home of the network procedural, and rarely do their dramas fail to work.

CIA essentially brings a series about espionage, which is typically a thrilling, sexy, and intriguing area of focus to network television, which is a change of pace from the subject matter usually being reserved for premium cable and streaming.

The series even angles for one of the most reliable tropes: odd couple buddy cops.

That’s a dynamic as old as television. People tend to gravitate to the familiarity and reliability of that trope.

And yet, despite all of that, there’s something fundamentally “off” about CIA, and I’m unsure if it’s fixable.

Part of the issue likely started with so much behind-the-scenes friction and restructuring. It should’ve been the first real sign that the network was likely trying to force a series that wasn’t meant to be.

At some point during filming, the series lost its showrunner, Warren Leight, director Eriq La Salle, and Michael Michele. Every single one of them is someone whom the industry holds in high regard, so that was a blow in and of itself.

The shaky foundation offscreen wasn’t a vote of confidence, especially for a series that many viewers were already leery of in the first place.

And why were they leery? Because we essentially had to lose the likes of both FBI: International and FBI: Most Wanted, and there was no way in which CIA didn’t read as a replacement.

The expectations were high for the series because of that, which means they had an uphill battle when it came to attracting viewers who were already salty about losing these other series that they loved.

Ideally, CIA should’ve come out the gate swinging and doing everything possible to prove the naysayers wrong and win over viewers.

Except the show never does that.

I’ve watched every single episode of CIA Season 1, and ultimately, the series feels like the type of background television you play when you’re doing chores.

It has a loose enough hook as far as an overarching plot revolving around a mole.

By the final few episodes, we get some twists regarding Colin’s former partner, Toni, but the problem is you have to actually make it through the full season for some of that to grow any real legs or pique interest.

CIA isn’t “appointment TV.” Its biggest mysteries and hooks are lukewarm at best, and there’s no essential drive to figure out some of the thinly drawn-out mysteries the series presents us.

And some series can still function despite that. It’s a procedural, after all. Most of them only require interesting enough weekly cases and a batch of compelling characters we’re somewhat invested in.

But then, that’s where CIA tends to miss the mark, too. Unlike any of the FBI’s, we don’t actually get fascinating cases that lure us in, or even anything that stands out in any meaningful way.

Some cases span everything from CSI and Criminal Minds to SVU that I still have perfect recall for because they were interesting. But CIA just doesn’t have that same effect.

There’s not the same execution with cases that we get from the FBI.

But I imagine part of the issue as well is that the show never fully finds the right balance in distinguishing CIA cases from the usual federal ones while still being exciting.

Somehow, CIA has a way of making “spy games” feel rather dull and unglamorous. I suppose when pondering why this series still doesn’t seem to resonate with viewers, that’s a major factor.

But one of the biggest ones is the characters and the partnership at the center of the series.

Individually, Tom Ellis and Nick Gehlfuss are great, but when you put them together, the chemistry isn’t nearly as dynamic as you’d typically expect from a series like this.

It’s not to say that Colin and Bill don’t eventually grow into something watchable and perfectly fine.

They do — but they’re also not anywhere near joining the pantheon of dynamic duos and partnerships onscreen.

At no point will they be so iconic that you merely have to mention their names for people to know exactly who they are: Mulder & Scully, Crockett & Tubbs, Benson & Stabler — dealer’s choice!

And given the fact that the series also does virtually nothing with its supporting cast, as most of them fall so far into the background that it’s hard even to keep the names straight, Bill and Colin’s inability to truly pop as the only characters who get real presence makes the whole thing all the more odd.

It’s been interesting to see the general reactions and sentiment to CIA.

At its most heavily criticized, it’s written off as “boring,” and its highest praise is typically based on the performances of its leads despite an otherwise mundane script.

It’s not a bad show… CIA is certainly watchable. It’s competent enough; it just… doesn’t inspire viewers to actually care.

But there’s an undeniable disconnect between viewers and the series: it doesn’t resonate, and it doesn’t seem likely that it can ever be fixed.

Maybe the sophomore season can prove me wrong.