HBO’s Rooster review: Steve Carell goes back to school, but the comedy barely graduates
Rooster arrives with a strong premise and a cast that should have made it one of the sharper comedies of the year. A once-famous writer returns to college in search of relevance, identity, and maybe a second act of cool. Instead, the show lands somewhere uneven. It flashes brilliance, then stalls.
At the center is Steve Carell, who leans heavily into a version of the awkward, approval-seeking persona that made The Office iconic. It works at times. There are moments where his desperation feels earned. A celebrity intellectual trying to reinsert himself into youth culture while dealing with a collapsing personal life is a strong comedic engine. But too often, the performance feels like a return to familiar territory rather than a reinvention.
His character’s emotional setup is compelling. He is a genuinely good father. He is also recently burned by his ex-wife, played by Connie Britton, who brings a sharp, confident energy as the polished CEO who moved on. Their dynamic hints at something deeper than the show consistently delivers.
The breakout surprise is Phil Dunster, best known as Jamie Tartt from Ted Lasso. Here, he plays the cheating son-in-law, and he clearly understands the assignment. He is smug, chaotic, and oddly charismatic. Every scene he is in feels alive. He injects unpredictability into a show that often feels structurally safe.
Then there is John C. McGinley, who nearly steals the entire series. As the unapologetically un-PC college president, he delivers the most consistently funny performance on the show. His timing is sharp, his character is unfiltered, and he operates with a kind of comedic confidence that cuts through weaker writing. Even his interactions with his secretary, a minor character on paper, turn into some of the most unexpectedly funny moments in the series.
Where Rooster struggles is with its supporting emotional core. The dean, positioned as Carell’s love interest, never quite registers. The performance feels flat, lacking the spark needed to anchor a romantic storyline. Similarly, the daughter character, who should provide emotional stakes, feels underwritten and distant. These roles are meant to ground the show, but instead they create gaps.
The tonal balance is also inconsistent. The show wants to be both a sharp satire of aging, relevance, and academia, and a heartfelt story about family and redemption. It never fully commits to either. When it leans into absurdity, it works. When it tries to slow down and build emotional weight, it often loses momentum.
Still, there is something watchable here. The premise has legs. The cast, at its best, elevates the material. McGinley alone is worth tuning in for, and Dunster proves he can thrive outside his breakout role.
Rooster is not a failure. But it is not yet what it could be. It feels like a show still figuring out whether it wants to be bold or familiar. Right now, it is caught somewhere in between.
We want to see a second season! 7/10
