Disclaimer?

Hey, is anyone watching Disclaimer? I must admit that the concept sounds interesting:

It is difficult to explain the many twists this narrative takes without dropping spoilers that will ruin the experience. And some may feel the plot – crafted with an auteur’s flair by writer/director Alfonso Cuarón, based on a 2015 novel by Renee Knight – is too predictable and outlandish to land with the power he so obviously intends.

But I found myself swept away by Cuarón’s patient, attentive style. (You’ll spend way too much time wondering about the inner life of a cat which constantly pops up in Catherine’s home at the oddest moments, framed artfully by the director’s lens.) This is a story that moves carefully in revealing its secrets, but never completes an episode without delivering forward momentum, leaving you with new clues, bigger questions and a desire to learn more.

Cuaron is a strong “yes.” But the Vulture hates it, and the case is plausible:

Cuarón has regarded the series as a “seven-hour film,” and perhaps his approach would have worked better if the production were designed to be experienced in one sitting. In its current form, the whole thing just slogs on. Scenes play out with all the portent of a Catholic Mass. Some sequences go so long you start to wonder if they’re padding the run time. 

Worst case scenario, of course, is that I watch the first two episodes, hate them, and write off the rest of the series. That said, I hate to give up on TV series, and so I might find myself wasting seven hours on a mess. I’m in the process of plowing my way through late-phase Terence Malick in preparation for a podcast with his biographer, John Bleasdale, and that means I might just have enough “portentous slog” in my diet.

So I’d appreciate thoughts. Yay, or nay?