The Spy Who Loved Continuity: Why Will Smith’s Exit from ‘Slow Horses’ Isn’t the End of the World
When news broke that Will Smith, the lead writer and executive producer of Slow Horses, was stepping away from the series, fans of Apple TV’s cult spy drama collectively held their breath. Personally, I think this reaction is both understandable and a little overblown. Yes, Smith was the de facto showrunner, steering the ship through its wry, slow-burn narrative. But here’s the thing: Slow Horses has never been a one-man show. What makes this particularly fascinating is how the series’ collaborative structure—a rarity in TV—has positioned it to weather creative transitions better than most.
The Showrunner Myth and the Power of Ensemble Creativity
One thing that immediately stands out is how Slow Horses operates without a traditional showrunner. Doug Urbanski, another executive producer, framed it perfectly: the show’s creative foundation is built on a shared vision, not a single voice. From my perspective, this is why Smith’s exit, while significant, isn’t catastrophic. The series has always thrived on its ensemble nature, both on-screen and behind the scenes. Gary Oldman’s Jackson Lamb, Jack Lowden’s River Cartwright, and Kristin Scott Thomas’s Diana Taverner are characters so richly drawn that they almost feel self-sustaining.
What many people don’t realize is that this ensemble approach extends to the writing room. Gaby Chiappe stepping in as lead writer for Season 6 isn’t a patch job—it’s a natural evolution. If you take a step back and think about it, this is how Slow Horses has always worked: a collective effort to maintain its delicate tone and momentum.
Season 6: A Bold Gamble or a Masterstroke?
The decision to adapt two of Mick Herron’s books into a single season is bold, to say the least. Urbanski’s reasoning—that the sixth and seventh books were ‘thin enough’ to combine—raises a deeper question: Are they stretching the material, or are they doubling down on what works? In my opinion, this move could be a masterstroke. Slow Horses has always been about pacing, and if the creative team believes this approach preserves the story’s momentum, I’m inclined to trust them.
A detail that I find especially interesting is how Herron’s novels remain the series’ creative bedrock. What this really suggests is that Slow Horses isn’t just adapting books—it’s honoring them. Some of the show’s best dialogue and scenes are lifted directly from Herron’s pages, which speaks to the strength of the source material.
Awards, Pressure, and the Art of Not Caring
The show’s nine Emmy nominations for Season 5 are impressive, but Urbanski’s comment that they ‘don’t make the show for awards’ is both refreshing and revealing. What makes this particularly fascinating is how Slow Horses has managed to gain critical recognition without chasing it. From my perspective, this is a testament to its authenticity. The series doesn’t try to be flashy or trend-chasing—it’s a character-driven, tone-focused drama that just happens to be really, really good.
But here’s where it gets interesting: awards do add pressure. Personally, I think this is why Urbanski’s ‘family conversation’ about the show’s future is so crucial. Success changes expectations, and Slow Horses has to balance its cult status with mainstream acclaim.
The Future: A Runway or a Question Mark?
With seven seasons in production and nine books as source material, the question of how long Slow Horses can run is inevitable. What many people don’t realize is that the show’s longevity isn’t just about the books—it’s about the willingness of everyone involved to keep showing up. Apple, Oldman, the creative team—they all have to want it.
If you take a step back and think about it, this is where Slow Horses has an advantage. Most TV shows don’t have a built-in roadmap like Herron’s novels. And as Urbanski pointed out, Herron hasn’t stopped writing. This raises a deeper question: Could Slow Horses outlive its source material?
Final Thoughts: Why This Show Matters
Slow Horses isn’t just another spy drama. It’s a study in nuance, tone, and character. What this really suggests is that its success isn’t tied to any one person—not even Will Smith. From my perspective, the show’s ability to adapt, evolve, and stay true to its roots is what makes it special.
Personally, I think Season 6 will be a litmus test. If it delivers on the promise of being ‘the best season yet,’ it’ll prove that Slow Horses is more than the sum of its parts. And if it stumbles? Well, that’s the beauty of ensemble creativity—there’s always someone ready to step up.
So, here’s my takeaway: Don’t mourn Smith’s exit. Celebrate the show’s resilience. Slow Horses isn’t slowing down—it’s just changing lanes. And that, in my opinion, is what makes it worth watching.
