i'll just write a quick review because i dont have time at the moment to go through the whole show. i only have two episodes left to watch. so far i liked the plot as a whole, i quite liked the acting too and i think that this show exceeded my usual expectations for dramas, which are quite low actually (though that doesnt mean i *like* low quality dramas). i just wanted to get some things out there, which are the things that i disliked most about the show and that made me lower my rating.
first of all i didnt like the amount of sex scenes, though that's actually my personal preference. however i think that maybe people who expect more of the action genre may be a bit let down.
one of the two things i hated the most were the non-con scenes between vegas and porsche. im not saying that sexual assualt or, as in this case, sexual harassment shouldnt be included because they are things that (very unfortunately) happen, and very often too. im just mad about the fact that vegas harassed porsche twice and both times he was either drugged or drunk. the first time no one knew it was him so, eh fine. but the second time i hated the fact that NO ONE addressed it, and porsche still trusted vegas after that. i ALSO hated the fact that after these things happened and porsche was rescued, he had sex with kinn BOTH TIMES. i dont care if he gave consent, YOU DONT HAVE SEX WITH DRUGGED OR DRUNK PEOPLE. and NO ONE addressed that either.
the second thing that made me question this show was the relatonship (the interactions) between vegas and pete. i havent watched the whole show because it isnt out yet so i dont know how they'll further develop the plot on this matter, and i dont know if my judgement/opinion on this bit is valid or not. back to the point, i dont like how they're portraying (or at least how they've portrayed it so far) pete's abuse and very possible stockholm syndrome. as i was saying with non-con scenes with porsche, my point isnt that these things dont happen, but that they dont portray them well, as if rape and abuse werent "that bad". i feel like they're romanticising the relationship between vegas and pete, but a) i might be wrong given that i havent finished the show yet and b) maybe they had good intentions but didnt carry them out well.
i think they also wanted to make vegas' character deeper, which is obviously fine and actually very good (and interesting) to me. most people arent 100% good or 100% bad, and either way building a character's backstory makes them more interesting and deep, and complete as a person/character. however, (though i dont know if the intentions were good in this case too) maybe they made vegas' own abuse and trauma look like a justification for his actions, which they're not, they can be the reason why but not a justification. he is still a bad person who did things such as rape and torture (among the usual crimes people do in mafia shows). im not very sure about this point because i often dont perceive things as other people do, so maybe they didnt portray this situation badly at all.
(and honestly the fact that they "forgot" pete DURING A MISSION, and an important and dangerous one too, just bugs me. they could have come up with a more reasonable plot point)

okay edit n. 1 since i finally have access to my pc again: thinking back on the thing about vegas' backstory, i realised that maybe it was just to make pete sympathise with him and create that kind of bond through past trauma and abuse and not as an excuse for his behaviour (vegas' trauma is still valid even though he's an abuser too).