M.I.T.: Murder Investigation Team

The one thing that stands out about MIT is that it's not very homogenous: style and quality of stories are very different throughout the first series. Some episodes are meant to be very cutting edge by using an almost documentary style, some are fairly traditional. Some stories are very complex and difficult to follow particularly within a 50 minutes format- sometimes you get the impression that a 90 minutes story was cut down to fifty. Other stories are great crime drama, almost Jonathan Kellermann terrain. So all in all, it's a show that's showing promise but still has to find its own style. My main issue with the show is however the DI Vivien Friend or rather the way she is portrayed. She is a bit of a stereotype in terms of being the hard nosed career woman on the surface but with emotions underneath- I just don't see that in the performance.

Another alleged spinoff from "The Bill", since the first episode arcs off from the murder of Sgt Boyden. They solve the crime in the first episode, despite the fact that "The Bill" had been carefully cultivating several suspects over several episodes. In the end their lengthy and complicated setups came to nothing and all the anticipation and mystery evaporates immediately. And for some reason it takes about six officers to solve a pretty obvious crime.

What's left? Five more pedestrian police drama episodes where the murderer always ends up being the first person you thought it was, over-produced and over-acted, in typical "quality British crime drama" fashion. "Burnside", the previous spinoff, was likewise a pretty ordinary set of police dramas with a character called Frank Burnside inserted. In "M.I.T." they could have at least used DC Duncan Lennox (wonderful George Rossi), since that character now works for MIT.

At the end of the day, the whole affair is obviously a fairly cynical attempt to build a franchise from "The Bill" by inserting a few cameos in the first episode. The fact that this show isn't continuing probably tells you a fair bit.

The first season was really interesting. Not perfect but the players were good. Putting DS Trevor Hands in charge for season two the show went downhill. No wonder there was no season three. His insensitivity and brash recklessness made everyone's job harder. There was just no sign of a good detective, just someone trying to prove he was the best but his ego was too big such a shame.

If it had carried on in the same vein as season one it probably would have been much better. His character was repugnant. The actor portraying him may have been good but the character was atrocious and unlikeable and very demeaning to others.

I love UK murder mysteries, both filmed and written, and most are on a high level. I thought this one was trying to be but just didn't make it. For one thing I can't stand that jerky hand-held camera style of filming that was popular for a while but no longer is, thank goodness. I think we were supposed to feel the tension build between the characters as the camera comes in for a close-up that lasts for more than a second, implying some kind of significance that just isn't there. The denouement where we find out who committed the murder was totally flat and boring. The whole thing felt meaningless IMHO. I watched only one episode and it felt like such a waste of time I was not tempted to watch any more. If you want a dramatic mystery series with two, no make that three, lead women, Scott & Bailey is so much better.

Loved this show. The first two episodes were exciting and dynamic. The scripting was dense and the visual style was edgy and modern. Overall it was well directed and had great performances. It reminded me a lot of the really exciting shows like Boomtown and The Shield that are coming out of USA and a little bit of the excellent Homicide Life on the Street. Definitely watching the rest.