Mad Dogs

It would be nice if they turned this into a full TV series because each episode leaves you wanting more. I wish American TV would start making shows of this caliber. Instead they give us the same boring dribble over and over again. US television will take a successful series and clone it 4 or 5 times and the only thing they change is the city in which it takes place (ex. CSI, CSI Miami, CSI NY, CSI Los Vegas, Law & Order, Law & Order SVU, Law & Order LA, Law & Order Criminal Intent, etc etc.). UK TV actually respects their audience enough to give them characters with depth, writing that embraces new ideas, and a genuine attempt to engage and capture the viewers attention with intelligent stories and unpredictable plot twists. They seem to understand that you don't need big explosions, car chase scenes, and unrealistic gun battles to have a successful show or movie. When the story is well written and you cast great actors that know what they're doing, all of that big budget fluff stuff isn't necessary. I have only seen the the first 3 episodes so far, and I can't wait to watch the last installment.

Bottom line, this mini-series get's two thumbs up from me. If you're not pulled into this show after the first episode, then something is wrong with you. I'm so glad I ignored the 1st guys review that was posted on this page. He said it was boring, nothing happens, and it was a waste of time. ***PLEASE DON'T LET THAT 1 REVIEW DISCOURAGE YOU FROM WATCHING THIS SERIES***!!! You'll thank me later... trust me.

http://www.sociallyurban.com

My headline is a bit of an overstatement, as I don't watch much British television, but through my work as a subtitler I've subtitled quite a few British series. Usually, I find that British shows pale compared to the best American series. When it does work, I simply find American pop culture a lot more exciting. British shows most often seem a bit dull, slow, old-fashioned and depressing compared to the American equivalents. Therefore, it was a joy to find something like "Mad dogs". I subtitled both seasons (each containing only four episodes each), and I'm hoping I will get the next season too if there's a third season at some point. The show is actually exciting, thrilling and well-made. Only once or maybe twice did I find a few light plot holes or something that didn't make so much sense. The acting is good, the characters believable, and the script is great. Someone else here on IMDb said the show was funny too. I might have laughed a few times, but then I also laughed at one scene in "Schindler's list" (the scene where Schindler hires secretaries) and I wouldn't say that's a funny film. "Mad Dogs" achieves what it set out to do, which was to create a thrilling character-based series about dilemmas that we all might face under the right circumstances – a little bit like a modern noir taking place in glaring sunlight.

From here onwards, this is an update to my original review, which I wrote after having watched season 1 and 2. I then gave the show 8 out of 10. After having finished watching the entire show I was filled with a feeling of having watched one of the greatest TV shows ever! There has been some debate about how the show ended, however, but I will leave that up to the viewers and the users here on IMDb to delve into. I've grown accustomed to having to watch never-ending perpetual motion machines from Hollywood, where every episode is a single episode (usually about a police officer solving a case) with little connection to the ongoing plot line, which is dragged out forever and ever, until it's all either so watered down that you don't bother watching it anymore, or they cancel the show and you get no proper ending (or a very poor ending to a show that started out great). "Alias", "Prison Break" and "White Collar" are prime examples of this. You can't watch one single episode of "Mad Dogs" and get any meaning from it. There are no 'single episode' plot lines, only an ongoing plot line – and all the seasons are different, as the story keeps unravelling. They had most likely written an entire season before starting filming it (or maybe the entire show from start to finish), which is what made it so great: A story, not a money-making machine. Thank you :-)

This series (or rather series of series perhaps) started out so strongly in season 1. We were intrigued. The actors and acting were strong. The storyline different enough to be worth watching and wondering what direction they were taking. The four episodes of the short season were just about right. I'd give season 1 maybe an 8 out of 10.

Season 2. Still good though it did seem to wander a bit. A new storyline set somewhere else in Spain with a couple of new characters to add to the mix that made it interesting in its own way. Not as good as season 1. Not as satisfying. A few scenes included that we wondered what the point was. But still watchable. Down to 7 out of 10.

Season 3. What on earth is going on? It just seemed to wander aimlessly from scene to scene and episode to episode. At times, it seemed to be liking a Sartre play it was so odd. Scenes seemed to be added just to make up time and fill in an episode. Characters introduced with their own stories only to never be head of again. The final episode had a 10 minute drug induced sequence towards the end that was just bizarre. It was all quite painful in the end. 5 out of 10 would be generous.

Season 4. Well, we didn't watch the two episodes that made up season 4. I took a look at the IMDb reviews and noted that the final episode was scored 5.3 by other viewers. That said it all for me. We chose not to endure any more pain. Thank goodness the writers realized that enough is enough and no more will be made.

I hope that helps other viewers. Season 1 definitely worth watching. Season 2 if you are huge fans of the actors. But leave it at that or you'll be left with bad memories of the whole series.

I have to admit, I was impressed with the first series of Mad Dogs. I thought that the acting was top notch, especially John Simm as 'Baxter', which in part was down to the great writing associated with each character's development throughout the series. There was enough twists, turns and dark humour through the series that kept me entertained and wanting to watch the next series.

However, with the second series I always felt that there was several times I would find myself sitting waiting for something interesting to happen, and when it does, it feels almost like an anti-climax. Through each fifteen minute part of an episode it always felt like something would happen that keeps you interested just before the ad breaks, and when it came back on, nothing really happened like was made out previously, and the next ten minutes would be filler until the next big shock.

I'm not sure, but the second series just didn't grab my attention like the first, and I felt that Mad Dogs should have ended this time round, instead of 'To be continued'. I just feel that the story has been played out, and is not as fresh and different like the first. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed it, but not to the point I would say I loved it.

There is something about Mad Dogs which is intriguing. It is not perfect, sometimes it feels unsure if it wants to be relentlessly hopeless or gruesome or something that doesn't take itself too seriously, but the acting is good and it feels honest, without compromise. One thing is it not, however, it boring to the extent you accuse it of being, Jay Roberts.

If you take the 'opening paragraph' of Mad Dogs, you see what is presumably a flash- forward, where all of the characters are clearly up a creek without a paddle, with grazed faces and tired eyes. Men clearly at their limits, in one way or another. That's as intriguing a prologue as any to make you wonder 'how did it get to this?' surely?

If things simply 'got the point' as you are clearly gagging for, all of the suspense and impending doom would be lost, and no actions would hold any significance. The promise of something interesting is fulfilled, the characters grow more suspicious of a friend's behaviour, and in the space of 45 minutes this reaches a climax, and a pretty interesting/exciting one. If you're going to impatiently fast forward until it looks like 'something is happening' (hoping for a fist fight or a car chase?) you'll miss the growing tension between the characters, which is why things HAPPEN in the first place.

Men are not like women, you say, but be aware that not all men are you, either. I don't think not caring about 'relationships' or 'drama' is much to be proud about, if you can't stand them in stories then i hate to be the one to break it to you that you might not like stories, because it's what the best ones tend to involve. On the contrary, it makes you appear like a child fidgeting because the TV isn't flashing up pretty shapes when you demand it to. Relationships MAKE 'good stories', and far from being nonsense, they give stories SENSE and purpose beyond men hitting each other for the sake of it, in which case I'd recommend a dose of WWE instead of a TV series which will, like any good story or novel, involve characters having relationships.

Unfortunately, good stories include good characters, which is what this first episode demonstrates. I'll admit it's not always entirely successful; at times it aspires to be a Shakespearian tragedy and others like a jokey gangster flick, both work, but the fence- hopping is a little jarring.

Episode 1 was about building tension and how the characters stand with one another. In Episode 2 cracks start to show and everyone is not so strong-footed. If you can bear to sit through more TALKING (heaven forfend for such a thing daring to be in a show, such contempt for the audience, to go 5 minutes without an explosion) then you'll find things most definitely do start to happen.