Bergerac

I'm old enough to remember watching the original Bergerac and always enjoyed it. A lot of time has passed since then and the people I watched it with have long since passed away. As a bit of a detective buff I wondered what was that I enjoyed about the original series so I watched a few d episodes ahead of watching the new one. I'm glad I did because there it was straight from the opening credits, the sheer beauty of Jersey itself! The new series could literally have been filmed anywhere and is all the weaker for it. Unfortunately the more I watch the more I realise that Bergerac 2025 is inferior in virtually every aspect. Damien Moloney is a decent actor but lacks the charm of John Nettles, the support cast are all lesser versions of the originals and Zoe Wanamaker is completely wasted here.

The long form story could have been an upgrade but 2 three part episodes or even 3 two parters would have been preferable as the story was fairly basic and stretching it over 6 episodes made for dull viewing at many stages which made the lack of use of the beautiful surroundings even more difficult to understand.

Mention must be made of the excellent Phillip Glenister who stands head and shoulders above all others involved and left me wondering if he wouldn't have been better suited to the titular lead role.

All in all not terrible and probably better for those who have never seen the original but it could have been so much better.

I'm a fan of Damien Molony.

I'm a fan of the original Bergerac (albeit I was a tiny kid when it was on our TVs).

I love the Channel Islands.

What's not to love?

It was OK.

It just needs to be more succinct.

Faster paced.

Each case could and should be completed in two episodes - just like "Silent Witness" or "Unforgotten".

This dragged on at a snails pace.

It was missing something - I cannot put my finger on "what". Possibly just pace and story arc. I hope it's renewed for a second season taking viewer feedback on board.

I was looking forward to the new Bergerac. I'm left slightly disappointed.

There is nothing barely redeemable about this remake. The storyline isn't new, the acting is almost as bad as a children's school play and none of the characters had any depth.

It's incredulous that this even got funding. The 'whispering' DCI character, the back stabbing DI and lack of basic police procedure we know from other crime shows. There was no drama, no edge of the seat tension and no real motivation to watch the remaining episodes than to at least give it a chance.

Add to this a complete lack of plausible 'rich' people behaviour - we know any wealthy person would have used their private connections to sideline Bergerac sooner. It's dubious anyone had watched the original show or had a clue about how to write an evolving story.

Firstly, opening titles and music: complete mess, a weedy irritating noise with the original sound track muffled.

Which suits most of the script: Well over half was incoherent mumbling, not helped by the bloke bashing with the hammer in the next studio. The acting was not so much "wooden" as "concrete". The cast appointed by the United Nations. The police station appears to be a disused block of flats. Apart from some of the cast sounding as if they were reading their lines, many were sitting around for no reason at all, not contributing to the (lack of) action. Not a hint of humour, character, personality from anybody, as if it was all filmed in flat grey.

Dub it with american accents, rename it "Cop Guys" or somesuch. We watched an old copy of "Heartbeat" recently, and would advise Jason Durr as Bergerac, and Mark Jordon as Crozier. Oh, and good though she normally is, poor Zoe Wanamaker as "Charlie Hungerford" just does not cut it. Total drearyness, best avoided without anti-depressants. Waste of money. Ivor Macadam.

Unfortunately, this production chose to treat some common life occurrences as though it's all just a "Slag Him Off!", "Slag Him Off!", "Slag Him Off!" opportunity. It's tiring and depressing.

A man imbibes one evening and all the next day he gets comments about being breathalysed, smelling bad, etc. Does this upright hominid not know how to shower or use a breath mint? WTH with this relentless nonsense? Clearly, there's a writer/team that doesn't understand garden-variety functional alcoholism, or what a true, full-blown drinking problem looks like. Instead, they flip out over practically nothing, and verbally exaggerate incessantly. PATHETIC.

Clichés and poor choices galore: 1) A pushy, wrong-headed, nearly amoral journalist who'd rather listen to a convicted criminal provide nothing but slander and defamation on any day of the week.

2) Idiotic psychiatry/counseling scenes, consisting of repetitive interrogations and hounding, followed by a full medical confidentiality breach with an employer.

3) Family conflict on repeat, where a parent is being barred from contact, but has done little of substance to warrant that.

4) Treating a grieving, depressed person with an emotional crutch like an abnormal pariah.

5) Bad, obvious evidence 'discovery' scenes.

6) Pressuring people while they're on the phone for absolutely no legit reason ('cept fake drama).

7) A totally illogical setup involving a semi-employment scenario (unrealistic in every way), with predictably irrational risk-taking, and then a parade of undermining and backstabbing colleagues (as if they could be called that) always marching around the office right behind to lay on the pointless pressure.

I mean, a guy has a drinking problem, but the counseling he's forced into doesn't address it, then he gets sent home to do nothing but scrut around his house for open bottles to chug? Would his 'superior officer' seriously think that cutting him off would be a way for him to get his head on straight, when being a workaholic is all that's keeping him going? INSANE.

And, no one is spending their full days having to parent teenaged children unless they are disabled dependents. SO DUMB!