Life on Mars

Our hero is thrust back in time by unknown means from 2008 to 1973 he is mysteriously holding a cops ID and is expected at the station house as a new transfer into H Keitels "team" of detectives. Its all confusing to him but he pulls himself together and for some reason goes to work every day as a new york detective working cases and living adventures with his new partners. We get to experience the culture shock first hand. There is also a dark unknown force always teasing Sam as to why he is there and that Sam is following someones unknown plan....

There are funny moments which are played out quite well almost looking like they are happening for real. Its a credit to the cast that they can pull it off considering the script quality.

more light hearted than the UK version and not quite so edgy. Even so in its own right its a decent show. the characters are intriguing and make you want to know more. As normal with yank shows there is always some big moral backdrop to the story which a lot of UK fans will find cheesy but the Americans love that stuff.....

each episode has its own story though they are all linked, I think the show could do with a bigger arc for us to get our teeth into spread out over several episodes or a season, though I would say it does look like its heading that way.

excellent cast. Though Harvey Keitel and Gretchen Mol both outshine Jason O'Mara the lead. He doesn't seem very realistic as a character and I wish he would take more advantage of the fact that he's from the future to make him more believable.

in summary thumbs up, good entertainment.

Having never heard of this show prior to its debut on ABC, I absolutely loved the American version. After a few episodes, the characters really developed, and the actors seemed to gel more than in the start. A lot of humor involved Michael Imperioli and Keitel condescending women's rights and confused by 'Spaceman's' current attitudes that we take as common sense.

The British version is obviously amazing, but it's two separate countries, so the issues and slang used (along with the scenery), are very different. To be honest, I didn't understand a lot of the references in the British version. I wasn't even alive in the 70s. I am almost positive a lot went over my head in the American version as well. The basic premise, the hallucinations, and character names are really the few things both have in common. The idea of a re-make is to improve something that was done poorly yet remained popular (usually a cult classic) or alter a successful idea to reach new audiences, not produce a carbon copy. Ricky Gervais understood that concept when bringing us the Office. Even today, his characters evolve yet maintain his original, core personalities, yet that may be due to his current involvement as producer and writer.

From reading the other reviews, I believe it was impossible for fans of the original to view the American version as something attuned to our history. The anger seemed more directed at Americans for even attempting this version, not its content, the sharp, sarcastic dialog (after the growing pains), or the humor in the ideals held a mere thirty years ago. Be that as it may, the outcry was heard and new fans of the series were stripped of a potential classic before it had a chance to develop into its beautiful and savvy predecessor. Sometimes the translation is lost on its way overseas (like Coupling), but I do not think that was the case here. Every week I was eager for a new episode. Every week I laughed and got more involved with the growing complexities within each character. Due to this, the final episode will infuriate just about everyone. It was an idea meant to be led to slowly and with a lot of misdirection, yet the cancellation sped us to the "wow" moment too quickly. It became a moment of confusion, instead of revelation.

I would advise purchasing either version and cranking the volume. Otherwise, you're not going to hear the music over your own laughing and voiced epiphanies. Both soundtracks are stellar, and half the fun is guessing at the end of the series like with Lost, and I promise, you will fail as soon as you start trying.

Both versions have a place in my heart. Enjoy them!

Who can resist checking out a new series with a time-travel aspect? I couldn't - so I watched. The pilot was pretty good. The stories, however, looked as if they would get tiresome since he's perpetually in 1973. Fortunately, the show's developers leave a little hook at the end of each episode where he's flashing forward to the present time. What they they are going to do with it is unknown, but it keeps me interested and watching.

If you haven't seen the show, it's about a present-day police officer who is severely hit by a car while investing a crime. He wakes up as a police officer in 1973 and, in every episode, tries to figure out what happened and what he needs to do to get back.

After a slightly shaky start, the series is holding up. The constant references to what life was like in 1973 (esp. things we take for granted) keeps it interesting - but it's Jason O'Mara (who plays the lead character) who holds the show together. His style of skepticism, seriousness and conflict (1973 values vs. modern values) is really great to watch.

There are some similarities to Journeyman from NBC, but let's hope this one sticks around.

In some ways, it is.

When I first heard "Life On Mars" was being adapted for American television, I really didn't expect much. And when I first watched it, I was unimpressed. The British series is just SO original, and SO excellent. Who could replace the Gov? No one. Even now that my opinion of the show has changed, I still think he is irreplaceable. But that's okay! The American series has other things going for it, which I suspect largely stem from a bigger budget. The music is better, for one. Also, the attention to detail is immaculate. One of the joys of watching it is experiencing the atmosphere of 1973 New York. I also quite like Michael Imperioli as Ray— perhaps he's not as funny as Dean Andrews, but he's enjoyable to watch in a grittier kind of way. I also like Jason O'Mara as Sam Tyler. He brings a lightness to the role which was absent in John Simm's portrayal. Whereas Simm was often terribly serious and painfully moral (admittedly why we loved him—it is these traits which made his exchanges with Gene Hunt so entertaining), O'Mara's Sam Tyler immerses himself more in the time period. When he takes delight in 1973, so do we. One of the few elements damaged by the adaptation is DC Chris Skelton—played in the BBC series by the talent Marshall Lancaster. Jonathon Murphy fills the role in the ABC version and he is so extremely boring that I lament the adaptation of his character every time he appears in a scene. Finally, it's certain that Harvey Keitel has big shoes to fill but he's adequate. He's a professional and has a presence which embodies 1973 New York.

If you are a big fan of the British series, you will enjoy this show. And if you've only ever seen this adaptation, I encourage you to rent the original BBC series.

The energetic and entertaining "Life on Mars" is a cop-show tonic for those tired of being CSI-ed five night a weeks. It's managed to craft a very watchable balance of humor and light science fiction in the frame of a traditional 1970's police story, and yet it's backed by some pretty solid acting chops from Harvey Keitel and Jason O'Mara. Yes, it's different from the British series which it takes its inspiration from, but if you can accept the premise, it makes for some pretty solid entertainment. For those of you fearing or thinking this could develop into another "Lost" with multiple incomprehensible story lines, the tenor of the first couple of episodes makes it clear that this show won't get overly weighted down by its time traveling premise.