Mammon

As Norway is considered as one of the least corrupted countries in the world, crime rate is also low, so you see many scenes depicted in series like Mammon with certain limitations, they do not seem realistic in full... So some mystery is in place, but you have to concentrate on other elements still. The story goes with ups and downs, there are some catchy twists and turns, but when rounded up, you realise some loopholes or start to think: how come?

The performances are okay, with several famous Norwegian actors included, but, compared to other series, the main character performed by Jon Øigarden tended to be a bit arid... All in all, my apparent "mistake" was that I wachted it recently, not when it was first screened, as Norway has created several more interesting/versatile series after that.

This review is strictly for Season 2.

First of all, it's MUCH better than season 1. As for Season 2 . . .

I had to go back and watch it twice. The first time I viewed it, the plot was too complex for me to fully penetrate. Primarily because there were so many people doing villainous things, it was hard to keep track of the characters. Usually, you can differentiate between the "good guys" and the "bad guys." And that helps to make a distinction between characters. But during Season 2, the characters all mix together in your head because seemingly none of them can be trusted.

IMHO,Season 2 is truly phenomenal. And the proof of that is, the plot entirely held up under a second viewing. I DID fast forward through a couple of action scenes because I already knew what was about to happen. But I took my time with the dialogue scenes and they all held up well.

Lately, I've been disappointed with the Camilla Lackberg crime series. Viewing Mammon for the second time reveals why. Mammon Season 2 is textured and although there are many "relationship" scenes, they do not devolve into soap opera style dialogues.

The plot of the second season IS quite intricate but pretty much every scene is credible. My only criticism would be the writer included a couple of scenes relying upon the "sneak up from behind the female" shtick. Which is mystifying because the writer was Margrete Soug Kåset, a female. Any woman knows females can sense when someone is staring at them from behind, let alone trying to sneak up on them. Scenes where the bad guy sneaks up on the female from behind are just NOT credible. So one has to wonder what Margrete Soug Kåset was thinking when she wrote such nonsense, demeaning the perceptive capabilities of women.

Having watched it twice, I can attest that the production values of Mammon 2 are exceptional and finely detailed. All of the scenes are expertly lit and well choreographed. Furthermore, there are no "clunker" actors. Every character is believable.

I've written several reviews and this is the first 10 I've given. Some will say the plot is too complex. But anyone who views it for a second time will realize the story would not have held together if the filmmakers had simplified the plot. Furthermore, this is a mystery that is satisfying to watch more than once.

Mammon - Season 2 is every bit as good as Bron/Broen and much better than Engrenages.

Mammon (which is biblical for material wealth or money) is advanced mix of crime, corruption, religion, rituals, media criticism and bad childhoods. Sounds as a lot? Well it is, and this series is a deep woven mystery, which is almost impossible to read before you the last episode.

That is of course positive in a world of a TV-series and films which are all too like. This differs from most, due to it being a mystery involving media, politicians and old school time secret networks.

We follow a newspaper journalist, Peter Verås, which is reporting on a case which entangles him way more than is good for the job, the paper, his family and friends. And he can't grasp what it is about, but it goes right down the core of his own family.

Some will love this due to it's complexity, others will have a hard struggle with understanding the complicated plot. This series has been a great success even before the first episode was screened, and sold to the folds of countries eager to get more of Nordic noir. Therefore the plans for a second season is already on the way, which once more will follow the journalist, I guess. This series goes right into that category, though it's more a mystery than a crime story.

The series was immensely popular when it was aired, having a 40 percent of the total marked when being aired, but was criticized for having advanced surround sound, making it difficult to grasp all being said on a small TV-set, but great on a surround system. As dubbed, or with subtitles, this will not be a problem outside Norway. From the third episode they decided to subtitle the series even on Norwegian TV.

It was also criticized for being unrealistic due to how a Norwegian independent newspaper would react to be scrutinized by the investigative police, but this came more out of pride of journalistic integrity than reality. I'm afraid the integrity isn't that strong, even in an otherwise low corruption nation as Norway.

I both liked it, and didn't, but I just had to watch the series through, and didn't have a clue who was responsible.

Exciting, yes, but easy to understand, no! Interesting due to the ethic dilemmas, yes, but easy to make a second season, no!

One big pompous belly flop of an attempt at nordic noir.

I'm a big fan of "Scandi-Noir" genre but to be honest, this one is just overly complicated with very little return. To keep track of the plot with its biblical references, moral discussions, tedious dialog which at times seems out of place, and the number of characters that keep appearing out of the woodwork, one of the boards that police use to solve a crime would be helpful. You need to try an remember who's who, who's connected to whom, and what their role is in the overall plot. The story could have been told in half the number of episodes, and without some of the very pointless scenes that seemed unrelated to the plot. The editing is not great as things jump around too much. The characters are not very likable, and the lead is very flat and two-dimensional. I'm not sure I'd watch a second season if it were produced. UPDATE: I thought I'd give the second season a chance to see if there was any improvement in the writing or extreme and unnecessarily complicated plot. There was absolutely no change at all. In fact, the second season proved to be even more ridiculous than the first, sequencing a series of confusing events that just seemed to happen and appeared unrelated to the story. It was as if the writers did not use a story board but came to work each day with a new idea. Whether that idea was relevant or not to the story, appeared immaterial. New characters would spring from nowhere and as the series progressed, each episode became just a celebration of chaos. You could watch the first and last episode only and not miss anything because the episodes in between were just fairly pointless. One can only hope we'll be spared a third season of this very silly series.