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.

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.

Having seen the first episode of 8 only, I'm in two minds whether to watch the rest. The first story continued from a storyline portrayed in a recent episode of The Bill. And a very interesting, intriguing and surprising storyline it was, too.

But what spoilt it for me was the filming technique. Just because you can stick a modern TV camera right up the actor's nose doesn't mean you have to. I watched on a small TV set, but the thought of seeing someone's head fill the whole of a 3-foot wide TV screen makes me feel seasick. Pretending to hide behind another character's head or a plant is a very dull, and now over-used, way of trying to create a sense of reality. The filmic technique merely gets in the way of the story.

I don't know why only two seasons were made of this show, I really enjoyed it. There was good acting, good story lines. I recently found it on Acorn TV and am disappointed there are no more of MIT to watch.