Rebus

My Review- Rebus Streaming on SBS on Demand

My Rating 810

I hope there will be a second series of Rebus as I really enjoyed the first series which is based on Ian Rankin's best selling novels concerning Detective sergeant later Inspector Rebus described as a hardboiled Edinburgh cop.

I liked this tough but vulnerable character played by Richard Rankin who regrets the recent breakup of his family and the resulting divorce from his ex wife Rhona .

Now Mrs Rhona Moncrieffe they maintain a good even affectionate relationship together as John Rebus is a good father to their daughter Samantha.

However Rebus is constantly reminded of his failures and inadequacies by the wealthy success and vastly improved lifestyle of Rhona and his young daughter Samantha provided by Rhona's new husband Locke played Nick Rhys.

The action of the story increases dramatically when John Rebus is drawn into Edinburgh's criminal underbelly when investigating what appears to be a fued between two rival families that are suspected to be involved in drug and human trafficking.

Rebus also has a difficult relationship with his brother Michael a returned soldier who like his brother saw service in Afghanistan .

Michael and his family appear to be going through difficult financial woes and like many returned veterans feel ignored and neglected. Michael seeks a way out of his financial problems that brings him into a dangerous conflict with his brother John.

I enjoyed the different story threads and characters in Rebus performed by an excellent ensemble cast that includes Amy Manson as Rhona , Brian Ferguson who plays Michael Rebus and Stuart Bowman plays Ger Cafferty a dangerous Edinburgh gangster who has violent history with John Rebus.

I recommend this 6 part series well written and adapted to television by Gregory Burke and skilfully directed by Niall MacCormick and Fiona Walton it left me wanting more .

I recommend subtitles as the Edinburgh accents at times are a little difficult to understand.

There are likely going to be two types of reactions to this series.

If you've never read any of Ian Rankin's novels and are willing to ignore the gaping incredible holes in the behaviour of some of the characters at various times, then you'll probably find it acceptable.

However ...

If you've read the novels then you will likely think this something of a travesty.

This series seems to take characters from the novels and picking and choosing the various characters from vastly different points of time (and by vastly I mean in some cases literally decades!) in the chronological development of the Rebus world and throw them together to call them a story. I'll go through a few that are the most serious anomalies.

In the books, Rebus and Cafferty are the exact same age. In the early books, Rebus the DS is head to head at times with Cafferty who has his empire. In the later novels (which are still being written of course), Rebus has left the force in his advancing years (and later returns) while Cafferty is also aging and has health issues and struggling to hold on to his empire in the face of challenges from others. However in this series, we have a young Rebus circa 1987 in the novels with an aging Cafferty maybe 25-30 years older than this Rebus and perhaps around the early 2010s in the world of the novels. The dynamics of the relationship are totally lost.

Malcolm Fox? The first Rebus novel was written in 1987 when Ian Rankin was still at University. In it Rebus was the DS that you see in this tv series. Rankin had written something like 15-20 books in the series before Malcolm Fox makes his first appearance in a novel of his own ("The Complaints") by which time Rebus had advanced through the force and bent or broken so many rules that it would be natural for Fox to take an ongoing interest in Rebus' history and activities. Here, he is just totally out of place and really serves absolutely no purpose in the story other than to add a character whose name is familiar to readers of Ian Rankin's books. His complaints to Siobhan about being careful around Rebus just ring so hollow at this point in time. When Fox is introduced 22 years into the stories? Absolutely they would make sense but not now.

Gil? In the novels, Rebus and Gil are in an ongoing romantic relationship in the early novels! No sign of that here and never any chance of that happening here given their dynamics.

Darryl Christie? He doesn't make an appearance in the novels until the 18th one which came out in 2012. He's the new kid in town challenging the aging Cafferty. Rebus isn't even a serving DI in this novel but has already retired from the force!!! So how is he here going up against a very young DS Rebus?

Michael Rebus? Well, in the novels he is a fairly successful hypnotist having followed the same career as Michael's and John's father. Yes , there is a storyline where he gets involved in dealing drugs but having him portrayed as a down-and-out individual living on an estate in a poorer section of town is just the opposite of who is was as a minor character in the books. If I recall correctly, he even owned some sort of expensive flash car in the books; no sign of that here of course.

One could go on but these are the main inconsistences off the top of my head.

So to sum up, what do we have? Rebus circa 1987 era when he was young interacting with Darryl and Ger circa 2012 by which time Rebus in the books is a DI at the end of his career and leaving the force. So, sorry, this doesn't work for me. Siobahn from 1993 being the newcomer assigned to Rebus in "The Black Book" but here in a relationship with Malcolm Fox which in the novels doesn't occur until 2015 (I think it was) when she is a DI by then and Rebus has left the police. That relationship amongst senior police worked in the books but here, it seems inconceivable with Siobhan a newcomer. So, again, sorry, it just doesn't work for me seeing them here.

Everyone knows that when a novel (or series of novels) is made into television that changes are inevitable. That's almost a given if only for the sake of simplification. However, one still expects there to be some sort of consistency for the most part but this series throws consistency right out the window.

For comparison, Shetland was written around Jimmy Perez but when actor Douglas Henshaw left the series last year a new Detective had to be brought in played by Ashley Jensen. That is still consistent with the novels and perfectly acceptable because it takes the storyline forward and in a different direction. That's fine. Ditto Vera where her #2's have swapped a couple of times due to cast changes. Again, it's fine.

I don't know what we have here. A good storyline that someone decided to adapt for tv by pulling in random characters from all over the Rebus world in order to force it to somehow work and then get Ian Rankin to agree to the mess? I don't know. It really comes across that the story was written first with anonymous characters and then the Rebus characters chosen from here and there out of 37 years of stories to somehow make it into a Rebus story. It doesn't work.

Just so disappointing.

After all, where do you draw the line? Would viewers want an "Agatha Christie" in which Poirot was stuck on a case so he called in Miss Marple for assistance? I'm not sure I would. Or perhaps next year Rebus could request assistance from Inspector Barnaby from Midsomer Murders (both Rebus and Midsomer Murders originally being series of novels) in order to track down Professor Moriarty. Would you want to see that? Tongue in cheek perhaps, but not presented as a serious adaptation of the Rebus novels.

So where DO you draw the line? I know I don't know but I do know that this Rebus very much crossed it. It just felt wrong throughout.

One review I read in a newspaper called this a "reimagining" of the Rebus world. Fair enough description. But it would have required a lot of imagination to expect true fans of the real Rebus world to like the result.

If instead of "John Rebus" in this series we'd had a "James McBurry" and with similar changes for all the other characters with no tie-in at all to Ian Rankin's novels, it would have worked for me.

But because that's not the way it was presented but sold to me as a REbus story instead, the whole thing just didn't make any sense for my wife or myself as it was impossible not to constantly spot the glaring inconsistencies with the world of the books.

So, as I said, if you aren't familiar with the books, then perhaps you can tolerate what they've done in this series. However, if you know and love the characters from Rankin's now 37 years of writing a total of I think 25 novels and still counting, seeing his characters thrown together at random like this is a bit of a travesty to say the least.

Just one final thought. Kudos to Richard Rankin who deserves praise for his portrayal of the young Rebus. Nothing wrong in what he's done and I do want to make that clear. Just such a shame about the script he had to work with.

Troubled cop Rebus battles crime on Glasgow's streets, and battles his own personal demons, the drink and his fractious relations with his family.

I think The BBC has a winner here, it's a cracking series, hopefully one that will go on for years to come. A lot more violent than anything that's been on mainstream TV for a long time, incredibly gritty.

Nicely made, but definitely has a a raw feel to it, that's part of the appeal.

We've all had our favourite, for some it was John Hannah, for some including me it was Ken Stott, Richard Rankin was first choice casting, he's absolutely brilliant.

I liked the dynamic between Rebus and Siobhan, they're not exactly bosom pals, there's definitely a degree of friction, which grows as the series develops.

I was a little mixed about episode one, but by the second I was hooked, I could easily have binge watched the whole lot in one go.

More please BBC.

8/10.

Those who have read Ian Rankin's originals, and seen the earlier TV series based upon them, may be somewhat disconcerted by this revival. It is well done - although the conclusion of the 6-part series suggests more has to come.

The originals were set in their time; the technology of our era now moves on differently. The revival reflects this, it's not an attempt to dive back into the past - and perhaps that's commendable.

But I'm concerned about why the producers felt the need to provide us with this - unless it's simply a blatant attempt to capitalize on a successful formula with the attendant risk of alienating those who revere the original. I'd like to believe otherwise!

Whenever I see the word "gritty" describing a TV series or a movie, it reminds me of a slick Hollywood PR type promoting something. I've seen parts of the first two "Rebus" series, but I never read the books. It's set in beautiful Edinburgh, the capital city of Scotland. In a number of shots you can see Edinburgh Castle in the distance, once the home of Scottish kings and queens.

I didn't care for the storyline, it's another police procedural which is really a family drama. Writers are obsessed with stories of drugs, when drugs are really a small percentage of all crime. It's another cliched drug and organized crime story. With a better script I'd watch a second series. I like the cast, especially Richard Rankin as John Rebus and Brian Ferguson as Michael Rebus.

"Vera" and "Grace" are much better UK police dramas.