jeff adams

Watchable but... Half way through I wondered who the director might be. Steve McQueen? Yep! Where to start? We see a market with stalls full of fruit, etc. A shop with pastries and cakes galore! War time London! Not one customer has a ration card! Later we see a Fagan-style led gang of shoplifters straight out of a Dickens novel. The whites are largely bigots while the blacks are decent and brave. Yep-definitely a McQueen movie. The mother of the fatherless black boy would have been, in that era, ostracised, no ifs or buts.

A decent film until it reaches the last half-hour when it seems to turn very silly indeed.

Highly watchable. Spall never lets us down. Bit silly in places , however. Eg where he starts singing!

Tosh. Clearly for teenie-boppers with a low IQ!

How can another reviewer state that he has no sympathy for those young lads breaking into someone else's house? For goodness sake it was only a MOVIE! Fiction. I thought it highly watchable. At least there were no boring infills to stretch the movie out.

How a thriller ought to be made, but, alas, seems not to be anymore. Great movie.

What is Olivia Colman doing in such a trash of a movie? She plays a woman who has just given birth and she's almost 50 in real life! Boring.

The advert said: a gripping TV drama-edge of the seat stuff! I beg to differ. Too long, too many infills to stretch the drama out. Up to date with a ready pair of lesbians to tick the woke boxes. It is watchable but toooooooooo long! So many gaffes also if you stay alert. More like a soap in many parts. I found the elderly Irish actor extremely annoying-he seemed to be in almost every scene and even turns up in the nick of time(naturally!) to rescue the female police officer. And in places some of the actors seem as if pulled straight from amateur productions. Too much of the F word. PS-I am NOT Australian!

A watchable soap-if you like soaps! It runs to 8 episodes, too many; it could have been shorter and better. It's plain daft in places: can the American Justice system when trying someone for murder call upon the family's "murder gene" as evidence? That is the lad's grandfather is a murderer still serving time, therefore the lad is obviously guilty because of the family gene? An "expert" is called into court regarding the actual stabbing. 'Is there always blood spatter?" she is asked when questioned. She replies not always. In fact the victim could have been attacked from behind and stabbed in the chest!! When a victim is stabbed there is always blood spatter! And to say that the victim might have been stabbed from behind in the chest beggars belief! It is possible but has it ever happened. I have never heard of such.

Starts off well enough but...becomes too clever for its own good. What is the point of the main character having a high-level philosophy discussion with a woman when it's clearly at uni level and irrelevant to the plot? It's plain silly. Switched off about one third of the way in. Boring.