Evengyny Thanks for the memories!

BootDigest Such a frustrating disappointment

AnhartLinkin This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

Fatma Suarez The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

mattrochman IMDb should actually have separate entries for each series, rather than filing in it as one show with three seasons. Each "season" is a separate crime story, set in a different era with different characters. My review of 8/10 is simply for season 1. The first season was a fascinating story and the series was fairly well put together, though it did become a fraction "soapie" at some points. Nonetheless, the tone set by the acting was well conceived and the accuracy was pretty much there, even though a few events and aspects were simplified. Engaging plot, engaging characters, a few well-placed humorous touches, great acting. Enormous success.Following this, we had the second year which was titled Underbelly: The tale of two cities. This show was set in the 1970s and 1980s and was, in a nutshell, unengaging. The story was a bit thin, it was hard to find characters to sympathise with and several mid-season episodes seemed to play no role in advancing the stories, while others covered areas and stories that were covered in previous productions such as Blue Murder. I lost interest and its dwindling ratings throughout the season were well deserved. The first episodes of the third "season" (The Golden Mile) has just been aired (at the time of writing this) and it similarly appears that the characters will be largely uninspired and a suspicion that material will run thin and ratings with dwindle.Why didn't they just leave it at the first "season" and launch other crime stories under a separate title? Answer: unoriginal channel 9 executives in Sydney!

travelbug_2001 Now firstly I can't help but to roll my eyes at reviewers slating the series having not watched the whole series! I can think of plenty of series that didn't grip me with the first episodes but I gave it a go & it was splendid.I moved to Australia 9 months ago so I didn't know any of the history of the gangland wars beyond seeing on the news here that they were extraditing Tony Mokbel for murder after his dramatic escape to Greece (series 2 perhaps?).I've watched the whole series & it was bloody excellent. I live in Melbourne & it was interesting to see the locations I recognised. Now what really made this great imo is that I've met people who were exactly like the characters portrayed, they were believable everyday people - therefore it felt realistic.Perhaps it's not as slickly produced as the Sopranos but I'd imagine the budget is rather different. "Underbelly" - being set in Australia had an entirely feel - a real Aussie vibe compared to US vibe which made it interesting. Both series are excellent in their own different ways.Highly recommended viewing!

jamesmoule Plenty has been written elsewhere on this site about "Underbelly" so there is no need for me to detail the plot or the relationship to real events. My purpose is to comment on the other commentaries. A few years ago, Screen time produced a mini-series based on the Bryce Courtenay novel "Jessica". It was aired on the 10 Network in Australia, presumably to boost their Australian drama quota. It bombed despite being of excellent quality. The reason was that the Ten Network audience has different expectations from the ABC audience. The same applies to "Underbelly". Though it has certainly rated well and is the talk of the office every Thursday morning, I can't help feeling that it would have been even more appreciated by those whose dials are rusted on to the ABC. Those who have commented here about low production values and those who have compared the show to "The Sopranos" give away their expectations as typical Nine Network viewers. They like slick, tightly scripted programs, typically produced by American networks. Thank heavens "Underbelly" didn't get the "Days of Our Lives" treatment. I feel that I know the characters in "Underbelly". The incidents and the people are straight out of the national news bulletins. This is a dramatised documentary in many ways. "The Sopranos", popular though it may be, is candy-coated fiction in comparison. Give me reality, rough with warts, any day.

dunxy Maybe i had set expectations to high before watching the 1st ep.I was hoping for something that would maybe stack up against the likes of "Blue Murder" but from the 1st ep,I really am not holding my breath.The acting is sub par for the most part, really i thought i was watching Neighbours one half of the time and Stingers(more Aussie crap) the other half.The writing doesn't seem to be much better.The camera work is atrocious, a lot of the hand held "move the camera excessively and abuse the crapola outta the zoom" nypdpoo style going on.I guess they do it to try and make uninteresting scenes more interesting,sadly it fails all of the time and just annoys.I'm sure this mediocre tripe will do OK rating wise because of all the hype surrounding it and the ban etc.But it really is nothing special, not so far at least.....UPDATE:People were quick to judge and say how can you rate something on the 1st 2 eps,well after having seen all the eps, it only got worse,MUCH worse.Far to much T&A (don't get me wrong, I'm no prude, just its mindless filler...)Its obvious which demographic they were hoping to get in the viewing audience...From the NSW number plates on the vehicles to all the breathing dead people, this show is just rubbish!I've seen films made by high school kids that are better than this. See revised (lower) rating....This may well be the best show channel 9 has ever aired, but thats not saying anything,they love to show unwatchable tripe,underbelly is just the lesser of evils.Anybody remember Chances? Underbelly is like Chances with guns!