Not as good as the series
Seems this is a TV film as opposed to the very punchy and watchable series.
shareI really liked it, and consider it superior to the series. Here's why:-
1) It focused mainly on the case. This is mainly because it is a telemovie, not a series, so a lot of the padding from the previous series was left out, and you only got important bits.
2) Limited nudity. Sometimes it is thrown in there for no reason (Matthew Newton's bare arse for example. Last night, it was only in context.
3) It was much less violent or sexual, and I found it more enjoyable to watch.
4) It didn't make the criminal life glamorous in this one. Rather than mafia types with lots of money and woman, they were a feral family, and it made the crims more real (I know they are based on real people, but it wasn't going overboard with Godfather-type crims).
Yes, get your drift but still much preferred the series - especially "Sydney" because I know The Cross well. Havent seen "Gold Coast" (where I live) yet. Horses for courses!! Guess I like like gratuitous sex and nudity!!!
shareI enjoyed the show because it concentrated on the case, had some really strong lines and the acting was in general far better than we tend to see on Australian TV. However I had trouble concentrating because of the terrible dialogue. It seemed at times that some of the actors were reading from cue cards which they hadn't had time to read before going on set.
What is it with Australian shows and dialogue? Doesn't the director listen to how lines are delivered? It might be a small matter but it drives a huge wedge between an excellent show and one which is so-so.
I've enjoyed both actually. I say this as most Australian content ie: TV Shows and movies (and I really hate to say this particularly being Australian) are rubbish. Poor acting, script writing, direction etc. The Underbelly Series' have all been well polished and thought through.
Don't get me wrong, Australia has produced some really good screen work, but some of it has been absolutely atrocious.