User reviews

I Tried watching. The filming is atrocious. Camera flips from face to face, one persons nose to another nose, follows an arm putting a case file on a desk, etc. Makes you dizzy trying to follow. They have people talking to suspects with characters jumping around in front of the camera. Truly annoying. I Tried later episodes and it was still the same. The stories seemed decent, characters not obnoxious and acting good. For once the show did not have a horrible chief superintendent who brow beat people for no reason. A very rare event in UK police dramas. Lastly, they might have well filmed it in black and white for all the lack of color in the environments.

The first season was really interesting. Not perfect but the players were good. Putting DS Trevor Hands in charge for season two the show went downhill. No wonder there was no season three. His insensitivity and brash recklessness made everyone's job harder. There was just no sign of a good detective, just someone trying to prove he was the best but his ego was too big such a shame.

If it had carried on in the same vein as season one it probably would have been much better. His character was repugnant. The actor portraying him may have been good but the character was atrocious and unlikeable and very demeaning to others.

Loved this show. The first two episodes were exciting and dynamic. The scripting was dense and the visual style was edgy and modern. Overall it was well directed and had great performances. It reminded me a lot of the really exciting shows like Boomtown and The Shield that are coming out of USA and a little bit of the excellent Homicide Life on the Street. Definitely watching the rest.

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.

"M.I.T." spun off "The Bill" after the demise of Matthew Boyden. In the best traditions of British police drama, "M.I.T." is a winner.

What makes it a change for the better is that "The Bill" in recent years has become little more than a soapy, tawdry shadow of the excellent series it once was.

"M.I.T." presents a stark comparison. Engaging, well focused, fast moving episodes with a good balance between storyline and characterization.

The fast pace may not be to everyone's liking but it still represents the best effort in its genre to come out of Britain in a long time.

Let us hope there is more to come.

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.

I'm really enjoying this crime show. If you like UK crime shows in particular, this one's for you. The episodes cover real police work (IMHO) with no meanderings-- quick and to the point! No homelives of the principals, no extra-curricular work romances, no back stories. Just a crime, an investigation and an ending which may seem somewhat abrupt. But it's not Crime and Punishment. It delivers.

It looks a bit dated. The head officer in charge of investigations reminds me of Della Street from Perry Mason, maybe it's the hairdo. But don't be put off. Give this one a try. I wish other crime shows were as good at showing really investigative work.

If you like really bizarre camerawork with peoples faces filmed from weird angles, and the camera motion like it's hand held, then you'll like this. It was a popular style in the early 2000s. Coupled with extreme closeups of faces, mouths, eyes that are common in many of today's films from Europe, mainly France, it's all just a bit too distracting. The show itself is formula driven with clues being solved in quick succession by a very smug faced inspector. It's just not that good a show to go up against other murder mysteries or cop shows on TV. No wonder it did not last long.

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 like this police show. If you like UK crime shows in particular, this one's for you. The episodes cover real police work and just that ! No home lives of the principals, no work romances, no boring soap opera dramas, no back stories. Just a crime, an investigation and an ending .

It looks a bit dated. The chief officer in charge of investigations hairdo seems a bit 40s. But don't be put off. Give this one a try. I wish other crime shows were as good at showing really investigative work.

Only moan, as usual police are shown wandering about the crime scene with their heads uncovered.

There are hoods for a reason.

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.

There is nothing good about this series. Bad acting, bad camera work, bad direction, bad script.

The only thing good about each episode was the ending.

This show is a spin off from the hugely popular Brit cop drama THE BILL , a fact that had been publicised for months before its transmission . But - And it`s a very big but - its connection with THE BILL is very tenious . A major character from Sun Hill police station is murdered and it`s up to this murder investigation team to catch the killer which they do in the first episode , however in the following episodes there is absolutely no connection between the boys in blue from THE BILL and the characters in this show . In other words it`s not really a spin off from THE BILL it`s just another generic detective drama that uses a plot in its first episode to allow the TV company to con people into thinking they`re going to be watching a grittier version of Britain`s favourite cop show.

There`s two things I found irritating . The first is the zippy camera work which has the camera quickly panning acoss , up and down , in and out of the screen . Imagine the camera work of HILL STREET BLUES on speed and you`ve got the idea , it`s really annoying though this seems to be ditched the more the series goes on . Secondly the scenes never seem to last for a few seconds . Jump cut to the station where the woman detective puts two and two together . Jump cut to lead . Jump cut to suspect . Jump cut to detective confirming alibi . Jump cut to station where there`s a new lead . No doubt the producers will defend themselves saying that the show is tightly plotted and that the stories aren`t held up by the characters domestic problems like most detective shows , and the producers would be right to a great degree , but this gives MIT an entirely mechanical feel the way the story jumps about not allowing the audience to draw breathe

As I write there`s no news of a second series of MIT , and if the show`s not coming back I wouldn`t be too disappointed since there`s far too many cop shows on British television at the moment . On top of that I can`t help feeling if this wasn`t a spin off from THE BILL it probably wouldn`t have been made in the first place

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 didn't like this series, but to be fair I didn't get past episode 1, so I might have missed out big time. The lead detective was of the usual bossy type who has no respect for men and treats her subordinates appropriately. Her team building manner is non existent. I found it hard to believe that a four foot plus size would have allowed to get get to the dizzying heights of senior detective. I don't mean to be unkind but she bears a strong resemblance in looks and her movements to Ronnie Corbett. I couldn't stop making that comparison. Everything about this screams stereotyping.

Three quarters of what I saw were up close face shots with the face taking up the whole screen. What's with that? It does nothing for the storytelling or ambiance, and zero for setting of course. Plus there are too many extraneous characters who are nothing but obvious background fillers whose job is apparently staring at computer screens. Lots of wry looks and off the cuff remarks that are so dated and stupid I can see why there was only one season. The leading lady cop appears more suited to school marm than head of a detective squad -- lovely complexion, nice clothes, perfect hair and makeup. Her snarky remarks come off as rehearsed and unnatural rather than the usual British DCI roaring at subordinates. This is a total loser. The investigation should have been "where can we find someone who does a decent job of writing scripts and filming."

I stopped watching The Bill back in the 80's when it turned into a soap opera and I didn't see this at the time. Recently London Live has been re-running it so I thought I would give it a go. After episodes 3 and 4, I missed the first two, I'd had enough of the pouting, Po faced DI Friend, bit of a forerunner of Scott and Bailey. Female DI enjoying pushing the male underdogs around, plus a female DCI to push everyone around.

I don't care about females being the boss but why are they now the norm and why do they always belittle the men? Oh it used to be the other way around, maybe in the unenlightened past but two wrongs don't make a right.

Apart from that gripe, the scripts are bad, the direction terrible and most of the acting is awful, other than Lindsey Coulson who I am always happy to see but I can't stomach this dross just to see her.