User Reviews (16)

Add a Review

  • /refers to all episodes/

    As I am fond of British (and Scandinavian) detective dramas, I try to watch them as many as possible - preferably in sequence. Although recent decades have seen the bloom of series without single cased based episodes, it is sometimes nice to "look back" as well - as here in Rebus.

    It is a bit odd that this series is divided into 2 - the episodes starring John Hannah and those with Ken Scott as DI John Rebus; both the approach and the depiction of Rebus are different, and now, after watching all series, I would say that I find Scott's performance more pleasing - he is rougher and his views and behaviour patterns include giggling moments, plus the episodes are shorter. Although not all episodes are equally interesting and sustained - in some cases I could guess too early who the wrongdoer was - the series in general is another nice example of respective British talent, with the beautiful city of Edinburgh within a supporting cast.

    As a whole, 8 points from me - 7.5 for Hannah's Rebus and 8.5 for Scott's.
  • I loved this series. It started well and end even better unlike many others that seem to drag to a close. The actors, both John Hannah and Ken Stott did a great job. I never read the books, so have no problem with John Hannah being younger than in the books. In fact I found the John Hannah season to be a bit more appealing due to the serious nature of the episodes. The supporting cast also did their job.

    Stories were well written and intriguing enough to keep you wanting more. I felt like it ended too soon. I read somewhere they were planning to restart, but haven't seen anything yet. Hope they do it.
  • I have read the books but still prefer John Hannah in the lead role and the style of season 1. It became very average when Ken Stott (on paper a 'better' Rebus) got the part and the style of the show changed.
  • It's very interesting what can be done in about one hour. I just watched an episode and I could relate completely with Rebus. I don't understand why the other reviews are so average. I taped (DVD-d) a lot of episodes and I watch them over and over. The music is also very good. And Siobhan is a very nice lady. Sometimes I feel sorry for her, with Rebus as a colleague, but in the end she always takes his side. When this is written in awful English, sorry, but the Rebus episode I just saw made such an impact I rushed to register on IMDb to let the world know I think Rebus and Siobhan are the best! Rebus doesn't seem to have any personal life, he can be compared to Jack Frost, I would like to see them as a team, maybe a writer can think of an episode with the two of them? Be creative!
  • jsrtheta26 March 2018
    John Hannah may a good actor, but he was no Rebus. Which is a shame, because the Hannah series had longer episodes that let some of Rankin's genius through. And they had Gerald Morris Cafferty, Rebus' nemesis, a running feature in the books. But they got Rebus wrong and Clarke as well.

    Word was that Rankin was not happy with Hannah, so when the series resumed, Ken Stott got the nod, and he is a much better Rebus. The stories are streamlined, which stinks, but any time spent with Stott is time well spent, as he nails Rebus' craftiness, as well as his emotional tension, perfectly. And the Stott episodes more accurately portray Rebus' partnership with Siobhan Clarke (Claire Price), both in its inception and then as it grows over time.

    This should be addicting for fans of Ian Rankin's books, which are among the best in modern police fiction.
  • I recently saw a list of the top 10 crime series in the US and I have to say that none of them were anywhere near as good as British crime shows. I love the ability to tell a story without all the vulgarity and sex that seem to be the mainstay of the US shows which by the way are just getting worse and unwatchable. My only problem with Rebus is that he is portrayed s a disheveled individual who enjoys his beverages a little too much and yet women jump into bed with him. While he might have charm his personal hygiene is certainly lacking and deems him undesirable.
  • The date indicated for this series on Prime v Video is 2015. The correct date for this series is 2000 to 2004.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I am from Edinburgh,I love crime/police dramas. So why do I not like the Stott Rebus series much? I watch them every so often and am always disappointed. I am not gripped by any of the stories. I am not saying the endings are difficult to guess,but I don't care much who did what in these stories. Stott is a fine actor,love him in The Vice but he is unconvincing as Rebus. I am in lockdown and watched the 10 Stott episodes over a few days. The episodes are not well written. Rebus is shown as a football fan and a a man who women find attractive. I have read a few of the Rebus books and Rebus is not a football fan,in the books we can excuse his faults due to him being a great detective. In this series every episode is similar,Rebus is rude to his assistant and his bosses and then solves the case. I prefer the John Hannah series,bigger budget,better stories.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    The first two seasons had a younger actor playing Rebus and that gave the character slightly more appeal, but he used it maybe too much in his hormonal field. The last three seasons changed the main actor for an older and chubbier character that fits the role better though he is slightly too rough, grumpy, anger-prone, and he puts himself in a corner with his hierarchy over and over again, which is both amusing and irritating. Amusing because it reveals in a way a police institution and a justice institution in Scotland that are both sort of cut off from real life. Unluckily real crimes are real life and the two said institutions are not up to these real crimes. Luckily, Rebus is the man who deals with such real apple cores. Rotten of course.

    But it is irritating because it becomes a pattern, and we all know such patterns do not lead to efficient action but only to conflict and the famous Peter's principle. So, the solutions of the crimes, problems, situations are always the result of some last minute flipflop event that gives Rebus the satisfaction of having been at least partially right from the very start.

    That leads to stories of crimes that are not really depicted with the psychological finesse of serial killers, most of them, and conscious planning criminals. Rebus rejects any kind of profiling. These criminals are often real Asperger cases in crime, thinking of all the details that may derail their enterprise, and even at times that derailment is planned by the criminal. This is slightly pushed aside.

    Along that line I must say the thick and deep Scottish accent does not help since it turns the English of these people into a foreign language. If you watch the last disc with the long reflection on how the series was made, with numerous interviews of the actors and other personnel, you can realize they do not speak with that excessively thick Scottish accent which is by the way closer to that of Glasgow rather than that of Edinburgh. That kind of linguistic choice leads us to believe that criminals after all are all coming from the lower classes of our societies that have to be Scottish in a way or another, real Scottish, which is jingoistic in a segregational way. This is a cliché that does not add one iota of mental or intellectual, or even existential truth to the crimes themselves.

    That has to do with the decentralized TV management and production in the United Kingdom. Everything is produced at "local" or "regional" level. So, they thicken the local dialects, the local accents, the local linguistic color, but that is very awkward, especially since the series does not have the subtitles for hard of hearing people it should have today. At times, the music and noise around the characters just plainly swallow up the language itself.

    In spite of all that the stories are interesting. But they do not present any deep scrutinizing vision of Scottish society. Very limited vignettes, even cameos of what life must be in Edinburgh. I hardly recognized the Edinburgh I visited in the past where I spent some summers on the university campus. We have at best glimpses of what is very typical of Edinburgh, for example the railway station and when you get out of it onto the vast avenue overlooking the lower plain with the castle in the distance. We get flimsy and fast visions of some buildings and streets, particularly back alleys, side narrow urban lanes that are desolate and frightening. I am certainly not attracted to Edinburgh with this particular vision.

    I would advise you to watch it with a good sound helmet of some sort to get the sound in your ears, which would probably improve the understandability of the dialogue. At least somewhat.

    Dr. Jacques COULARDEAU

    VERSION FRANÇAISE

    Les deux premières saisons avaient un acteur plus jeune jouant Rebus et cela a donné au personnage un peu plus d'attrait, mais il l'a peut-être trop utilisé dans son domaine hormonal. Les trois dernières saisons ont changé l'acteur principal pour un personnage plus âgé et plus grassouillet et enrobé qui correspond mieux au rôle bien qu'il soit légèrement trop rude, grincheux, sujet à la colère, et il se met encore et encore dans un coin avec sa hiérarchie, ce qui est à la fois amusant et irritant. Amusant car il révèle en quelque sorte une institution policière et une institution judiciaire en Écosse qui sont toutes les deux en quelque sorte coupées de la vie réelle. Malheureusement, les vrais crimes sont la vraie vie et ces deux institutions ne sont pas à la hauteur de ces vrais crimes. Heureusement, Rebus est l'homme qui s'occupe de ces vrais trognons de pomme. Pourri bien sûr.

    Mais c'est irritant parce que cela devient un modèle, et nous savons tous que de tels modèles ne mènent pas à une action efficace mais seulement au conflit et au célèbre principe de Peter. Ainsi, les solutions des crimes, des problèmes, des situations sont toujours le résultat d'un retournement de situation de dernière minute qui donne à Rebus la satisfaction d'avoir eu au moins partiellement raison depuis le tout début.

    Cela conduit à des histoires de crimes qui ne sont pas vraiment décrits avec la finesse psychologique des tueurs en série, la plupart d'entre eux, et des criminels qui consciemment planifient leurs crimes avec précision. Rebus rejette tout type de profilage. Ces criminels sont souvent de véritables cas criminels d'Asperger, pensant à tous les détails qui peuvent faire dérailler leur entreprise, et même parfois ce déraillement est planifié par le criminel. Tout ceci est partiellement écarté.

    Le long de cette ligne, je dois dire que l'accent écossais épais et profond n'aide pas car il transforme l'anglais de ces personnes en une langue étrangère. Si vous regardez le dernier disque avec la longue réflexion sur la façon dont la série a été produite, avec de nombreuses interviews des acteurs et autres personnels, vous pouvez vous rendre compte qu'ils ne parlent pas avec cet accent écossais excessivement épais qui est d'ailleurs plus proche de celui de Glasgow. Que de celui d'Edimbourg. Ce genre de choix linguistique nous amène à croire que les criminels viennent après tout des classes inférieures de nos sociétés qui doivent être écossaises d'une manière ou d'une autre, de vrais écossais, ce qui est chauvin dans un sens ségrégationniste. C'est un cliché qui n'ajoute pas un iota de vérité mentale ou intellectuelle, voire existentielle aux crimes eux-mêmes.

    Cela a à voir avec la gestion et la production décentralisées de la télévision au Royaume-Uni. Tout est produit au niveau « local » ou « régional ». Du coup, ils épaississent les dialectes locaux, les accents locaux, la couleur linguistique locale, mais c'est très gênant, d'autant plus que la série n'a pas les sous-titres pour malentendants qu'elle devrait avoir aujourd'hui. Parfois, la musique et le bruit autour des personnages engloutissent tout simplement la langue elle-même.

    Malgré tout, les histoires sont intéressantes. Mais ils ne présentent aucune vision scrutatrice profonde de la société écossaise. Vignettes très limitées, voire caméos de ce que doit être la vie à Édimbourg. J'ai à peine reconnu l'Édimbourg que j'ai visité dans le passé où j'ai passé quelques étés sur le campus universitaire. On a au mieux un aperçu de ce qui est très typique d'Edimbourg, par exemple la gare et en sortant sur la vaste avenue qui domine la basse plaine avec le château au loin. Nous obtenons des visions fugaces et rapides de certains bâtiments et rues, en particulier des ruelles, des ruelles urbaines étroites qui sont désolées et effrayantes. Je ne suis certainement pas attiré par cet Edimbourg de cette vision particulière.

    Je vous conseillerais de regarder la série avec un bon casque audio pour obtenir le son dans vos oreilles, ce qui devrait améliorer la compréhension du dialogue. Au moins un peu.

    Dr Jacques COULARDEAU.
  • Watched all episodes about a year ago, after enjoying one of the books, and I have to say I liked it. Having now read most of the books, it's disappointing watching the series again. Some episodes have nothing to do with the book, like Knots and Crosses, many others are loose adaptations which lose a lot of the plot intricacies and 'bite' of the books. Even allowing for the fact that they have to squeeze the stories into an hour long episodes, there could be more suspense. Stott is the best thing in it, good characterisation of Rebus, little else.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I read and watch a fair amount of mysteries and crime stories. And yet this series did not grip me at all. To be fair I started watching at Season 3 due to streaming limitations. It opened with Rebus trying to reach a girl friend who is ignoring his calls. I thought here we go again. The make detective as someone who cannot be housebroken (maintain intimate significant relationship). He is rumpled and hard drinking, goes against the brass, etc etc.

    But even moving past that stereotype, the stories themselves were just not clicking or interesting. I haven't read the books so maybe I would like them better.
  • The first season has great film noir qualities. From the nearly black and white filming to the "mood of pessimism, fatalism, and menace", it is a current take on a neglected genre. My favorite added little feature is the audio narration voiced by the lead actor of season one: John Hannah. It was a very pleasant change to hear the insights, thought and reflections of the character that are not actually spoken aloud. It gave useful insight into the overall direction of the characters and the episodes.

    I might agree that the lead actor John Hannah might not have been the best actor that could have been cast. However, given that I did not read the books, the only distraction he had for me was that he looked too young for the part.

    After season one all the magic is gone. There is a change of lead actor. The film noir is gone. There is no narrator. It becomes just another lengthy British style detective story with no broken heart nor tortured soul. What a shame!
  • Thorsten-Krings4 September 2008
    Although Ken Stott is a good if sanitized Rebus, the show doesn't really take off. Format might be an issue here as 70 minutes is a fairly short period to tell a complex story. On the other hand, other shows like Blue Murder manage it. My main misgivings about the show are that the episodes have nothing to do whatsoever with the books of the same titles and that the story telling is linear. A whodunnit is which the who and usually even the why is obvious after 15 minutes is pretty pointless. There are absolutely no surprises, no twists in the story telling: not to put too fine a point on it, the stories are plainly boring. That's a pity because you get some really find performances of the cast. Particularly the actresses who play Siobhan Clarke and Gill Templer are really doing a splendid job in bringing those characters to life. Some changes to Rebus I just don't understand. In the books we learn that he drives a Saab. Why change that to a Mercedes (of all cars. A symbol of authority and power if I ever saw one.)? Rebus in the books is a very dark character which is reflected by the nature of his relationships. Here, he is a dark brooding womanizer. In the TV series he is more grumpy than violent. An interesting thing is that Cafferty keeps calling FRebus "Strawman", apparently because he was once called that in a court case. However, that is taken from Eliot's "The Hollow Men" and refers to Rebus not having any purpose in life beyonmd his job (and the point is driven home brutally in the last scene of Exit Music).
  • dizydazy12 January 2009
    The first Rebus program was aired on our Knowledge Network tonight. I had not heard of this detective but was looking forward to watching it. I was disappointed in Rebus himself--I'm not sure how to explain it. Clarke was more like a woman who had been beaten into submission and was just there. She had no bright ideas nor any personality to spice up her role somewhat. The music was far too dramatic and loud for the puny action on the screen. I haven't read any of these detective stories. i must see what I can find in the local stores. I will then decide if I like the books better than the programs. It was nice to see Edinburgh rather than the usual English countryside. I was very impressed with some of the interiors.
  • I watched the first two and was baffled as to the storylines which generated not a whit of tension or even sympathy for the characters, including the lead, John Hannah playing Rebus.

    The two episodes were drawn out, and well boring in the extreme as it was really difficult to care about any of them. Hannah portrays Rebus as out of control, flaunting authoritiy, running off half cocked in all directions without any kind of disciplinary action whatsoever, even involving himself in a crime committed against a family member without reprimand.

    Far too much suspension of disbelief, it all felt like hard work.

    1/10 for wasting my time.
  • sfbayqt29 December 2023
    I'm struggling. I watched S1 (John Hannah), S2 (Ken Stott), & beginning the first epi of S3. But, I'm gonna be honest...I'm not sure if I will spend time grinding thru Series 4. Yes, it's that tough.

    Mind you, I LOVE UK tv, & other international shows, very much! (I'm in the US) but, this one did/does nothing for me.

    That said, John Hannah drew me in to watch it. However, IMO, it was a bad choice for him. Stott? I LIKE him! But, not in this series. It's just not working fo me. Character/actor chgs did nothing to help it along, slow as molasses, like watching paint dry. Not sure how it got such an overall high review. I'm baffled.