Trial & Retribution (1997–2009) User Reviews (30)

Problematic but very absorbing

[TheLittleSongbird · 7/10 · 12 May 2016]

There may be better and more consistent shows in the crime genre than 'Trial and Retribution', but despite its problems mostly in the later seasons at its best 'Trial and Retribution' was excellent.

It is agreed that 'Trial and Retribution' was better in its earlier seasons, particularly in the first six cases of the show with Pat North still in the show. By all means, the early episodes aren't flawless either, with "Trial and Retribution I" containing some loose ends that made the outcome of the court-case surprising and unsatisfying and a little too much time is spent on Mike and Pat's relationship, which was nicely fleshed out and played but sometimes like in "Trial and Retribution IV" it was almost like it was too much of the main focus.

However, a great job is done developing the police and law cases methodically and in great detail, and it really worked giving the episodes two hour length and taking time for the story to develop. The storytelling could easily have been thin in the show but on the most part they are incredibly absorbing with enough twists and turns to keep one on one's toes and to create genuine surprise. Some of them have a wonderfully unsettling atmosphere, particularly "Trial and Retribution II" (with the scene with Linda Henry being one of the show's greatest scenes) and "Trial and Retribution III" (with a disturbingly off-the-wall Richard E. Grant), and the court-cases avoid falling into hammy melodrama.

While the later seasons are certainly watchable, they aren't as good in my opinion. "Sins of the Father" is the only outstanding late episode, with such a complex and cleverly told story that actually took its time to develop (at a time when the show started feeling rushed). This said "The Lovers" (a very close second best later-season episode, with a very creepy Michael Feast and the investigation given top-priority, a real shame that the final courtroom scene felt too hasty and incomplete), "Rules of the Game" and "Tracks" are also very good and "Paradise Lost" provides parts that do resonate emotionally and a main suspect that in a rare case we feel sorry for. Plus Mike's family issues are written in a way that balances with the cases well and are easy to relate to. However, despite some interesting cases, good acting and well-fleshed out characters the later episodes suffer from being rushed as a result of telling a lot of story in too short a running time (which has been halved) which causes parts that don't feel explored enough and don't come over realistically, with too much emphasis on soap-opera-style relationships which cause the investigations to be rushed through and the courtroom scenes which are even shorter to feel even more so and not come over entirely plausibly. Some of the episodes are also either too thin ("Kill the King"), not explained enough ("Siren", had trouble following in the second half) or too obvious ("Mirror Image", which gives it away from as early on as the title!, "Closure" also with the killer being revealed too early). "Blue Eiderdown" is spoilt too by a ridiculous ending.

Another factor is that Pat North is a more interesting, engaging and likable character than Roisin Connor. Roisin has moments of charm and fire, particularly in the enjoyably combative tension between her and Mike, but is far too one-dimensional and is developed barely at all, very cardboard-like. Victoria Smurfit is also to me an inferior actress to Kate Buffery. Smurfit tries and has moments but her range is limited, making some of the more authoritative parts on the forced side, none of her acting comes close to the emotions of unspeakable terror and affecting poignancy that Buffery showed in a particularly tense moment in "Trial and Retribution III".

'Trial and Retribution' is an incredibly stylishly made show, the 3-split-screen camera work was not distracting to this reviewer and was used interestingly, while the gritty look the show has suits brilliantly. The show throughout is compellingly directed, sparingly but understatedly scored and very tightly and succinctly written with little being forced or gratuitous. Acting is good on the whole, much has been made already about Smurfit but there are also a couple of exceptions in supporting roles, notably the grotesque overplaying of Tim McInnerny, the damp squib underacting of John Lynch and (although it is a very short early role, in a career that has really grown) Rosamund Pike's relative inexperience shows that she comes over as annoying and robotic. David Hayman is a superbly commanding lead though, while Kate Buffery is similarly great and Dorian Clough brings some much needed humanity to the show. Simon Callow makes a few juicy appearances as a barrister but is underused.

Overall, 'Trial and Retribution' is problematic but it is very absorbing and at its best excellent. 7/10 Bethany Cox

Quite a good show with just one little problem.

[grandmabrat · 7/10 · 19 May 2018]

I enjoy the show and despite some people saying the endings were not clear, I thought they were pretty good. Sometimes you were undecided whodunit. Or not to see it til the last minute. The thing I did not enjoy is the misogyny of the main character who shouted at people, especially the women and seemed to use women like servants, calling them names as he did so. The stories were good despite him. Would have been great without him.

Giving it 9 out of 10 for the early seasons

[katjoeus · 9/10 · 11 October 2017]

I agree with pretty much everyone else that the later seasons aren't as good as the early ones and that the Roisin character is not an adequate replacement for North...not sure why they did that, I'm guessing the original actress wanted out for some reason? Otherwise it would have been madness to do this. But I want this to have a really good rating here on IMDb, because despite the flaws in the later seasons, it is still a million times better than anything American TV has to offer!! Gritty, realistic (for the most part), gripping and horrifying. Everything a good police drama should be, unlike it's US counterparts. So I'd highly recommend watching this!

Good show -- unlikeable characters

[greggreek · 28 July 2019]

I enjoyed the series but I started wanting Mike Walker and his cohorts to get punched in the face. Arrogant and overbearing is not something you want to put up with in the heroes.

Brilliant. One of the best series ever on TV.

[pandawanda · 10/10 · 27 September 2016]

There are 3 series on TV that I would vote the best ever and Trial and Retribution is one of them, however I would only apply this to the first 6 stories. Everything about it is superb. The stories are really interesting and gripping, good acting from the main characters, and the 'guest' actors for each story line are also excellent. Actors like: Helen McCrory, Iain Glen, Richard E.Grant, Tim Mcinnerny, Charles Dance. From T&R 7 onward the series definitely misses D.I Pat North, played superbly by Kate Buffery. I enjoyed the personal story lines, with all the great supporting characters like Lynn Walker, Satch, as well as Mike Walkers family; his mother, Violet and brother, Jimmy. I would have liked DI North to have been in future episodes and preferably would have liked to have seen Mike and Pat married. There was no real explanation why they split up and Pat's quiet, yet no-nonsense personality was perfect for Mike. To replace the wonderful Kate Buffery with the awful Victoria Smurfitt was a travesty. Her character is very irritating and she is just not as good an actress as Kate Buffery.

Although the later stories are not in the same class as the first 6, Charles Dance was brilliant in No. 7 and 'The Lovers' No. 8 were excellent to which I would give 9/10.

The remaining episodes, I would give 6-8/10.

A fantastic show

[avacuppa · 10/10 · 29 January 2020]

I So love this show Trial and Retribution. I recently fount it on Acorn TV in Canada and have been binge watching like crazy. I am sad now that I am on the last one, number 22. 😢. I wish it was still going. Great acting, great story lines, great casting Fantastic series!

Sometimes gripping procedural drama... Good guys aint so..

[canuckteach · 9/10 · 16 February 2023]

Mike, the chief detective, is a jerk and a workaholic. In the first few series, we see him trash his first marriage whilst dealing with puzzling cases. He is compelled to settle a large debt in order to end his first marriage. By extorting a perp on the run, he gets the cash needed but Roz, his tall drop-dead gorgeous assistant (played by the luscious Victoria Smurfit), figures it out. 'Prove it!' he snarls. Later, his ex-wife dates a guy who turns out to be a dangerous Looney. If you were Mike, how would you end this problem? Wait til the final frame.

Another 2-part episode stand out: THE LOVERS (S9) involves a nasty serial killer who preys on young couples using a method we saw in the French-Dutch film VANISHED. Mike makes the arrest, but the killer may never see prison. Gripping.

The conflict between Roz & Mike drives many episodes, but they usually get a 'result'. Characterization in the series is superb (script and portrayal). Truly, this lengthy mystery series is one of the top 5 Brit shows ever. Did I mention that Mike is an unlikable weasel?

Just good old school crime serie

[mylenemet · 9/10 · 25 August 2021]

Just really really addictive when youre hooked on crime series....

Wish someone would murder Mike Walker!

[simoncoram-06766 · 6/10 · 24 September 2020]

One of the most annoying, arrogant and hateful characters on TV. How this guy came to be a Superintendent beggars belief. Him aside, this is a great show, well worth bingeing. Unfortunately series five shares so many similarities with Prime Suspect 2 I wondered how it ever got made? In series 10 there is also a very similar plot to another Prime Suspect story.

They should have kept Pat North.

[susanfreewoman · 8/10 · 7 July 2021]

I started watching about a week ago (late to the party). Very exciting plots, until Pat North went. Unfortunately, the character who grates on my nerves, her love interest in the show (Mike?) stayed on. If only I had started watching earlier.

Could have been better.

[ec_vc · 7/10 · 15 November 2018]

Written by Lynda La Plante, I naturally wanted to see this TV series. She has written some really good crime shows. The character of Mike Walker was very hard to like. He had an over-inflated ego and turned everything in his personal and professional life into "why, oh why, me". He was a terrible husband and father and I was glad when the show stopped focusing so much on his personal life. After watching all 22 series more than once, I can truthfully say I never did warm to him but the stories and other characters made this series worth watching. The first 6 series are the best although I never felt there was any chemistry between Mike & Pat. I hated to see her leave the show. The character Roisin Connor was not as warm and easily liked as Pat North. I really liked the character David Satchell - the long-suffering sergeant who worked with Mike, Pat and Roisin. If you like crime shows, you'll probably like this series. At least give it a try.

Slightly simplistic on the psychology

[Dr_Coulardeau · 8/10 · 23 November 2021]

It is not a series in the generally accepted meaning. It is a collection of fully self-contained and rather long episodes. Each episode is a case, and few elements are overlapping from one episode to the others, apart from the personal relationships between and among the members of the team. The various members also have personal careers, which means one can move out, and another can move up. And they have some family life, at least some members of the team do have wives and children, living as families or divorced and separate, which is not always easy for both divorcees. The other members of the team are more discreet but most of the time the relationships that are brought up are temporary, transient, with no duration or perennity.

It is thus easy to take the episodes one after the others, in any order even, which makes the end of the "series" easy. It just stopped after a certain episode which is a final episode, but nothing really happens that would explain the disbanding of the team, the death of one or two members. It is just the end of the collection. Sorry folks, no more episodes.

The treatment of each case is interesting. It is not always the same, but the variations are rather slight at times and only depend on the various communities or groups or bands of people concerned by the crime at stake. The only permanent question is the professional relationship of the "boss," detective superintendent Walker, with the rest of the team, especially with Detective Inspector North first, and then DCI Connor. Note these last two are women and one leaves officially on some kind of promotion, and the other comes up and replaces her. Walker is a power freak and has an obsessive-compulsive personality. He wants to control everyone, and he makes all the decisions, and without being a male-chauvinist pig, he sure is not very favorable with women. With North, he even tried to live with her after his separation from his wife, but it never could work since he was a power-freak in his personal relationship with her too.

But no matter how different the situations and the crimes are, there are some clichés, even some elements that are repetitive and thus become humdrum and commonplace, hence trite. Let me specify a couple.

The main central problem in each episode is the relationship between some children and their parents, including for the members of the team, and Walker first of all. The general idea is that a boy will turn bad because his filial relationship, when a teenager, is not close enough to his father because the father is doing other things and does not find the time necessary to be close to his son. This is trite indeed. Maybe the point should be made slightly more complicated. A teenage boy needs both love, authority, and a personal model from his father. The son may transfer his needs onto another man outside the family. It can be good or bad according to the man selected for being the target of this transference. The father may dislike it - or him - or the mother may dislike it - or him - and the son might not like this resistance. Such elements are rarely explored in depth or detail. Walker's son is a typical example. He needs the love of his father who does not know how to express it, and he does not want the love of his mother as some kind of compensation, because that's childish, and she is an even worse control freak than the father, literally castrating the boy. He gets into drugs, bad connections in the street, etc. But it always remains schematic.

The same situation can be found - with variations - among the criminals right through to the last episode in which the father turns criminal to take the lead of his two sons who want to be criminals because they think it is the only way to impress their father, etc. And this "etc." is the absolute sign that it is a common humdrum psychological singsong that has no depth at all.

It is not vastly different with girls who turn bad, become they become prostitutes or beaten women and beaten mothers, and raped women, even when it happens domestically, because their relationship with their mother was bad, most of the time because the mother was herself dissolute or marginally criminal or criminally marginal. And in most cases the father is not present or really present because he is gone, he is in the military, he is in a cannibalistic profession, etc. But that is once again a cliché, a simplistic pattern.

The last element is the originality of this collection of criminal stories. There is always a part of a trial at the end, or at times at the beginning, and this justice always has a jury, except if the accused pleads guilty. And the intervention of the trial is very skimpy, and the jury is always delivering the verdict by saying "Yes" or "No" to clear-cut questions. Some of the defendants are found guilty though we know they are not. Some others are found not guilty though we know they are, and some others still see a twisted element at the end that turns the situation around: a last-minute witness that gives the testimony that proves the defendant guilty without any doubt, or maybe at times the reverse.

One element is rather easy. Very often the police work, old or recent, is shown to be twisted. Rotten police officers who like money, lazy coppers who want a culprit as fast as possible and satisfy themselves with insufficient evidence, or even plant evidence. The pressure of public opinion, tabloids and television is enormous especially when they reveal the identity and likeness of the police officers, thus endangering them and their families. But that again is rather easy. Corruption is often more complicated, and no one becomes corrupt in one day under a blue moon in the sky.

But altogether it is good though this series does not have the standard subtitles for people who are hard of hearing. That is an important shortcoming, and since the action takes place mostly in London, which is extremely cosmopolitan, there are so many accents that at times you just wonder if you are not in some foreign languages, and in fact, at times it does happen, and still without subtitles. Too bad folks, everyone has to be plurilingual.

Enjoy the depth of corruption and crime in London but no real sightseeing of the City. Too bad. Not done for tourists.

Dr. Jacques COULARDEAU.

Big characters, thin plots -- where's my scotch?

[epaldelta · 6/10 · 7 November 2015]

If law and order in Britain were anything like this series, they'd get it wrong even when the evidence jumped into their arms and grabbed the ubiquitous scotches and cigs. Well-acted intriguing characters -- always LaPlante's forte -- are worth watching, even if rampant incompetence among police, lawyers, judges and juries seems to be what drives the stories rather than clever twists. Some of the gap between concept and execution should probably be overlooked because this is the first series, and extra points granted for roaming outside the well-defined lines of the genre. The irascible DCI Walker (Hayman) commands the screen and the squadron and the well-fleshed minor characters are hold it well when Walker's not around. Fans of LaPlante's style won't be disappointed, but casual viewers might want to tune in to later series.

Something to fall back on when streaming queues dry up

[qui_j · 5/10 · 27 May 2019]

This series ran over a number of years, and evolved in the process. It's an average series to watch but the constant and overuse of split screen frames, along with extreme closeups of eyes, ears, noses and mouths, all serve as distractions. It serves as a back up for when your streaming queues run dry and you need a quick 2 episode fix for something to watch. The acting overall is not bad although a bit "touch and go" with certain of the supporting actors.

Sometimes lurid and salacious..

[boomer-kris · 9/10 · 27 March 2022]

The melodramatic writing is typical of Lynda LaPlante screenplays. The actors are frequently screaming and crying and acting hateful to one another. If you can get past those things the series is excellent! The plots are engaging, sometimes crimes against children, and the long double episode format gives detectives time to explore every facet of every crime. You'll keep wondering who committed these crimes until the last few minutes of each show.. Highly recommended for crime show buffs.

NICE.

[rajibatta · 9/10 · 11 June 2022]

Love all the characters.... could use some developments for some. Smurfit should have stayed. Thankfully no self-destrcuctive storyline for the characters..

The Barristers are to Die For

[patricia-haertlein · 10/10 · 19 November 2021]

Overall, I found this a very well written series with good legs. Simon Callow, Corin Redgrave, and. David Fleeshman were spectacular as the barristers of the day. Ms. La Plante is a delicious storyteller. Kudos!

We quit

[heibeinh · 6/10 · 4 March 2022]

After 4 seasons we gave up on this because the character of David Hayman was just obnoxious, egotistical and abusive, especially to women.

This behaviour would not be allowed on any police force even in the late 90s. We just couldn't watch it anymore. It would bet an 8 from us with better character development or growth, maturity or decency.

Could've/Should've been a 10

[smartinezmd · 7/10 · 19 March 2022]

I think that the plots are good and all the actors are really good. David Hayman is an outstanding actor - BUT not good enough to bridge this huge flaw that the writers carved into this series. He simply is not "lead man" material and the dynamics between him Pat North are incredulous. It's a poor match and on top of that, the writer(s) dwell way too much on this horrific flaw. I also find David Hayman's character, at times, annoying in that it verges on a caricature of a detective. In fact, the writer has managed to turn David Hayman's character into an incredibly dislike, unsympathetic protagonist. To say that he is obnoxious, at times, would be an understatement.

The first few seasons are the best

[PippinInOz · 7/10 · 4 February 2012]

If you are wondering whether or not to give this a go, then my advice is to always make sure the character of Pat North is in the Cast. Excellent, well rounded character who proves a brilliant foil for (at times) nasty Mike Walker.

While I understand that in 'real life' police are not all good or all bad for that matter, did we really need the appallingly two dimensional - and thoroughly unlikeable - Roisin Connor?

No.

A genuine low point in La Plante's characterisation work, this woman is so awful you want to punch her.......or the script writers. Not believable at all. As the Seasons go on, her character turns more and more into a Panto Villain Cop, if you can imagine this nightmarish vision.

.....and did we really need yet another nasty Irish woman stereotype?

Again: NO.

This is a good strong entertaining English cop drama if you like the genre (and I do), but the Pat North years were definitely the best. Those would be a 9 out of 10. Wonderful stuff.

Potential totally lost

[catnapbc · 4/10 · 1 November 2023]

Despite some solid actors and guest performances, I agree with many others that the David Hayman character was just too dark, too 'in-your-face' and too misogynistic. This, coupled with his constant smoking and flare-ups make the rest of the detective squad look truly both competent yet lost in his orbit. Some of the crimes and scenarios are so graphic and needlessly violent that the characters and relationships fade in comparison, which is too bad. It feels like an endless struggle between the female leads and 'Mike Walker' and his need to dominate most scenes. Not many likeable characters and certainly enough unbelievable coincidences that a truck could drive through them. La Plante usually writes interesting strong female lead characters (Prime Suspect for instance), but here it's a bit less clear what the focus should be. I just found that each season be some less and less bearable and the constant darkness was just too much.

Despicable DCS

[zqqbmvqm · 7/10 · 27 March 2024]

Utterly despicable, deplorable, hateful, horrible Detective Chief Superintendent character. At first the character was just annoying, but as the series progressed this character became more and more irritating and arrogant. He yells, throws tantrums like a toddler and is basically one of the most obnoxious characters ever written or portrayed. Just when you thought he couldn't get any worse, series 4 takes the character to a whole new level of toxic human being. So you would ask why I continued to watch it? Because I am hooked on British crime dramas! I ran out of shows to watch and found this and figured with as many seasons filmed it must be good. And for the most part it is good so I tolerated the DCS. Though there were times when I wished someone would punch him in the face. The stories are good and some of the endings are unpredictable surprises. Not necessarily a bad thing. Another reviewer stopped watching, but not me. Judge for yourself.

Too Morbid for Us

[aphillips-43057 · 6/10 · 13 July 2019]

The leads in this series were pretty good. My wife and I gave up after Season 3 (6 episodes total): the crimes were too morbid. My wife said she felt dirty after watching some of them. BTW - we've probably watched 70 British and European detective series so we are used to some pretty extreme murder cases.

Started on 8

[Headturner1 · 5/10 · 15 August 2020]

I believe. When I saw how many seasons there were and I knew it came out years ago so I started later. On the one with the mother daughter murder and watched a few more. The split screen is annoying and makes the sound horrible when they do it to where you can't hear any dialogue. Like at the airport all you can hear is the announcements made . I quite like Smurfit because she's from Dublin and I like David Hayman in other things I've seen him in. The episodes are OK. I hear Hellen Mccorry is in earlier episodes and I love her as an actor so tonight I may tune in to the earlier seasons. I watch mostly all UK thriller, detective series. This is no Line of Duty but I've run out of things that I haven't seen so it's an ok watch. I wouldn't be shouting off the roof tops recommending people watch but it's an ok show. I'll watch a few of the early on ones and see if that changes my review/ opinion.

Trial & Retribution, Season 2 - MELODRAMA IN THE EXTREME!

[emmapeeldallas · 1/10 · 17 December 2011]

Linda LaPlante is a terrific writer, and the first episode of this series was fairly well done and interesting. The second episode, however, about the brutal murders of 3 women, was badly written, badly directed, and badly acted. The endless, busy camera work, with the screen divided into 3 parts, was distracting and ineffective. The trial scenes were interminable, with endless pontificating and bad acting by both the actor playing the lawyer for the defense and the actor playing the lawyer for the prosecution, to the point that I thought it was some sort of bad joke, but unfortunately, it was not. Linda LaPlante usually produces work much better than this. I have no idea why this was so below her usual high mark, but if you're a LaPlante fan, don't waste your time on this; it's sure to disappoint.