You Would Do It Too

This is the great example of a show were you have to stick with it to get the best from it.

To begin with the set up is clear but some of the dialogue and situations are quite formulaic until about half way through. By then a series of twists are introduced and the pace picks up considerably. Given that the whole premise is that several people are lying it does not take any leap to get to the end and say 'well I knew they were lying from the start' That is the whole point of the series. I would wager though that anybody who saw the end coming in the way that it does is almost certainly kidding themselves.

With only eight short episodes it is well worth a watch.

This series explores perspectives in a very smart way.

The series starts by what looks like a simple heist case. However, the series is way deeper than that, and it shows that detectives should be visionories, as this series explores various perspectives for that simple case.

The characters are very impressive, and this is important in a mystery series because this is the main driver of a mystery show. Secondly, the climax was at point, reached in a sufficient number of episodes and was very clear and made sense.

The series is very realistic and recommend for those who like crime-mystery shows.

Each episode in the series "You Would Do It, Too" acts like another layer in a story; adding more perspective to what actually occurred. That keeps this series interesting and, in some ways, more real and engaging. The actors all strong in their roles. What I especially liked about the series was the rendering of the dialogue in English. Dubbing is often wooden. These voice actors were very into their roles; they didn't sound like they were just reading a script, something that disappointed me about the recent Apple TV series "Where's Wanda." I've seen all episodes but the last one; can't wait to see how it turns out.

A relentless, repetitive, nonstop synth track is your first clue that an unsuccessful cover-up of cliché trivial, crap-writing is happening. I despise a pushy soundtrack, dictating how you are supposed to feel instead of evocative storytelling. Over-scoring is a cop-out.

Passé handheld camera work, fast, flashy editing is your next clue that the writers are floundering in their intent: is the protagonist a superhero, a magical man, a misunderstood hero, a vigilante, a victim?

Who knows? I certainly never will. It wasn't interesting enough to finish.

All that's missing is good content- writing, storyline, continuity, a direction. Put this series on in the background to get your cooking and housework done.

It's a waste of hours I'll never get back.

A robbery takes place on an airport coach and goes wrong. Or did it? That's the dilemma soon-to be-ex husband and wife detectives Fran Garza and Rebecca Quirós have to solve. Fortunately, this is a puzzle that the viewer has to decipher without the extra baggage of irrelevant background stories of the protagonists. We just get some back story as facts and aren't swamped in it. The meat is in the solving of the crime.

Slowly, in twenty-five minute episodes, the two cops get to the bottom of things. On the way there, three different explanations for the botched crime emerge.

This is in no way a profound series, but it does discuss on a superficial level the ethics of vigilantism. And it shines a spotlight on Spain's "popular jury" system in a critical way.

I watched this over two evenings and would love to see a similarly fast-paced Season Two emerge. Perhaps next year.