jpmarmaro-2 True, this is not Robbie Coltrane. True, the series is darker and at the same time less complex than the magnificent British series. But just because a California vintage varietal is not Château Latour does not mean it isn't potable. Taken on its on merits, without making comparisons to the original British series (in which the American series really has no chance to shine) this is a well-made and far-from-clichéd series. Playing Fitz as Pastorelli did-- as less-than-lovable, curmudgeonly without the usual saving graces of humor or humility, was actually very brave, and much truer to everyday life, truth to tell, than Coltrane's wonderful portrayal. Coltrane's characterization is in a way bigger than life, a flawed yet dazzling (and also, endearing) genius: very much in the tradition of other flawed, brilliant, larger-than-life sleuths from Sherlock Holmes to Hercule Poirot. I find Pastorelli's interpretation more in the line of, say, John Thaw's Inspector Morse (they even have similar tastes in music). Pastorelli plays Fitz as depressive, grouchy, arrogant, flippant, self-absorbed, and sometimes downright rude. That is truly going out on a limb, and would be even for British television, but for American television it is valor of the first water. So it is unfair to compare his portrayal with Coltrane's: they approach the character quite differently. Taken on their own, I think the Pastorelli episodes are fine productions. Being an American myself I was raised on happy endings and characters designed to elicit one's emotional engagement. Yet as others have rightly noted, life isn't like that. I remember an episode of a British production, one of Roy Mardsen's wonderful Adam Dalgleish tales, which ended, yes, with the criminal's apprehension-- but NOT happily (his assistant's grandmother, being held hostage, having been killed at the end when SWAT teams stormed the hideout)... and I was appalled at first--- but then I realized, that that was as possible an outcome as the happy ending would have been, perhaps more likely even. And this series has a lot of that flavor to it. So: approaching this and expecting the same thing as one got in the British production is really counterproductive. But if you watch these shows without expectations, you'll likely find them quite satisfying on their own merits.

jotyler65 I wanted to comment in response to the many negative reviews of this compelling show written by those who enjoyed the original British series. While I unfortunately missed that series, this American version is dynamic, penetrating and entirely undeserving of being cancelled. Robert Pastorelli gives a daring, captivating central performance as Fitz, the cynical and self-destructive anti-hero whose gambling obsession and rough persona alienate his wife (Carolyn McCormick) and son (a young Josh Hartnett!) Fitz' demented persona make him a natural for his part-time work as a police profiler, where he maintains a tenuous relationship with the equally blunt Lt. Fry (R. Lee Ermey). Fitz is an intriguing fallen hero - up to the task of catching disturbed, violent murderers but unable to command his own inner demons which tear at the very fabric of his being. Pastorelli's intensely uncompromising performance gives the show a realistic, darkly humorous edge which is ultimately touching. Fitz' character foreshadows that of Frank Black (Lance Henriksen), whose dark, telepathic gifts cost him his family on Chris Carter's equally compelling crime series 'Millennium." Both characters need the close embrace of their families - it is what they live for - but because of their disturbing professions and intense persona's alienate their loved ones, spiritually self-destructing even as they desperately seek redemption. While this Cracker may have fallen short of the original English series - I wouldn't know - it was a breath of fresh air on typically sanitized American television and ultimately proved to be too daring to continue.

martinu-2 Like many remakes (Dr Who springs to mind!) this is a VERY poor American imitation of the excellent British series. Robert Pastorelli's version of Robbie Coltrane's character "Fitz" lacks the subtlety and the lovable character weaknesses (eg gambling) that Coltrane gave him: Pastorelli's Fitz is just too perfect. The whole series lacks the magic of the British one. Verdict: 1/10 for trying (but failing!).

Gary Dickerson People were extremely unkind to this American remake of the brilliant British crime drama "Cracker." Yes, the British version was superior; but I often felt that the American version didn't get the credit it deserved. It wasn't supposed to be a direct copy, it was supposed to be a distinctly American version, as "All In The Family" or "Three's Company" were. I would have liked to watch it develop. My theory is that the main problem people had was with the American Fitz - Robbie Coltrane is so flawed, but his egotism is tempered by a humor and humility that Robert Pastorelli didn't really possess. Nonetheless, I refuse to trash this show like everyone else and heartily recommend it, should you find it somewhere - it didn't last very long. And whether you find it or not, do go watch the British "Cracker" series. It's magnificent.