Alan Chadwick I just stumbled across this on Netflix and never had heard of it before. Not knowing what to expect and having watched almost everything else I wanted to see on that service I decided to give it a try and I am certainly glad that I did.At first I was worried because it has just about the worst, most boring opening credits sequence I've ever seen. It's cheap and stupid and annoyingly loud and has absolutely nothing to do with the show it is introducing.But after that I was pleasantly surprised. It's an Australian series with no actors I've ever seen before but the entire cast is very good in their roles. The writing is also very good with some great jokes (this is a dark adult oriented comedy) although sometimes the solutions to the courtroom dramas and personal stories as well can be predictable, but that's par for the course when it comes to any of these legal shows.This show is well worth checking out. Apparently there's also a US version if you're one of those people who hate watching shows from other countries, but it's nowhere near as good as this show.

scutfargus-1 The lower rating is for the constant swearing (which most of the characters do). The protagonist, Cleaver Greene, is the worst offender of all; but based upon his character, this is what one might expect. Sometimes, a script filled with obscenities and profanities simply means that the writers lack imagination; but that is not the case here. In the original blurb, the emphasis is on the cases which Cleaver takes on; but the real emphasis of the show is upon the self- destructive Cleaver Green and those people associated with him. The cases, for the most part, are secondary to the characters. Whereas, Cleaver's actions and motivations tend to make sense; some of the secondary characters sometimes do things simply to "drama up" the plot. I have seen this occur in many Australian dramas. It is as if the writer decides, "What we need right now is a good adulterous relationship; followed by a lot of drama." Sometimes it works; and sometimes it feels quite forced. This is not to say that the series is poorly written; because the writing is generally very good, with the reservations noted. Whereas Cleaver is not always the most likable or sympathetic of characters, the actor who plays him does a tremendous job, so that, even if you sometimes don't like Cleaver, you still have concern for the things which he gets himself into (and the majority of his problems are self-caused). I have nearly completed the 3rd season; and it is quite funny (but it requires knowledge of the characters to appreciate most of the humor; so, it requires you watching the first two seasons). When humor comes from the characters and their actions and dialogue, that is generally the best humor. So far, the 3 seasons have their own story arcs, but without them seeing too artificial (as sometimes story arcs can seem). For those who are in it for the sex scenes, if memory serves there is no nudity or so little that I cannot recall it. Most of the Australian dramas are like this. If I were to guess, most of the top stars have it written into their contract not to do nudity. This is not a program I would allow children of any age to watch; but it is entertaining. It is certainly not what you would share in a church group.

fung0 I tripped over this show on my way to the US remake, which caught my attention because of the presence of the always-likable Greg Kinnear. I'm very glad I tried the Australian original first. The US version is derivative and downright dreary; the original sparkles, with both razor-sharp satire and equally sharp-edged drama.Rake manages to fuse comedy, courtroom trickery, human drama and even some odd moral allegory. All these facets are apparent in the first show, when Greene must defend a cannibal (brilliantly played by Hugo Weaving) - who just happens to be a free-market economist, and who (like most free-market economists) sees nothing wrong with what he has done. In the next show, Greene tries to get an innocent woman convicted, then is forced to switch and get a guilty one acquitted. Then he defends a bigamist, who just happens to be a model husband - more than once.Greene's approach to the defence in each case is both clever and believable, in a way that most courtroom fiction is not. It reminds me of the best of Rumpole, with that series' ability to feel sympathy even for the guilty, and its reliance on astute legal trickery to make things come out 'right' in the end. Not to mention its ability to make us question just what 'right' means, in each case.Rake has immediately leaped onto my list of top ten TV shows *ever*. It's as funny, vulgar and painfully real as the brilliant British sitcom Still Game. Yet it's equally compelling dramatically. It definitely has things to say, but it slips these points in subtly, slyly, when you're not looking.Jack Lemon (speaking about The Apartment) said his ideal role was one that was both comedy and drama. That describes Rake perfectly. Richard Roxburgh may not be the equal of Lemon (who is?), but he comes through superbly as Cleaver Greene. The other roles are similarly well-handled, many of them by actors who will be very familiar to fans of Australian cinema.The US version of Rake seems like a quality production, and I may give it another try, though I admit I was unable to get through the first episode. The show seems predictably gutless, unable to embrace the moral ambiguity of the Greene character. Kinnear ends up playing a dysfunctional loser, where Roxburgh scintillates as exactly what he should be: a rake - an utterly likable rogue, a womanizer, a vagabond. A man who has no choice but to live by his own rules, and who adheres to no moral code but his own.I don't register a 10/10 rating very often, but in this case I felt like it was barely high enough. My advice: track down this show by whatever means necessary, and see it immediately.UPDATE: Rake is back for a 4th season. There's no question that the original brilliance has dimmed just a bit. The first season focused on legal shenanigans. Successive seasons have become more of an improbably Rake-ish soap opera. They're still a load of fun, but maybe in the 8-9/10 range. Still, the approach remains unique, and it's always a pleasure to see Roxburgh chewing up the scenery as the quintessentially Australian anti-hero, Cleaver Greene.

peterbreis but have rectified that with desperate anticipation driven out of absolute addiction.It is magnificently written, cast, structured and performed. What makes it most riveting to those of us blessed with living in and around the actual locations and situations, is that lots of the stories are absolutely true (given a few exaggerations here and there) with "only the names changed to protect the guilty".I can't imagine how they got filming permission for the scenes in the actual NSW parliament, when the story line revolved around the rottenness of our recently evicted government.If only the real party hacks were as funny as their corruption is real. Maybe we could actually forgive them. Instead they are dull, boring, incompetent and corrupt, very little amusement value there.Hard to imagine anyone ever playing the role of Cleaver Green to the hilt the way Richard Roxborough has. Having seen the dull, American rendition, makes Richard's performance only shine the more brilliantly.I hope there are many more series in the pipeline. This show is honestly the best I have seen in decades. Right up there with Boardwalk Empire and Game of Thrones. And a whole lot funnier! :)