Having just viewed all three series for the first time, I'm surprised that every reviewer seems to love Season 1 and hates Seasons 2 and 3. To be honest, I can't see much of a shift in quality between the three. I would probably agree that the first series is the best - but only just. I think that Season 3 is almost as good. Season 2 - apart from the excellent "Light of London" is largely a disaster, settling into an almost comfortable 'everyday' life-style which just feels too safe. Season 3 pulls the rug out from all that by being continuously threatening with the heroes moving from place to place with no sense of any roots. A third season with them happily working the land would have just sent the show down the tubes. Much of the second half of Season 1 also suffers from this "happy" community syndrome as well (excepting the harrowing "Law and Order" episode). Season 3 has some duff episodes as well, but then all 3 seasons do, but a number of very hard-hitting ones such as "Mad Dog" and the haunting "Last Laugh" - as adult as the series ever got. Yes, Jenny has become very annoying and shockingly willing to leave her son behind, while the character of Ruth (one of the best) is written out without explanation. Overall - good and entertaining to watch (perhaps just once though) - but patchy throughout.
Review of Survivors
