Survivors - Series 2 Reviews

[Highly rated reviewer]

Flawed Classic

Survivors Series Two suffers from three problems - the producers' decision not to renew Carolyn Seymour's contract, the resultant gender politics (woman's place is in the kitchen), and some of the worst tv acting I've ever seen from the various 'guest artists'.

Seymour's departure from the show is well documented, but her absence leaves a gaping hole in the character structure, and Series Two suffers hugely from this. Whilst the regular male characters get to 'lead' the community, the women all seem to become increasingly 'Stepford-like'.

Some of the 'guest-star' acting is gob-smackingly bad - witness Coral Atkins as Penny in The Lights of London (was there a shortage of decent tv actors in Britain in the 70's?). The frequent examples of clunky and third-rate acting often destroy any tension or complexity of plot, especially when the principals - Gregory, Lill or McCulloch - are so good.

Yet Survivors still impresses, with fascinating ideas, and is still as good as I remember from watching it as a kid.

More of the same....but that's no bad thing

Obviously you must have rented the first series to appreciate series 2, the story being what it is. More of the same in the 2nd series, but will Abby ever find Peter? Watch and learn...

Dated

This series has not aged well. Very creaky and amateurish acting. Did not bother watching the rest.

I enjoyed it

I've read the various comments and, to be honest, it was a 1970's budget sci fi drama. The plot is still good and the characters have...well character. Tom Price is amusing, Abby Grant (Carolyn Seymour)has a particular allure and I'm not sure if we see Jimmy Garland again.

Enjoy it for what it is and don't draw comparisons with more recent drama's which have the bigger budgets and the special effects this series didn't have.

The plot weakens in parts though. If the majority of the population are dead, why drive an old banger and live in a tent? Why eat biscuits when there must be loads of tinned food. As for Episode 4, gone to the Angels, why would anybody living in the country have to make a spade? Also, what happened to the kidnapped child in Episode 6?

Otherwise - Enjoy...

a shock after series 1

Complete surprise and let down after series 1, Still some good story lines but some worse acting. The so called nurse is unconvincing...still if you pursue with it this series does get better.

if you survive watching this youre a better man than I

I remember being quite worried about where society was going when watching this as a young boy in the seventies. After watching it again i am now quite worried that someone else may waste a few hours attempting to watch it. a good premise is stretched far to thinly by some of the worlds worst actors and scriptwriters. nostalgia leading swiftly to neuralgia. Actually attempting to survive an apocalyptic plague is probably more fun than attempting to sit through an entire disc.

Survivors

Very slightly dated but stories as good as I remember. Why this has not been remade by a US or British Company I don't know or understand - there are plenty of stories that would fit easily into this plot.

Terry Nation Genius or Prophet

When the first series ended every 1 said hhmm intersting idea, So Terry Nation went on and wrote this second series and it was better than the first. Watch the lights of london 1 & 2 then watch making of on disc 4. The totaly trashed area it was filmed in was not changed at all for filming. Does that mean were already on the way to this apocalyptic state? Worth watching every single episode.

Series 3 Would Be Better

Quite disappionted with series 2 and disk 4 has only 1 episode on it.The series got better later on but as a fan of the Survivors very watchable

a classic what not to do when the sh*t hits the fan

Does anyone have disc one?

Does anyone have disc one? If so please send it back I've been waiting for it for ages.