Having seen the two movies you want to see the tv-show!
It takes about two episodes and then you must see how it ends!
It's an ok tv-flick and the last episode is very tense!
Give it a chance, it's ok!
11 Reviews
Worth a watch!
southgard19 January 2019
Review for season 1 - decent
connyskribent27 March 2021
Warning: Spoilers
The first season was ok, but just barely. The characters actions just get you angry, even for "lazy cops in a sparsely pouplated area" their actions are just beyond stupid. As a viewer there are so many scenes you can guess what will happen, in a bad way. Still, watched it til the end and Lassgård is a good actor.
Great serie
joeled-1310823 December 2018
Best swedish tvshow ever made
martin-isaksson-138-44800530 November 2018
I love it!!!!
lysethp16 December 2018
Scenario is a classic masterclass
mkastillon17 November 2023
An exceptional series. What confuses the assessment is that we are now accustomed to very fluid and constantly moving camera movements, post-production of lighting and permanent effects. But in Jägarna, none of that.
We return to the classic thriller, to the thriller of 15 or 20 years ago, and that's where it's strong: everything depends on both the interpretation (the performance of the actors and actresses) and the scenario . And here, the scenario is absolutely out of the ordinary as the writing is of great mastery and the narration is very tight. There is not an extra scene, not a useless moment, not a second where we are bored.
So, it is certainly too classic to please people dependent on visual overkill, but Jägarna remains a work of art and a demonstration of efficiency which will delight fans of the genre.
We return to the classic thriller, to the thriller of 15 or 20 years ago, and that's where it's strong: everything depends on both the interpretation (the performance of the actors and actresses) and the scenario . And here, the scenario is absolutely out of the ordinary as the writing is of great mastery and the narration is very tight. There is not an extra scene, not a useless moment, not a second where we are bored.
So, it is certainly too classic to please people dependent on visual overkill, but Jägarna remains a work of art and a demonstration of efficiency which will delight fans of the genre.
Hey people!!!!1
pigsmiceandmen6 July 2020
I see there's very few reviews, and one numpty left a series review after only 3 episodes. Meh. This show is fantastic. So much so I am stoked they are making a second season. I won't give anything away, but trust me, this is compelling. Bravo.
A complete mess
laduqesa23 May 2021
I watched it all but was bitterly disappointed. Season One was just about OK, but Season Two was just a farrago of nonsense. And honestly? I'm getting a bit fed up with Rolf Laasgard who plays Erik Bäckström and who is so typecast he doesn't bring anything new to any role he takes now.
Here he is once more, the lonely maverick who is convinced he's right and everyone is wrong. It doesn't matter that he IS right; the problem is that it's absurd that in the face of the clearest of evidence everyone else is on the wrong trail.
I'm going to talk mainly about he second season in this review as it's the one freshest in my mind.
The stubbornness of his nephew Peter, in particular, is unconvincing and the hatred of the rest of the small town is overblown as is the behaviour of the putative murderer. It's clear in episode three who the baddies really are. That the ending is contrived in such a way that the town can continue in its slumbers and prejudices seems to be a total cop out. I don't believe for a second in the decision that Bäckström took regarding his nephew. That such an upstanding and dedicated warrior for truth and justice took the course that he did when Internal Affairs intervened is simply not possible having regard to his character and personality. In any case, there were witnesses outside the police force who could have contradicted his version of events, upstanding members of the public.
But wait! There's an epilogue. And here only an oldie like me is going to understand what I am talking about. Who remembers Perry Mason played by Raymond Burr? Well, at the end of each episode Perry would demolish the DA's case so convincingly that someone in the audience in the courtroom would always be moved to cry out, so forceful and piercing were the words of that famous defence attorney, "I did it" and then proceed to explain why. Bäckström must have been reading up on this old series, or at least the scriptwriters were, because that's exactly what happens here except it is done in a bar amongst a load of drunks. This isn't a spoiler because we know from the beginning that the accused isn't the guilty one. It's utterly ridiculous.
OK, as it was Swedish, I watched till the end therefore three stars. No way is it worth more.
Here he is once more, the lonely maverick who is convinced he's right and everyone is wrong. It doesn't matter that he IS right; the problem is that it's absurd that in the face of the clearest of evidence everyone else is on the wrong trail.
I'm going to talk mainly about he second season in this review as it's the one freshest in my mind.
The stubbornness of his nephew Peter, in particular, is unconvincing and the hatred of the rest of the small town is overblown as is the behaviour of the putative murderer. It's clear in episode three who the baddies really are. That the ending is contrived in such a way that the town can continue in its slumbers and prejudices seems to be a total cop out. I don't believe for a second in the decision that Bäckström took regarding his nephew. That such an upstanding and dedicated warrior for truth and justice took the course that he did when Internal Affairs intervened is simply not possible having regard to his character and personality. In any case, there were witnesses outside the police force who could have contradicted his version of events, upstanding members of the public.
But wait! There's an epilogue. And here only an oldie like me is going to understand what I am talking about. Who remembers Perry Mason played by Raymond Burr? Well, at the end of each episode Perry would demolish the DA's case so convincingly that someone in the audience in the courtroom would always be moved to cry out, so forceful and piercing were the words of that famous defence attorney, "I did it" and then proceed to explain why. Bäckström must have been reading up on this old series, or at least the scriptwriters were, because that's exactly what happens here except it is done in a bar amongst a load of drunks. This isn't a spoiler because we know from the beginning that the accused isn't the guilty one. It's utterly ridiculous.
OK, as it was Swedish, I watched till the end therefore three stars. No way is it worth more.
Opportunity missed
hannamarina128 April 2021
This tv-series could've been good but as usual with a lot of tv-series like this the characters are cliché and do so many stupid things which is insulting to the viewer. Please let the viewer think and stop feeding us all the answers.
Good season 1 but terrible season 2
rainoleik6 April 2023
Warning: Spoilers
I enjoyed season 1 and would rate it a "7." Season 2 was most disappointing with the most incompetent writing I have seen in watching hundreds of international crime dramas. Scenes were so improbable that I found it insulting. Watched until the end thinking something might redeem the story line, but I was left wanting to cancel my subscription to Mhz. Near the beginning an older female police woman of some standing interviews a prisoner convicted of a murder by stabbing. The convicted man is interviewed without restaint of any kind and the murder weapon is on the table between the officer and the convict. Four officers take the convict into a forest to locate the body of his victim and in the process all four officers simultaneously get preoccupied and the convict escapes. There are no likeable characters in season two and even the so-called heroes were often disgusting.
Really disappointing
markfranh23 December 2018
Warning: Spoilers
I'm reviewing after just 3 episodes as we are giving up on this.
Very disappointed as we loved Rolf Lassgard in a Man Called Ole and had been looking forward to seeing him in this series.
So what was the problem?
Too many silly holes in the writing.
For example: a suspect is found to have used a police radio to track police movements so the police use this fact to track him back to his hideout. Bad news writers: you can't track a radio receiver! If the suspect had used the two-way radio to transmit (which he didn't) then sure, you can triangulate on his signal. If the radio had a GPS built in like a telephone and it was switched on and you happened to know his ID, then again, you might have tracked him using that but that didn't apply either.
A hunting party goes out armed to teeth with rifles to shoot a bear. Is anybody wearing high-viz so they don't kill each other? Nope. I'm sure even in Sweden nobody goes hunting without hi-viz vests but this group are all wearing camouflage colors. It was insulting to the viewers' intelligence.
A man is murdered but it is looks like a car accident. In any other police drama (and probably in real life too), the autopsy would immediately revealed that he didn't die of injuries from the car accident but instead of the other cause you will see if you watch the episode. But an inquiry of any kind would have been inconvenient to the plot so the police just accept it was a car accident despite questions being raised at the scene that it was a bit suspicious.
The investors stating they were going to proceed with the mine investment as it was clear the community was 100% in favour if it (except for the one individual) but this despite earlier scenes showing large protests outside the meeting. Somehow the protestors didn't count or the investors didn't do the basic research to see what was going on? Not credible.
Eric continues with his 'undercover' work but then decides to reveal what he knows to the bad guys instead of offering an easily contrived explanation for his actions and by doing so puts his investigation at risk? Nobody would be that stupid.
There were others as well but by the end of episode 3 we'd had enough and won't be pursuing this further. I hope the final episodes are better than the first few for those who see it through to the end.
As I said, we would have loved to have enjoyed another great Swedish drama series but this just wasn't up their usual standards.
P.s. I'm adding this a few days later.
Very much against my better judgement, we started to watch episode 4 thinking it really couldn't get any worse. It did. We gave up after 10 or 15 minutes and I'm downgrading my rating to a 4.
It's absolutely beyond me why a few others have rated this so highly as it really is pretty much rubbish.
Very disappointed as we loved Rolf Lassgard in a Man Called Ole and had been looking forward to seeing him in this series.
So what was the problem?
Too many silly holes in the writing.
For example: a suspect is found to have used a police radio to track police movements so the police use this fact to track him back to his hideout. Bad news writers: you can't track a radio receiver! If the suspect had used the two-way radio to transmit (which he didn't) then sure, you can triangulate on his signal. If the radio had a GPS built in like a telephone and it was switched on and you happened to know his ID, then again, you might have tracked him using that but that didn't apply either.
A hunting party goes out armed to teeth with rifles to shoot a bear. Is anybody wearing high-viz so they don't kill each other? Nope. I'm sure even in Sweden nobody goes hunting without hi-viz vests but this group are all wearing camouflage colors. It was insulting to the viewers' intelligence.
A man is murdered but it is looks like a car accident. In any other police drama (and probably in real life too), the autopsy would immediately revealed that he didn't die of injuries from the car accident but instead of the other cause you will see if you watch the episode. But an inquiry of any kind would have been inconvenient to the plot so the police just accept it was a car accident despite questions being raised at the scene that it was a bit suspicious.
The investors stating they were going to proceed with the mine investment as it was clear the community was 100% in favour if it (except for the one individual) but this despite earlier scenes showing large protests outside the meeting. Somehow the protestors didn't count or the investors didn't do the basic research to see what was going on? Not credible.
Eric continues with his 'undercover' work but then decides to reveal what he knows to the bad guys instead of offering an easily contrived explanation for his actions and by doing so puts his investigation at risk? Nobody would be that stupid.
There were others as well but by the end of episode 3 we'd had enough and won't be pursuing this further. I hope the final episodes are better than the first few for those who see it through to the end.
As I said, we would have loved to have enjoyed another great Swedish drama series but this just wasn't up their usual standards.
P.s. I'm adding this a few days later.
Very much against my better judgement, we started to watch episode 4 thinking it really couldn't get any worse. It did. We gave up after 10 or 15 minutes and I'm downgrading my rating to a 4.
It's absolutely beyond me why a few others have rated this so highly as it really is pretty much rubbish.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
