TV Review: “Hustle” (Series 1)

So as I was poking around about one of my favorite TV series, “Leverage,” I started reading about a series called “Hustle.” And so I tried out the DVD set for the first season.

“Hustle” is a BBC series, premiering in 2004, about a “family” of cons and grifters, and both their internal dynamics and the long cons they run on (only) dishonest bastards.

• Mickey Stone (Adrian Lester) – A/k/a Mickey Bricks – one of the top reigning con men in London, trying to figure out whether he wants to stay at the top, or find something new in his life, even as he deals with the aftermath of a failed marriage and tries to keep the team together.
• Danny Blue (Marc Warren) – The Young Turk, a short con artist who is out to prove himself, to force Mickey to take him onto his crew, even as he resents being trained and directed.
• Ash Morgan (Robert Glenister) – The Fixer, the Barney, the guy who builds the set, wires the (relatively low) tech, and supports the team in most of their cons, even as you wonder what he gets out of it.
• Stacie Monroe (Jaime Murray) – The slinky, sexy con woman, with a past that involved Mickey, a future that Danny wishes he was part of, and a present that’s motivated by something only she can say.
• Albert Stroller (Robert Vaughn) – Gentleman con from the States, Mickey’s old mentor, alternating between con man wisdom and a childish delight in the score.

The show is stylish, echoes of the Ocean’s Eleven jazz, Euro-classiness, in music and look and guys smoking and slinky dresses and snazzy music …

While the straight-up drama (and humor) is great, there are occasional stylistic elements that make you blink and then enjoy.  The cons occasionally break the Fourth Wall, whether to give a smile and a wink to the audience, or to give the viewers a lesson in The Con.  Other times we end up with a 30s musical number or a 20s silent film scene.  It’s used sparingly, but enough to catch the eye and the imagination.

I love con/caper films and shows.  The Sting is, of course, a classic — and, remarkably, the show (in its typically short British 6-episode season) makes frequent reference to it, including some major plot elements in both the first and last eps.  But it remains an original, even as it pulls bits and pieces from other sources.

(For those who are “MI-5” — in the UK and Canada “Spooks” — fans, much of the show behind the scenes is done and written and produced by the same crew.)

So how does it compare to “Leverage”?  Well … it’s very British.  It’s less tech, it’s more stylish, it’s harder-edged and less commercial than American TV.  With, occasional, partial nudity.  And while there’s often a neat wrap around each hour-long episode, the plotting (and metaplotting) feels less structured, less manipulative than the American style of telly.

That said, given a choice between watching one or the other, I’d probably go with “Leverage” — the characters are more “characters,” and perhaps more fun for all that.  But I’d really rather not have the choice; both shows do the Big Con in their own fine ways.  “Leverage” is in its third season; “Hustle” has six done; a seventh is apparently in the works (there are four on DVD here in the US).

Good stuff. I plan on getting more.