The Universe behind Neverwhere's plot is so intense and fascinating that I really wanted to see how this TV Show would have been made if they had a bigger budget at the time. The enormous amount of close-shots that follows us through the episodes are a really frustrating attempt to hide the poor scenarios and the environment. And considering we are following a character knowing a new "world", it would have been much better if it were presented to us by wide-shots. But as I said, this is obviously a choice they had to do because of the short budget. I still think this can't be used as an excuse. Doctor Who is a TV Show that almost every episode brings us to a different "world" and for so many time had problems with budget. However, they were never afraid of showing us the "world" we were seeing. That being said, what really makes me sad about this TV show, specially because I'm a huge fan of the book, are the performances. The actors chosen were clearly bad choices. This even gets worse when three of the four main characters (Hunter, Marquis de Carabas and Richard) are so awful that really got me out of a story that I adore. There are, of course, exceptions. Peter Capaldi is good as always, and Laura Fraser was a Door that convinced me. That may explain why their careers went forward and the others's career, didn't.Although all the above restrictions, I still think the plot is interesting, the story is really good, the characters are well-developed and the world we unfortunately barely see on the show is mind-blowing. I strongly recommend everyone to watch Neverwhere and to get in touch with the beautiful and brilliant mind of Neil Gaiman, for those who don't know him yet.

I spent most of the three hours of this low-tech sci-fi series wondering who it was made for.It's too dark and grisly for children. And it's too childish for adults.So I assume that the target audience is the horde of spotty youths who spend their lives loitering in comic book shops or dulling their senses on video games. The ones who read all the "novelizations" of Spiderman and Star Wars movies. You know the type. They might also miss the allusions in the film ranging from the Bible to the Wizard of Oz...to an ending ripped right out of Brigadoon, with Paterson Joseph standing in for Mr. Lundie.Because it's basically a comic book come to life, NEVERWHERE's best feature is its villains, Croup and Vandemar. The other characters are the type of two-dimensional caricatures I haven't seen since I gave up reading comic books about 30 years ago. And I knew something was up when Peter Capaldi, who has made a career of playing rotten scoundrels, shows up as an angel! (And check out Tamsin Greig in one of her first TV roles.)The other high point for me was the use of actual underground London locations, which must have been uncomfortable for the cast and crew. (Note the breath-clouds in many scenes.) There are even new angles on some familiar ABOVE-ground landmarks, such as St. Paul's.The use of videotape gives NEVERWHERE a cheap look, like old Dr. Who episodes or THE BILL. Visual effects and editing are also amateurish. (Watch the opening monologues for example.) Perhaps this could have been more effective with the kind of budgets allotted for the current Dr Who or Torchwood franchises. But as it stands, NEVERWHERE goes nowhere.

You probably have to know London a bit to fully enjoy the story of Neverwhere (the series or the novel for that matter). The whole story relies on knowing a bit of the city layout, above and below :) And it's understandable that US viewers can be surprised by the low budget BBC production (unless they were familiarized with it through stuff like Dr Who which seems to be popular at the moment). Most European TVs don't get to sell their productions abroad so they won't invest as heavily as the US productions.I read the novel long before I could get my hands on the DVD (actually way before I was even aware of anything being available in filmed form, much less as a DVD). For some reason the only release seems to be for the US market.Regarding the Neverwhere series, yes, while the cast is mostly good, some of the actors are so-so. Even with the obviously shoestring budget, the sets and costumes are quite inventive and convincingly used. The directing unfortunately is really poor and it does quite a bit of damage to the effectiveness of the whole.If you have read and enjoyed the novel, you will find the series to be something imperfect yes but also something that you can watch with fondness. Possibly a proper adaptation by a proper director with a decent budget would be nice. But it's unlikely it will ever happen. Isn't it better to enjoy what's available even if it could theoretically be better ?

When others here say that this thing has cheap looking production values, believe them. Beyond that, I still don't see what everyone loves about Neverwhere. The story doesn't seem particularly original or interesting and the performances weren't too hot, either. Maybe if you live in London and know the locations they are referring to, you can get more out of it. Unfortunately, I do not.Between the laugh-inducing freeze-frame editing during monologues, the poor video quality, and the goofy music, I had to fight my way through disc one and refused to watch disc two. I read that even Gaiman didn't like it. I certainly can't recommend it. In fact, stay far away.