#1 Extreme Danger

[4567TME]

This book gets:

6.1 (ATAC Trainee)

[Hardy Man]

When I began reading the Ubs with this book, I was mildly let down but still satisfied. I thought This might not be what I was hoping for in the much-anticipated re-boot of the Hardy Boys series, but it shows character and room for development. There were some added new elements (the parot, Brian, F and J not dating their long-time Gfs- leaving them available for other love interests (like that cute skater, Jenna) and the book showed the promise of more expansion (perhaps an event would tie two books together rather than the Hardys having automatically forgotten everyone they met and every experience that they had in a previous book by the time of the next book) and deeper character development than its predecessors (though the suspect profiles that revealed information perhaps 20 pages before it was discovered and the anti-climactic and somewhat confusing climax annoyed me for weeks). I have since been constantly displeased at the direction that the series has taken. In the first book, they set up a fresh, new spin on the Hardy Boy franchise and by book 10 or 11 they had ruined it all. The series has since been reduced to a predictable villain-of-the-week format. Almost all realism has been taken out of the books and their family and friends have been disgraced by being made to look stupid i.e. they are constantly tricked and swayed by some of the most ludicrous excuses presented by the Hardys for them to sneak off on their secret missions. Also, a considerable amount of action and suspense has been drained from the series as the James Bond-esque opening of the books features them usually escaping the simplest of death-traps and piecing together a mystery that the Boxcar children probably would have found childish. 

[tomswift2002]

I have since been constantly displeased at the direction that the series has taken. In the first book, they set up a fresh, new spin on the Hardy Boy franchise and by book 10 or 11 they had ruined it all. The series has since been reduced to a predictable villain-of-the-week format.

I know that when I first read the first 4 books back in 2005 I found that it felt like S&S was trying to keep the series in the same universe as the Orignals/Digests, but after those 4 books it seems like S&S has tried restarting the series over and over and over again, causing the Undercover Brothers universe to not just have one continuity but many continuities.

[NancyDrew]

I know that when I first read the first 4 books back in 2005 I found that it felt like S&S was trying to keep the series in the same universe as the Orignals/Digests, but after those 4 books it seems like S&S has tried restarting the series over and over and over again, causing the Undercover Brothers universe to not just have one continuity but many continuities.

I had the opposite experience. I was extremely disappointed with the first few ones. I felt they were rather sad. The later ones, however, I've really loved mainly because of the humor and character interaction. The one thing that I always loved about certain Hardy Boys books were the humor between Frank and Joe and I think the newer ones have that.

[NancyDrew]

Ah, dang it. Sorry about that. I don't mean to double post. I meant to click reply on the one before it. I would have edited it but I don't seem to have one. Oh well.  That's just to explain any confusion. I do agree that the continuity is rather off at times.

[Hardy Man]

I happen to believe that one thing that would do wonders for the appeal of the series would be if the publishers would agree upon some sort of continuity between books. It gives things a more orderly appearance. I mean, it wouldn't even take that much effort. Every few books, something could be mentioned like, "Joe still occasionally received emails from some of his friends from Murder House" or "Frank and Joe had met Justin Carraway not to long ago". The digests did it. The casefiles did it. The real supermysteries did it. Why can't the UBs do it? All it would take is just one or two sentences every three or four books, if that often. Though I suppose one of the publishers' ways for covering themselves might be to say that since F and J are always undercover, they can't afford to make friends across country and all over the world.

[tomswift2002]

Right now I'm reading A Nancy Drew and Hardy Boys SuperMystery A Crime For Christmas and Frank and Joe are joined by Nancy Drew and Bess Marvin in an undercover operation where they were called into the operation by Same Peterson of the New York City Police because he didn't have any officers who looked young enough to get connected to the cat burglars that are operating in New York City in the story.

So it would also make sense if the Chief of Police on the local police force that the Hardy's were in the jurisdiction of knew who they were in the Undercover books, since in all the books when they are looking for information on a suspect or character in the story they are afraid of blowing their cover, so they are usually forced to go to ATAC for the information which usually means scenes on the phone or checking email.  It would be nice if the boys actually had a contact on the local police force that they could go to to maybe talk about the case and use to get information related to the case.  I'm pretty sure that the local police contact, in the end, would make sure that their names didn't get into the papers or on the TV news.

[SDLagent]

When I began reading the Ubs with this book, I was mildly let down but still satisfied. I thought This might not be what I was hoping for in the much-anticipated re-boot of the Hardy Boys series, but it shows character and room for development. There were some added new elements (the parot, Brian, F and J not dating their long-time Gfs- leaving them available for other love interests (like that cute skater, Jenna) and the book showed the promise of more expansion (perhaps an event would tie two books together rather than the Hardys having automatically forgotten everyone they met and every experience that they had in a previous book by the time of the next book) and deeper character development than its predecessors (though the suspect profiles that revealed information perhaps 20 pages before it was discovered and the anti-climactic and somewhat confusing climax annoyed me for weeks). I have since been constantly displeased at the direction that the series has taken. In the first book, they set up a fresh, new spin on the Hardy Boy franchise and by book 10 or 11 they had ruined it all. The series has since been reduced to a predictable villain-of-the-week format. Almost all realism has been taken out of the books and their family and friends have been disgraced by being made to look stupid i.e. they are constantly tricked and swayed by some of the most ludicrous excuses presented by the Hardys for them to sneak off on their secret missions. Also, a considerable amount of action and suspense has been drained from the series as the James Bond-esque opening of the books features them usually escaping the simplest of death-traps and piecing together a mystery that the Boxcar children probably would have found childish. 

This is probably the best analyst of the Undercover Brothers I've seen in awhile. IMO, the first few books were a nice update of The Hardy Boys, but after the first ten, the series began to feel more and more like a full-scale reboot. Any connections to past Hardy Boys series disappeared, Hardy history was completely ignored, and, worst of all, the continuity within the series went down the toilet.

I had the opposite experience. I was extremely disappointed with the first few ones. I felt they were rather sad. The later ones, however, I've really loved mainly because of the humor and character interaction. The one thing that I always loved about certain Hardy Boys books were the humor between Frank and Joe and I think the newer ones have that.

I can see where your coming from. I feel that, while the overall quality of the series has gone down hill, the brothers' relationship has improved. The interaction between the boys, which seemed pretty mean-spirited at times and very "un-Hardy boys", is what I disliked most about the series, at first. In more recent titles, however, the boys teasing each other has seemed more light-hearted and more like what we saw in the Casefiles, and to a lesser extent the Originals, and overall, the brothers seem more like good friends.

The Hardys ARE brothers, obviously, but, I think we can all agree, more then that the Hardys are best friends, too. It didn't seem this way in the earlier UB books, but in the more recent ones, and the graphic novels (which have been closer to the Casefiles and Originals all along) it is starting to.

This isn't enough to make me want to read the recent UB, mind you.

[Hardy Man]

I can see where your coming from. I feel that, while the overall quality of the series has gone down hill, the brothers' relationship has improved. The interaction between the boys, which seemed pretty mean-spirited at times and very "un-Hardy boys", is what I disliked most about the series, at first. In more recent titles, however, the boys teasing each other has seemed more light-hearted and more like what we saw in the Casefiles, and to a lesser extent the Originals, and overall, the brothers seem more like good friends.

The Hardys ARE brothers, obviously, but, I think we can all agree, more then that the Hardys are best friends, too. It didn't seem this way in the earlier UB books, but in the more recent ones, and the graphic novels (which have been closer to the Casefiles and Originals all along) it is starting to.

This isn't enough to make me want to read the recent UB, mind you.

I agree with you there. The UBs have greatly improved the interactions and friendliness towards each other of the Hardys. I suppose this might be due to the fact that, because the Hardys are secret agents and always have to lie to any other friends that they might have otherwise had as well as their parents, they have to be more close with each other. They can't have a real relationship with anyone else because it would be built on a mountain of (unbelievably poorly thought out)lies
and (rather childish) excuses. One thing that perhaps prevents them from enjoying such a relationship with their father is the fact that he represents the world that puts them in situations of constant danger and intrigue. Besides, what teenager wants to spend all of their time hanging out with their parents? This provides the basis for a very lengthy discussion about character development and character maturity that, if played up in the novels, might have given the UBs a sense of depth a respect for bringing a new dimension to the Hardys. However, it wasn't meant to be. Not when it is far easier to publish Playhouse Disney Monthly Mysteries instead. I have to say that I am saddened by this fact. It would have been very nice to see a more emotional touch to the Hardy boys. There are so many good directions that the re-boot of the series could have taken. If it was done the right way, the whole ATAC thing might even have been a good thing for the series. We've seen the Hardys as individual loners, al-around good guys, and enthusiastic government agents. It would be nice to perhaps see them as undercover agents trying to make their way through everyday life and dealing with the conflicts of doing what they know is right and wanting to have real relationships with friends and live normal lives.

[4567TME]

I really didn't think that this series was required, either.

[SDLagent]

Is it just me or are less and less people reading the Undercover Brothers? I stopped almost a year ago, now, and it seems more and more people (even those who were fans of the series, originally) are becoming dis-interested in the series. The trilogies really seem to be killing the series.

[Hardy Man]

The trilogies really seem to be killing the series.

It didn't have to be this way. Had the publishers actually put thought and consideration behind them, the trilogies might actually have turned out all right. First, they should have done more research into story lines that could perhaps be broken into three coherent parts and stuck to them. Second, they probably should have questioned the wisdom of switching what once was a well-known series of stand-alone books into a series of trilogies. They had no precedent (save for three trilogies in the casefiles series) and, IMO, no idea as to how to make the idea work on paper. Honestly, what company writes these books. I have often stayed up at night wondering if it's just like, "Hey! do you think that two boys who try to find a killer on a ____ is a good mystery?" "Yeah, Jim. Have the full story on my desk by tomorrow! And Jim..." "Yes." "Don't bother getting it edited and/ or checked for any discrepancies or plot holes." "Yes sir."

[Hardy Man]

I really didn't think that this series was required, either.

Required for what?

[tomswift2002]

Is it just me or are less and less people reading the Undercover Brothers? I stopped almost a year ago, now, and it seems more and more people (even those who were fans of the series, originally) are becoming dis-interested in the series. The trilogies really seem to be killing the series.

Really the only books that I tend to read anywhere near their release date are the third books, since with the trilogies I've been keeping the other two books sitting on the shelf waiting for the third book to come, and I'll usually read them a week or two before the release date of the third book.  So for about 5-6 months I don't bother to read the series; it just sits on the shelf collecting dust.

Actually there were only 2 trilogies in the Casefiles with a third story arc that ran from 1987-1991.

[SDLagent]

It didn't have to be this way. Had the publishers actually put thought and consideration behind them, the trilogies might actually have turned out all right. First, they should have done more research into story lines that could perhaps be broken into three coherent parts and stuck to them. Second, they probably should have questioned the wisdom of switching what once was a well-known series of stand-alone books into a series of trilogies. They had no precedent (save for three trilogies in the casefiles series) and, IMO, no idea as to how to make the idea work on paper. Honestly, what company writes these books. I have often stayed up at night wondering if it's just like, "Hey! do you think that two boys who try to find a killer on a ____ is a good mystery?" "Yeah, Jim. Have the full story on my desk by tomorrow! And Jim..." "Yes." "Don't bother getting it edited and/ or checked for any discrepancies or plot holes." "Yes sir."

I agree. The premise of Hardy Boys trilogies sounds cool and when I first heard about it, I was actually excited about the series again. Then I read the first book of the trilogy...