|
|
Post by MagdaFR on Apr 23, 2017 1:00:20 GMT
I watched series 3. I had seen series 1 but could not bother to finish the second one. I have to say that I got bored of the Beth, Mark and family arc. Why they dragged that story through the three series? Also, the journalist part was rather unnecessary. It was like 5 minutes and had little direct relation with the story. The rapist, at least the son of the taxidriver , was pretty clear very early. The other "suspects", Ed, Jim, the ex husband were clearly not guilty. I like The Killing (Forbrydelsen) but I think it brought along a new kind of crime shows that are artificially complex. I don't like much Hardy, Tennant's character. |
|
|
|
Post by mllemass on Apr 23, 2017 5:22:28 GMT
Really? I didn't think it was clear at all. Until the moment we found out who was guilty, it could have been any of the suspects.
I hope they return to do more seasons!
|
|
|
|
Post by MagdaFR on Apr 23, 2017 18:38:32 GMT
Why would they introduce the porn thing (which it was treated as something big when it must be the most common thing among teens) if it wasn't going to have any relation with the story? I suspected the boys had something to do with the crime and since Ellie's son was not possible imo because her husband was already a murderer and child molester the other boy was probably guilty, they showed him many times, not only with Ellie's son. |
|
|
|
Post by igs on Apr 24, 2017 18:36:06 GMT
I thought they introduced the porn plot as part of Ellie's storyarc, with her fear of Tom becoming "his father's son" and probably a heavy dose of lingering guilt (however misplaced) she carried over Joe killing Danny. That's why I actually thought the porn thing would not have any further importance, except maybe to act as a link between Ellie's life and one of the suspects (the taxi driver) to highlight what a tiny community Broadchurch really is.
In the very end I thought of the son, but then dismissed it, cause a similar scenario was precisely what I thought the conclusion of series 1 would be (Joe covering for Tom) and I was wrong then so I thought I'd be wrong again. But nope,
this time there really was a father (foster or not) covering for a son. I liked series 3 a lot, thought it was heaps better than series 2. I couldn't care less about Mark Latimer anymore though, I wish he (and the journalist and the priest) had only had cameo roles in S3. |
|
|
|
Post by roverpup on Apr 24, 2017 19:46:56 GMT
I liked all three series for different reasons. And I actually really liked the storyline in Season 3 that continued as to what happened with the Latimer's family. It was kind of refreshing to see them just not drop off the face of the earth because in a small community like Broadchurch was supposed to be people just don't disappear from the community psyche as quickly as in a big city so I thought it was realistically representational of small village life. And I welcomed the chance to see Andrew Buchan more. I loved him in The Sinking of the Laconia and I wil always remember BC saying that if he had a choice of any actor to play him in his own life story it would be Andrew Buchan. That's a pretty impressive recommendation to me for Buchan's acting abilities! While the newspaper editor's story was brought forward again it wasn't dominate so it didn't get in the way for me of the main plot. Having been so closely associated with the newspaper business in my own life I kind of liked that the death of independant print media was highlighted - even if it was just in a peripheral manner. And again aspects like this showed that life in a village was impacted from the forces of change even though in many ways Broadchurch had a veneer of being a typica village that time had stood still for. So, all of these things played into my interest in how they showed the village itself as a living entity - one of the most moving scenes for me was when the "take back the night" walk was on and the villagers came out en mass to support Tish. Of course the downside of small town living was also on display as well - what with the gossip, the nosy neighbours, the people who were judgmental of folks without any information. But also showed how much even people who wouldn't be normally considered friends of someone came together to show support, not only for the individual but also for the sake of the community as a whole. And it made it a lot more believable in the end that Hardy decided not to encourage his daughter just to pull up stakes and leave the town. And I also think the inclusion of the vicar as a character was important because he tied the effects of the rape on the individual to the effect on the community as a whole in the ending bit of his sermon. I think all of this played into the theme that living in a place like Broadchurch is special kind of commitment. And these multifaceted aspectsof the story made it much more of a complete, complex story to me, rather than just another simple run-of-the-mill who done it crime story. :-)) |
|
|
|
Post by igs on Apr 25, 2017 6:53:42 GMT
I wil always remember BC saying that if he had a choice of any actor to play him in his own life story it would be Andrew Buchan That's interesting! Kind of random, but BC and Buchan probably know each other cause for a relatively big and lucrative market the UK acting world sometimes feels tiny. Like Broadchurch-y lol. I don't know Buchan apart from Broadchurch, though for whatever reason he sometimes reminds me of Benoit Magimel. That might just be the looks - I'm not familiar enough with Magimel either, have only seen him in La Pianiste and Little White Lies where he managed to outperform everyone from Marion Cotillard to Francois Cluzet to Jean Dujardin, one of those performances I remember being absolutely blown over by. I really liked Mark in series 1 and for what it was worth in series 2 (I thought in general it was just too dragged out and too much of it was set away from the titular town) but I just didn't like his S3 arc. What I love about the show is how it ties everyone's lives in Broadchurch to the same tragedy, but Mark's (and Maggie's and the priest's) in this story were just totally separate. On the other hand they did a great job in integrating Beth to the A-plot, I loved her in this series. I think Maggie and the Echo could have been a bigger part of the series if they had somehow made more of an effort to tie it into the main plot, like I thought how they handled the newspaper in series 1 was great. Hardy and Miller were absolutely wonderful, forgot to mention that in my first post. I miss the mystery about Hardy's moroseness, but I liked having a more upbeat Miller back, she's so witty and funny. Their dynamics were so wonderful in S1, and S3 was closer to that I felt like (although not quite as scathing obviously!) |
|
|
|
Post by roverpup on Apr 25, 2017 13:15:14 GMT
Cumberbatch has cited The Sinking of the Laconia as one of his favourite tv shows (it was a 2 part mini-series made in 2011). Also I think BC has seen him on stage because he has a number of stage productions under his belt as well. He is just a shade younger than BC - 38. He also became a father for the first time in 2015, like BC.
:-))
|
|
