TV REVIEW: Broadchurch - Episode 9

Monday nights have become a bit surreal of late. As Broadchurch has become increasingly bonkers, they’ve taken on a kind of mad escapist quality, not always vastly satisfying, but unmissable nonetheless.

This penultimate episode however, did feel a little like an hour we could have survived without. There were a few revelations; it turns out Claire (Eve Myles) had an abortion years ago whilst Lee (James D’Arcy) was either in prison or on the run, I forget/no longer care which. We also learned that, with Alec Hardy (David Tennant) lying next to her when she awoke from the procedure in flashback, that perhaps they’ve always been closer than he would have people believe? Having had his heart surgery, it seems that Alec is going to survive until the end of the series after all, which is just as well given that he and Ellie Miller (Olivia Colman) have finally started to make some headway with the Sandbrook case, connecting Claire and Ricky Gillespie (Shaun Dooley) through the mysterious dialled number on Claire’s phone. Perhaps Lee is innocent after all? He’s creepy as hell, which by the usual Broadchurch standards means he hasn’t done a thing wrong. 

So far so relatively logical, although none of this felt like it contributed to the wider plot in any significant way. It felt, and I hate to say it, a little filler. And then we had the madder scenes of the episode to contend with, the majority of which, now I think about it, seemed to happen around the beach and cliff areas. Ah, that sea air. We had Claire inexplicably choosing to hide out at the beach huts after Alec threw her out. ‘No one knows I’m here, do they?’ what, here in your secret hide-out on the beach in broad daylight? It’s hardly Fort Knox is it, love? And then the mad fight between her and Lee with them both seemingly attempting to drown each other in the surf, then giving up and realising that perhaps they’re not good for each other after all. Really, you think? And then to cap it all off, there was that kiss between barrister Jocelyn (Charlotte Rampling) and journalist Maggie (Carolyn Pickles). 

In the right context, it could have been very sweet, albeit random. Unfortunately, this wasn’t that context, and it felt thrown in and a little insensitive. That said, there has been a bit of a theme in recent episodes of people changing their behaviour due to ill health, becoming more rash and emotional (Hardy, Susan) so given Jocelyn’s failing eyesight, meaning it (just about) fits the pattern, I’ll let this one slide for now.

On the plus side, at least Ellie seems to have her family and her life back together a bit now, thankfully. I never quite understood why her eldest son turned against her as he did, so I was pleased to see that rectified through another fabulous Ellie Miller common sense shouting match last week. She was beginning to turn into a bit of a downtrodden plot device, so it was good to see her firing on all cylinders again here, even if she has made a bit of a mess of her evidence in court on a number of occasions. It was also good to see Phoebe Waller-Bridge’s arrogant, self-serving Abby get a bit of a comeuppance, again in a slightly bizarre exchange, as lawyer Ben (William Andrews) took great delight in telling her what a horrible person she is. It was a laugh out loud moment amongst a sea (literally) of disbelief.

Despite all the madness, there was a little bit of tension to be found, as the case against Joe Miller (Matthew Gravelle) finally came to an end. For a while it almost, almost appeared that we were going to hear the verdict in this episode. But of course we weren’t. 

If nothing else, it would have been nice to give Matthew Gravelle something to do. He was outstanding in the final episodes of series one, yet this series all he’s really been able to do, albeit for obvious reasons, is sit behind bulletproof glass and widen his eyes occasionally. 

Which seems a shame to me.

Will he be found guilty? All will be revealed tomorrow.

Jen

@jenniferklarge

Follow @AssortedBuffery on Twitter
Or like our Facebook page  

TV REVIEW: Broadchurch - Episode 5

Despite throwing even more confusing twists and turns at us, and not really getting any closer to divulging any answers, the cinematography and running themes in this episode of Broadchurch made it one of the best for a while. 

With lots of shifting focus in shots, more hilltop seascapes and not to mention the eerie fairy lights of the fairground outside Hardy (David Tennant)’s gaff, it actually felt a more like a standalone short film than anything else. Although some elements of the show doubtless continue to be frustrating at best, and at worst totally unrealistic, at least we’re being given a beautiful, almost art-house view of the seaside to keep us going. Even if it is shot through the lens of what is now three grisly child murders. 

But I quibble.

As Alec tried not to let Ellie (Olivia Colman) get too caught up in the Sandbrook case (the words bolted, horse and stable door spring to mind) she was allowed an uplifting, albeit momentarily, storyline as she took it upon herself to solve the mystery. Meanwhile, drama between the legal teams increased, Beth (Jodie Whittaker) tried and failed to come to terms with her loss once again, Claire (Eve Myles) admitted to sleeping with Lee (James D’Arcy) whilst left alone at the cottage, and Ricky Gillespie (Shaun Dooley) turned up – although we’re still not too sure of his real motivation. Does he know something about the deaths of his daughter and niece? Meanwhile, it looked even less likely that DI Hardy will survive the series, and James D’Arcy somehow managed to pop up in just about every shot. Could the shock twist of all be that he’s actually some sort of ninja? Time will tell.

Again, this was another episode with a lot of people shouting at a lot of other people, most of whom didn’t really deserve it. We had Sharon Bishop (Marianne Jean-Baptiste) shouting at Charlotte Rampling’s Jocelyn over the latter not taking up her son’s defence as he was put on trial for murder, we had Tom, played by star-in-the-making Adam Wilson (also seen recently in Mr Selfridge and Silent Witness) telling Ellie off for not standing by his murderous Dad, and even Paul (Arthur Darvill) the sinister vicar had a tough time of it.

 I know I’ve questioned Paul’s holiness since day one, but the shock from Becca (Simone McAullay) and minor blackmail on the part of Joe’s legal team that a vicar should be visiting a sinner in jail seems a little far-fetched. Err, it’s his job? Give him a break! Whether this is just a ruse to let him off the hook of suspicion himself for a while, I don’t know, but it certainly worked on me.

This all tied in well with what seems to be an ongoing theme not just of justice as a system, but of what it is fair to expect of individuals. Is it fair to assume Ellie knew what Joe was up to just because she was married to him? Is it fair to punish her for what he did? Conversely, is it fair to blame Claire for protecting her husband? Can we really expect Beth to help precisely the sort of offender who killed her son? The list goes on.

Interestingly, Sandbrook has actually now become intriguing enough as a storyline in itself that it doesn’t feel so much like an irritating distraction from the main event. We’re now genuinely caught up in the mystery, to the extent that I for one now have to frequently remind myself that Eve Myles hasn’t actually been in the show since the beginning. Again, more cleverness on the part of Chris Chibnall in that most viewers are now working on two separate theories for two separate mysteries, all from the comfort of their sofas, and will most likely tune in to find the answer to one or the other. 

On the downside, Susan Wright’s (Pauline Quirke) re-appearance felt like a bit of a farce. Her attempted revelations became yet another example of the show’s slightly annoying habit of dealing you a cliff-hanger (literally, given the town’s location) at the end of almost every episode, only for it to either never be mentioned again or dismissed within the first five minutes of the following episode, like a dissatisfying rollercoaster. Ellie and Alec’s alleged affair, anyone?

Nonetheless, Broadchurch continues to be well acted, well shot and well written. But as viewers become increasingly frustrated, will it continue to be well watched as we enter the final three episodes? Probably, after all, most of us still want to know whodunit, whydunit and can, in the case of Joe, can they prove he-dunit?

Let’s hope so.

Jen

@jenniferklarge

Follow @AssortedBuffery on Twitter
Or like our Facebook page  

TV REVIEW: Broadchurch - Episode 2

Alright there at the back? Have we still got everyone?

Granted, we’re only at Episode 2 of ITV crime drama Broadchurch’s second series, but I must admit I’ve found myself behaving slightly like a fretful tour-guide this week whenever I’ve spoken to a Broadchurch viewer. Are we still all here? Are we still following?

The answer appears to be a resounding yes so far, although don’t worry, I’ll keep checking we haven’t accidentally left anybody in the loos.

There was certainly a lot to take in this week, even for Broadchurch. The trial of Joe Miller (Matthew Gravelle) kicked off in earnest, now with a full quota of lawyers, DI Hardy (David Tennant) ramped up his mad mission to solve two crimes at once, orchestrating a meeting between Claire (Eve Myles) and Lee Ashworth (James D’Arcy), Mark Latimer (Andrew Buchan) continued to behave very oddly, as did Reverend Coates (Arthur Darvill), whilst poor old Ellie (Olivia Coleman) is still bearing the brunt of just about everyone’s anger. Oh and Beth (Jodie Whittaker) went into labour. 

So a quiet episode, really.

Admittedly, there was some silliness, with several reviewers astutely pointing out the show’s ever-increasing resemblance to a soap opera. And it is, really. The meet up between Claire and Lee was doomed from the outset, made obvious by how many times we were told in the dialogue exactly where Alec and Ellie were both standing, and how safe it all was. This is Broadchurch - nobody should be taking ‘safe’ at face value anymore.  The anger aimed at Ellie continues to defy all logic, at least as far as I’m concerned, mainly as I don’t see how anyone can bring themselves to shout at Olivia Colman in an orange anorak. Especially when she’s had nothing to eat but ‘a scotch egg and a Kit-Kat’. In its defence, though, it does neatly demonstrate the atmosphere of blame and paranoia in the town.

And I think that might be part of the reason why, despite its barmy-ness, the show is very much still working. We’re still feeling the aftermath of Danny’s murder, but if all the action was just inside the courtroom, it would get very boring very quickly. So we’re seeing other things. We’re seeing the continued extraordinary performances from Colman and Tennant in particular as their characters’ relationship strengthens further. So much so that it almost makes you wish you could see them detective-ing together in happier times. 

We’re seeing the relationships between the legal teams, flashbacks to the Sandbrook case, a theme of misanthropy as just about everyone is guilty of something unpleasant, lots and lots of beautiful coastlines, a few bluebells, and then Meera Syal turned up! Meera Syal on a bike, slapping on a judge’s wig and then basically delivering the ‘let’s have a good, clean game’ speech a la Madam Hooch. Brilliant, just brilliant.

For this, arguably, is where the show’s genius really lies. Despite its primary storyline being over, there’s still plenty going on that’s new. Amazingly, it somehow still pushes you into having theories, still having suspicions, even though the culprit has allegedly been caught.

  

For example, I personally want to know what Mark Latimer was doing between 1 and 4am on the night in question, what on earth he’s up to hanging out with Tom Miller (Adam Wilson) quite as much as he is, and who Sharon the lawyer (Marianne Jean-Baptise) was talking to on the phone in the hotel.

Oh and I wouldn’t trust the vicar as far as I could throw him, Arthur Darvill or no.

And that’s just me. There are masses of theories and discussions going out there and everyone’s got their own.

If it carries on like this, it’ll have us all hooked until the very end.

Jen

@jenniferklarge

Follow @AssortedBuffery on Twitter
Or like our Facebook page  

TV REVIEW: The Guilty - Episode Two & Finale

WARNING, THIS ARTICLE CONTAINS SPOILERS.

After an interesting but not wholly lapel grabbing start, The Guilty (ITV1) has now wrapped up its trilogy of episodes. All three hour shows had a fair amount to offer, but the programme sadly suffered somewhat from what I shall henceforth be referring to as Broadchurch 2 Syndrome right through until the end.

Episode 2 saw progressively more aspersions cast as to the moral turpitude of the chocolate box cul-de-sac of the show’s setting (not a sentence I thought I’d be writing this week), with bluffs, double bluffs and presumably triple bluffs galore to boot.  Daniel Reid (Darren Boyd), father of the victim, began to act distinctly shiftily, forcing his wife Claire, played by the marvellous Katherine Kelly, to doubt not only their marriage but everything she had so far gleaned about the death of her son. Meanwhile, in a plot arc I’m still not entirely sure of the point of, despite its obvious merit in terms of subject matter, the son of DC Maggie Brand (Tamsin Greig)  is put under scrutiny as potentially being on the autism spectrum, putting a strain on both her professional life and her marriage. Putting all this to one side however she still manages to interview both the former nanny of the Reid boys, as well as deal with this series’ ‘slightly odd villager’ stock character.

This, naturally, brought us on to the finale. It would be fair to say that it did not have anywhere near the level of closure hype as the finale of Broadchurch or even the inferior MayDay, due at least in part to it being such a short run. I, at least, still found myself intrigued as to who the murderer wold turn out to be, ever unable to resist a good old fashion whodunit. By this point DC Brand had a confession on her hands, but unfortunately not one she believed. Running out of options, she is forced to consider the possibility that the answer may lie a little closer to the deceased boy’s home than anyone would like to believe, especially as Daniel Reid’s alibi begins to unravel through the unwitting handiwork of former lover Teresa (Ruta Gedmintas). As the show reached its, actually rather chilling climax, the focus began to fall on the Reid children themselves, as well as upon the condition of young Sam, as his autism symptoms took a dramatic turn for the worse. 

 

Again, whilst nothing about this mini-series felt new and exciting, the big reveal at the end certainly did pack a punch. Not in the same league as Broadchurch, no, but it did have its own shock factor to bring to the table. All in all the ending felt far more resolved than its ITV Drama predecessor, which I think it’s fair to say will come to work both for it and against it in terms of posterity. From episode one, it has been the central performances of Katherine Kelly and Tamsin Greig which have held the show together, with Kelly’s raw emotional exposure and vulnerability as the victim’s traumatised mother clashing nicely with the measured, uptight career lady next door of Greig’s DC under pressure. This remained the case throughout, and the show was all the better for it.

The Guilty could just have benefited from the elusive ‘little bit more’ in so many areas. More twists, more suspects, particularly as it only ever really felt like there were two, heck perhaps even more episodes, just to allow what was a genuinely strong and well-constructed script the space to develop.

It all needed a chance, really, and it’s just a shame it didn’t get it.

-          Jen

Follow @AssortedBuffery on Twitter
Or like our Facebook page.

You can read my own blog here or follow me on twitter here