Broadchurch ITV/TV3 [** Spoilers **]

sashafierce

This post has been deleted.

AnonoBoy

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

I didn't recognise Tom at all, for instance - why is he living in a caravan somewhere being visited by the other fella?

He explains it in episode 1.

It's the dour blondey woman's caravan - she had given them the key but had just vanished I think is what he said.

He's not living there, they just use it as a place to meet.

Snoopy1

This season is starting to annoy me. How stupid to chose millers house for them to meet.
I'd never get tired of punching the best friend
Also I'd have the mother up for assulting a police officer.

HeidiHeidi

Snoopy1 wrote: »

This season is starting to annoy me. How stupid to chose millers house for them to meet.
I'd never get tired of punching the best friend
Also I'd have the mother up for assulting a police officer.

Ahd while we're picking holes in it, how come one D/I who is apparently invalided off work (or at least meant to be on light duties according to all the hints), and a D/S who has been transferred elsewhere either on compassionate grounds or to avoid conflicts of interest, are rampaging around the place conducting a completely offside investigation/case of their own?

And if the D/I isn't off work/on light duties, has he really NO other work to be doing apart from digging himself further into a hole he dug for himself in another part of the country entirely and then got fired off the case?

I know we have to allow for a bit of artistic licence, but really?

And yes, the court scenes were laughable.

But I LOVE Olivia Coleman, and will continue to watch it for her alone!

(Can't wait for Graham Norton this Friday )

squonk

I watched Gracepoint and transferred now seeing Gracepoint is to be no more.

It's so much duller than Gracepoint (Season 2 anyway). The music would mkae you slit your wrists. I'm not sure I'll stick with it. The fact that there's not a new case isn't that interesting. I'm not particularly interested in the old case really.

FunLover18

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

But I LOVE Olivia Coleman, and will continue to watch it for her alone!
)

Her near-breakdown at reentering the house was fantastic

Snoopy1

FunLover18 wrote: »

Her near-breakdown at reentering the house was fantastic

She's the main reason I watch it

mrsdewinter

On the one hand, I admire the fact that a lot of the laughably unprofessional stuff drama gets away with has far-reaching consequences - as powerful a scene as Ellie's reaction to Joe's unmasking was, I'm sure real-life cops everywhere must have been going, 'Nooooo!' when they saw it in S1, so it's great that we see the confession ruled inadmissible. But I wish things made sense in the world created within S1. So, the DI who was so buttoned down and cautious in the first series is now willing to use the home of the chief suspect in the Danny L case for this highly improbable meeting between key figures in the old case. Wut??

Harry Angstrom

And how on earth did they manage to leave the house so quickly? I doubt she left with him on her own volition (considering she was so scared of him), so surely there would have been some sort of struggle, or loud words exchanged at the very least?

small town girl

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

And how on earth did they manage to leave the house so quickly? I doubt she left with him on her own volition (considering she was so scared of him), so surely there would have been some sort of struggle, or loud words exchanged at the very least?

I don't think she is whiter than white herself, I think the story will evolve with some involvement by her in that original case. Also I'm suspicious that the elder of the two girls wasn't found. It hasn't grabbed me as much as Series 1 so far but I am enjoying it

K-9

mrsdewinter wrote: »

On the one hand, I admire the fact that a lot of the laughably unprofessional stuff drama gets away with has far-reaching consequences - as powerful a scene as Ellie's reaction to Joe's unmasking was, I'm sure real-life cops everywhere must have been going, 'Nooooo!' when they saw it in S1, so it's great that we see the confession ruled inadmissible. But I wish things made sense in the world created within S1. So, the DI who was so buttoned down and cautious in the first series is now willing to use the home of the chief suspect in the Danny L case for this highly improbable meeting between key figures in the old case. Wut??

Noticed that last week too, and it was built on this week. You can just see the prosecution case just getting chipped and chipped away, plus the pressure the legal counsel is under. Tbh the legal scenes are the best stuff in the new series yet. It's hard to know where the other stuff is going and why!

Harry Angstrom

People starting to pick holes in the plotlines....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2918494/Broadchurch-ratings-plunge-lowest-fans-complain-unrealistic-lawyers-new-mother-recovered-immediately-giving-birth.html

_Whimsical_

I found this weeks episode pretty weak, it was hard to know where it is going, it felt all over the place. Ellie having sex with a randomer in the middle of her husbands murder trial was wildly out of character for her too.

They didn't dwell on it but the barrister having someone drive aggressively behind her made me wonder if that's the start of us uncovering there's a wider interest in the community in not having Joe prosecuted. Maybe a pedophile ring or someone else involved who fears being implicated if the full truth of Joe's story comes out. It would tie in with Joe's conversation with the minister.

donalh087

My main problem is that victims in a criminal case do not get to select the prosecutor. The Crown Prosecution would take the case - not some woman who lives at the end of the beach.

Miguel_Sanchez

Unbelievable?

No way.

Sure people give birth at home and attend court the same day all the time!

Realtine

I dunno, it's not as good as the first series but it's still very watchable. IMO I think they should have just left out the whole trial from the second series, Joe confessed and we saw the scenes so move on, Claire totally annoys me something going on there alright, and I wonder if she's the guilty one... I dismissed the whole birth thing I mean whatever, at the end of the day it's just an edited TV show and not real life! Anyway I love David Tennant and Olivia Coleman so meh!

FunLover18

Definitely not as good as series 1. I don't remember last series always ending on such a dramatic note, the defence's accusation of a Hardy/Ellie affair is pretty ridiculous.

I found it odd that Mark seemed pretty nice towards Ellie given how he verbally attacked her when they were exhuming Danny.

Snoopy1

Oooh that's a good theory that Claire did it.

Alfred Borden

Much better episode tonight so far anyways.

HeidiHeidi

It's Terry Keane!

secman

Don't care who killed who at this stage...... A pity because I did enjoy series 1.

sashafierce

This post has been deleted.

mrsdewinter

Yeh, we can safely say that Claire is a rum un. I'm sorry, tho, I know Charlotte Rampling's character is supposed to be awesome but for a lawyer, she spends a lot of her time communicating extremely poorly with her junior counsel. Boxing metaphors? Jebus. I'm glad I'm not a UK taxpayer footing the bill for these riddles...

Snoopy1

sashafierce wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I cant stand nigel, so I hope it was him

I think claire killed the girls and Lee cleaned up after her.

Still watching this but let's be honest not in the same ballpark as the first season in terms of it being compelling viewing.
It has gone from "very good" to "average to good".

seems like many people think that it has gone bad as a series as evidenced by the zero activity on the thread! last nights episode not much good either. the fragmented flashbacks in particular are a really lazy and cheap device.

FloatingVoter

I watched it last night. To be honest - half-watched, I was making a snack at the same time. A sure sign that you're losing interest in something. They really were not ready for a second season at all.
It reminds me of something in its seventh season where they start regurgitating old plotlines in the hope nobody remembers. Not good in a show that's only twelve months old.

FunLover18

its ridiculously bad at the this stage. the writing is so inconsistent and makes little sense. Hardy dragged Miller into his case and now he's saying "don't let this drag you down too". The defence goes to the vicar asking for character witness, the vicar says he sees no sign of redemption or remorse in Joe but they STILL persuade him to take the stand, I'm not a lawyer but that is clearly a terrible idea. I though they were going to use the the defense barrister's son to humanise her but instead they've used it to bring her villainy up to panto levels. So disappointing BUT I do want to know what happened to the girls and Olivia Coleman continues to be excellent.

glasso

glasso wrote: »

Still watching this but let's be honest not in the same ballpark as the first season in terms of it being compelling viewing.
It has gone from "very good" to "average to good".

downgraded from "average to good" to "bad to average".

K-9

glasso wrote: »

downgraded from "average to good" to "bad to average".

I do think it will improve now the obvious plot holes are out! There's too much going on for me but we've Olivia to entertain us and there's enough intrigue to keep me watching.