Home Forums Television Official THE KILLING thread, Season 1

Official THE KILLING thread, Season 1

CREATE A NEW TOPIC
CREATE A NEW POLL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 18 total)
Created
6 years ago
Last Reply
6 years ago
17
replies
1169
views
1
users
MicheBel
17
  • MicheBel
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 5th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #225963

    ARCHIVE THREAD FROM THE ENVELOPE

    ***********************************

    Originally posted by east/west:
    The show debuts on 4/3 @ 9/8C on AMC.

    Discuss.

    *************************************

    Originally posted by LadyHathor25:

    Thanks for the reminder.  I am setting my Tivo right now.

    **************************************

    Originally posted by espnfan:
    I am very much looking forward to this show.  I am hoping some reviews come in soon.  I believe the season premiere is two hours.  From what I have heard so far it is supposed to be very good.

    ***************************************

    Originally posted by Carlo:
    The Hollywood Reporter is extremly positive. Mireille Enos and Michelle Forbes could be contenders.

    The Bottom Line
    A slow-moving but compelling and well-acted drama that will keep audiences yearning for more.

    AMC’s adaptation of popular Danish series “Forbrydelsen” provides a solid vehicle for breakout star Mireille Enos, who plays a homicide detective investigating the murder of a teenage girl.

    It might be essential to the success of AMC’s newest drama, The Killing, to cut to the chase on this one point: The series is excellent, absorbing and addictive. When each episode ends, you long for the next — a hallmark of great dramas.

    With that out of the way, give credit to AMC for being unafraid to green light a series that moves slowly, lacks a lot of flash and holds tight to the clues of a dark mystery. Translation: Apparently the channel doesn’t feel burned by the fact that Rubicon, another series in the same vein, failed to ignite with an impatient audience.

    In fairness, Rubicon was probably the poster series for Slow TV. Comparatively, The Killing moves with a more brisk gait. But put it next to the hyper-paced, action-packed, fast-talking American police procedurals and it looks like Abe Vigoda in the 100 meter sprint.

    Ah, but the hook it sets goes impressively deep. And if viewers know they should exhale before watching, that’s half the battle right there. Based on the phenomenally popular Danish series Forbrydelsen, which then became a hit in Britain and is being reworked in various other countries, The Killing upends so many elements of American television that it immediately comes across as unique.

    The premise is only simple from the description: A teenaged girl is murdered. Her death affects numerous people on numerous emotional levels.

    After that, it’s all mystery and fallout. Told with compelling patience.

    Each episode of the Danish original took place over the course of a day and there were 20 episodes/days in Season 1. Another successful season followed (10 episodes/days this time) and a third is planned for 2012. All of that means that AMC has plenty of source material for executive producer Veena Sud (Cold Case) who has adapted the series for AMC. She also serves as writer and showrunner. The Killing is scheduled for 13 episodes in Season 1 on AMC.

    There is certainly risk involved in AMC trying to pull of The Killing on these shores — primarily based on our ADD viewing habits. Even if The Killing lures in savvy viewers — as it should — there’s also the notion of stiff competition in the drama arena, a competitive reality that has felled some acclaimed series before.

    And yet, the investment in The Killing is time well spent. Set in Seattle (but shot in Vancouver), there’s a dark, damp, gray-sheen visual style to the series that, like a rainy day, slows everything down. AMC said there was an intentional “Nordic noir” feel to the location and that’s as true as any description. As visually arrested as the greens and yellows in the yawning expanse of Breaking Bad’s Albuquerque setting — only the opposite — The Killing makes Seattle/Vancouver an essential character in the story.

    The key decision in adapting the series for American television was not tampering with the quiet, stoic demeanor of the main character, Seattle homicide detective Sarah Linden (played with riveting austerity by Mireille Enos). Hewing to the original, Enos plays Sarah as uncommonly quiet, solidly professional, intuitive without being, like American crime fighters, some kind of savant. It’s not until you watch Enos play Sarah for a while that it sinks in — there hasn’t been a female American character like her probably ever.

    She not much for talking, as she tells her fiancé (who is moving Sarah and her son down to Sonoma; Sarah catches the murder case on her last day on the job). Sarah also does not dress provocatively. She’s barely emotional. She’s a long distance runner. She’s short on niceties, mostly because she’s blunt (without being mean). What she is, essentially, is a man. Women are never portrayed this way on American television. Enos, (best known as a dowdy polygamist on Big Love, where she also managed to conceal her beauty), is something of a chameleon. She’s a red head, with a pale face, and as Sarah she’s make-up free, her face placid, her eyes wide. She does not blink when talking with suspects (or anyone, for that matter). Chewing nicotine gum while trying to kick the habit is her most expressive trait.

    You can’t take your eyes off of Enos, who gives Sarah both a tough exterior but also a complicated emotionalism; because she’s struggling as a mother, mostly because she works late hours. She hasn’t planned the wedding and, as the case moves from Day 1 to Day 2, she pushes back her flight to Northern California. Calls from her fiancé, as the case moves slowly to Day 3, reveal that he knows all too well that Sarah’s work comes first.

    There are wonderful acting turns throughout the cast. Joel Kinnaman, like Enos, may have found a breakout role. The relatively unknown actor plays Stephen Holder, a former undercover narcotics cop promoted to take Sarah’s spot on homicide duty. It’s to Kinnaman’s immense credit that he makes Stephen seem sketchy and too ****y in his presentation as street-savvy undercover cop who talks like the young teens he’s investigating. You don’t know what to make of him, nor does Sarah.

    Billy Campbell (Once and Again) is Darren Richmond, Seattle’s city council president running for mayor. Michelle Forbes (True Blood) and Brent Sexton (In the Valley of Elah) are exceptional as the parents of the murdered girl.

    What The Killing posits is that everybody has a secret or two — it’s just a matter of uncovering them. As a serialized drama, uncovering those secrets and connecting them to the murder will be, one would hope, the intellectually satisfying and dramatically magnetic pull at the core of the show.

    Because if you’re looking for car chases, gun fights and something sexy, you’re in a foreign land with The Killing.

     

    ********************************************

    Reply
    MicheBel
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 5th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #225965

    Originally posted by Dr. McPhearson:
    From the clips that I’ve seen, Michelle Forbes seems terrific. And playing the mother of a murdered child always provides the actress with a role that will allow her to emote across the board.

    I’m still weary of Veena Sud, whose main credit that is continuously brought into conversation is that she was executive producer of Cold Case. If The Killing is supposed to be like no police procedural we’ve seen before, it might be best to not tell the audience that the showrunner worked on a very by-the-books police procedural.

    *********************************************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    NY Times’ review:
    —————————————————————————-
    Television Review | “The Killing”

    A Thinking Woman’s Detective

    by ALESSANDRA STANLEY

    Published: April 1, 2011

    Sergio Leone gave cinema the spaghetti western, but there isn’t yet an equivalent term for Scandinavian riffs on the classic hard-boiled detective yarn. “The Killing,” a fantastic new AMC adaptation of a popular Danish television series, certainly qualifies as a smorgasbord thriller. It’s unnerving how well the Nordic sensibility fits a genre that for a long time seemed indisputably and inimitably violent and American, particularly given that Sweden, Norway, and Denmark have homicide rates that suggest that they have more mystery writers per capita than murders.

    There are so many Scandinavian crime solvers besides Henning Mankell’s gloomy detective, Kurt Wallander, or Steig Larsson’s hacker heroine, Lisbeth Salander. Yet even among all those popular imports, “The Killing” stands out—it is as scary and suspenseful, but in a subdued, meditative way that is somehow all the more chilling.

    This American version of “Forbrydelsen,” which begins on Sunday, relocates the story to Seattle, a West Coast city that in climate and moodiness comes as close as any to Northern Europe. The first season on AMC is shorter than the original 20-part Danish series, which transfixed viewers in Britain, subtitles and all. But the AMC interpretation is faithful to the three-strand plot, characters, and mood of the original, so much so that it almost seems like a perfectly dubbed foreign-language film. The premiere opens with two women running, one a jogger striding purposefully through Arcadian woods at the break of dawn, the other a terrified girl, clothes torn, crashing through trees and bramble in the dark of night, followed by an implacable flashlight. The murder of a high school girl quickly entwines the police, the victim’s family, and a prominent local politician.

    Mireille Enos plays Sarah Linden, a homicide detective who is supposed to move to California with her fiancé, but catches the case on her last day on the job. Sarah is quiet, even contemplative, an observer who is paired with a brash junior partner, Stephen (Joel Kinnaman), who previously worked narcotics undercover. They track down the victim’s parents, Stan Larsen (Brent Sexton) and his wife, Mitch (Michelle Forbes), and along the way find that their case is complicated by the mayoral campaign of Darren Richmond (Billy Campbell), a handsome city council president.

    AMC has a good track record of introducing dramas that are not comparable to anything else. “Mad Men” wasn’t a fluke, because “Breaking Bad” and “The Walking Dead” are, in their own ways, equally good. “Rubicon,” a 1970s-style spy thriller, was a disappointment that was quickly canceled, but it was at least a noble attempt to try something new.

    In many ways “The Killing” is the opposite of American television’s most popular crime series. Procedurals like “Bones” on Fox or “Criminal Minds” on CBS keep a light touch as they showcase ever more grotesque and disturbing images of violence. A recent episode of “Criminal Minds: Suspect Behavior” featured a serial killer who chopped off his victims’ limbs while they were alive, beheaded them, then stuffed the remains in barrels of cement. Visual horror on these network shows is amplified with music and lurid sound effects, then deflected with calculated flecks of humor; each team has quirky secondary characters whose banter assures viewers that they will not have nightmares once the episode wraps up.

    On the new AMC series, horror lies mainly in the consequences of a crime, not its grisly execution, and that can’t be laughed off in time for the commercial break. The camera doesn’t linger long, if at all, on a brutally murdered corpse. It closes in unrelentingly on the grief of parents who refuse even to concede their child could have gone missing, or on the pain of a friend who feels responsible for not doing more to protect the victim.

    And while the murder investigation is stark and unrelenting, relationships change, and buried secrets are revealed in ways that are too intriguing to set aside. Recently, the crime series that came closest to “The Killing” was another imported show, “Durham County,” a Canadian thriller that was shown on Ion and that was creepily suspenseful, unrelentingly grim, and quite addictive.

    There have been plenty of dark, cheerless murder mysteries on television. “The Killing” is as bleak and oppressive as any, but it’s so well told that it’s almost heartening. Murder is tragic, of course, but viewers may find themselves wishing for Seattle to provide many more to keep Detective Sarah Linden at her desk.

    “The Killing”

    AMC, Sunday nights at 9, Eastern and Pacific times; 8, Central time.

    Produced by Fox Television Studios. Written by Veena Sud; based on the Dan- ish television series “Forbrydelsen”; Ms. Sud and Mikkel Bondesen, executive pro- ducers; Dawn Prestwich and Nicole Yor- kin, co-executive producers; Ron French, producer.

    WITH: Mireille Enos (Sarah Linden), Billy Campbell (Darren Richmond), Joel Kinnaman (Stephen Holder), Michelle Forbes (Mitch Larsen), Brent Sexton (Stanley Larsen), Kristin Lehman (Gwen Eaton), Eric Ladin (Jamie Dempsey), Brendan Sexton III (Belko Royce), and Jamie Anne Allman (Terry).

    *********************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    Variety’s review:
    —————————————————————————-
    The Killing
    (Series — AMC, Sun. April 3, 9 p.m.)
    by Brian Lowry

    Filmed in Vancouver by KMF Films and Fuse Entertainment in association with Fox Television Studios. Executive producers, Veena Sud, Mikkel Bondesen; co-executive producers, Dawn Prestwich, Nicole Yorkin; producer, Ron French; co-producers, Kristen Campo, Jeremy Doner; directors, Patty Jenkins, Ed Bianchi; writer, Sud.

    Sarah Linden – Mireille Enos
    Darren Richmond – Billy Campbell
    Stephen Holder – Joel Kinnaman
    Mitch Larsen – Michelle Forbes
    Stanley Larsen – Brent Sexton
    Gwen Eaton – Kristin Lehman
    Jamie Dempsey – Eric Ladin
    Belko Royce – Brendan Sexton III
    Terry – Jamie Anne Allman
    Regi – Annie Corley

    Although “Rubicon” proved too deliberate and cerebral for a mass audience, AMC braves that stylistic terrain again with “The Killing,” an adaptation of a Danish series that’s essentially the anti-procedural. Instead of crime-investigation-solution in an hour, this 13-part series follows a teenage girl’s brutal murder and assiduously dissects it from multiple angles, from the police to her grieving parents to the local politician whose campaign may be connected to the death. Equal parts “Twin Peaks” and “Murder One,” this grim, absorbing show restores the horror to homicide, while its cliffhangers deftly propel viewers from one hour into the next.

    Produced and written by Veena Sud (“Cold Case”) based on the Danish “Forbrydelsen,” “The Killing” brings a fresh eye to the rather jaundiced world of TV crime by approaching its story in the least glamorous, most understated way possible. And while the gray skies (the show takes place in Seattle, actually shot in Vancouver) and dour tone could be a turnoff, the underlying mystery and offbeat characters ought to earn this a dedicated following, for a channel that knows a little something about cultish devotion.

    Detective/single mom Sarah Linden (“Big Love’s” Mireille Enos) is just about to move to California and marry her boyfriend (Callum Keith Rennie) when she fields the case involving a missing 17-year-old girl. At first, she’s going through the motions, just showing the ropes to Stephen (Swedish actor Joel Kinnaman), the confrontational ex-narc assigned to replace her.

    Before long, though, Sarah is caught up in the investigation, which connects not only the girl’s parents (Michelle Forbes, Brent Sexton) but a mayoral candidate (Billy Campbell) dealt a setback when a campaign car is linked to the body.

    “Who killed Rosie Larsen?” isn’t quite the same as “Who killed Laura Palmer?” but there are simple pleasures in its old-fashioned mystery—one featuring wayward teens, perhaps slightly disengaged parents, political intrigue, and at least one rather unorthodox detective. Everything about the series, moreover, contributes to a moody, noirish atmosphere.

    There are some drawbacks, admittedly, in that approach—since nobody so much as cracks a smile, much less leavens things with humor. Still, the first three installments (the series shrewdly launches with a two-hour premiere) methodically advance the story, carefully weaving together the three overlapping plots while inviting new questions with every revelation.

    Ultimately, this sort of construct will be judged in large part by its payoff, but en route there’s considerable strength in the performances (Forbes and Sexton are especially good), while delivering a reminder how TV can tease out such a narrative in a way almost no other medium can.

    Cops and crime ostensibly carry less risk than other recent AMC offerings (“The Walking Dead,” “The Prisoner”), the disclaimer being that this format requires deferred gratification. It’s a given that “The Killing” is unlikely to rival the crime genre’s broadest ratings appeal, but the initial episodes have a good chance of getting a discerning audience hooked, even if they don’t knock ’em dead.

    Camera, Peter Wunstorf; production designer, Michael Bolton; editors, Elizabeth Kling, Amy Duddleston; music, Frans Bak; theme, Richard File, Wendy Rae Fowler; casting, Junie Lowry Johnson, Libby Goldstein. 120 MIN.

    With: Callum Keith Rennie

    **********************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    LA Times’ review:
    —————————————————————————-
    TV review: “The Killing”

    AMC’s new murder mystery bears faint traces of “Twin Peaks,” with a riveting Mireille Enos as the lead detective investigating a young girl’s death amid a well-acted tangle of characters.
     
    by Mary McNamara, Los Angeles Times Television Critic
     
    April 2, 2011

    Although it is based on a popular Danish series, the show that AMC’s “The Killing” most quickly evokes—with its brooding skies, ominous waters, and complicated murder-mystery cast—is “Twin Peaks,” a fact that AMC seems more than happy to leverage. “Who Killed Rosie Larsen?” is the show’s promo, a direct homage, or rip-off, of “Who Killed Laura Palmer?,” a question that kept American audiences enthralled for two seasons (though in hindsight it feels like more.)

    But “The Killing,” which premieres Sunday, is not “Twin Peaks,” nor was it meant to be; although they both revolve around the murder of a young girl under the lachrymose skies of Washington state, the similarities end there. While “The Killing” will probably not cause the stir of the David Lynch classic, it promises to become something even more valuable: a show that is visually poetic, normatively compelling and, most important, sustainable for a good long haul. Though one doesn’t like to use blurb words, the first two episodes are riveting, and if the third slows down considerably, it’s still pretty darn good.

    Like its Danish progenitor, “The Killing” follows Sarah Linden, a talented and likable if buttoned-down police detective played by Mireille Enos (who was so astonishingly good in HBO’s “Big Love” that the creators made her twins). Hours before leaving her job in Seattle for a quiet life in the hinterlands (Sonoma, Calif.) with her son and fiancé, Sarah is drawn into what at first seems a missing person case.

    But it quickly becomes a full-blown investigation into a brutal and baffling murder. Reluctant, but still brilliant, she is aided by her replacement, Stephen Holder (Joel Kinnaman), a lanky and heavy-lidded cop trading up from narcotics but still so steeped in the street that you can smell the cannabis rising from his hoodie. It’s a classic mismatch—Sarah tucking squares of Nicorette into her cheek like an obsessive-compulsive squirrel while he tries to get her to lighten up, man—but the performances are so quiet and understated that the tensions hum along just below the surface, where they belong. Enos, with her Andrew Wyethesque beauty and talent for silence, is one of those rare American actors who can stare into the middle distance and actually make it mean something.

    As the missing Rosie Larsen becomes the murdered Rosie Larsen, a tangle of characters intertwined with the crime emerges. Michelle Forbes and Brent Sexton are astonishingly good as Rosie’s parents, Mitch and Stan, moving from ignorance to concern to howling grief with powerful precision that is difficult to watch at times.

    “Why are her fingernails broken?” Mitch asks in one moment of exquisite horror. Darren Richmond (Billy Campbell), a politician running for mayor, is drawn into the investigation, bringing with him all manner of political jockeying and backstabbing as well as two possibly mendacious advisors, one of whom is Richmond’s lover. Rosie’s friends, meanwhile, are a parent’s nightmare—the BFF (Kacey Rohl) who’s been covering for Rosie, the horrible son-of-local-bigwig-boyfriend (Gharrett Patrick Paon), and his drug-addict pal (Richard Harmon).

    As with the original, “The Killing” covers one day of the investigation in each episode, but creator Veena Sud (“Cold Case’) has said the plot will differ enough so viewers can make the transition from Copenhagen to Seattle and not fear total repeat. Although the tension over whether Sarah will ever get to Sonoma is cursory at best—what would she do with all that Gore-Tex in Sonoma?—it serves its purpose, which is to put her character at a crossroads, both professionally and emotionally. Rosie’s death clearly means even more to Sarah than the senseless killing of a young girl, and Enos creates a cipher tantalizing enough that we want to know what, exactly, that is.

    *************************************************************************************

    ReplyCopy URL
    MicheBel
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 5th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #225966

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    USA TODAY’s review:
    —————————————————————————-
    “The Killing”: A taut, textured tale
    by Robert Bianco, USA TODAY

    Something wicked this way comes. And a TV audience starved for good new drama should embrace it.

    Arriving Sunday, just when a so-far-dismal season could use the boost, this Americanized version of a Danish hit, “Forbrydelsen,” is a true rarity: an adaptation that doesn’t leave you wishing you were watching the original or, worse, wondering what people saw in the original in the first place. Writer Veena Sud (“Cold Case”) has so brilliantly translated and transferred it to America, you never once get the feeling that it doesn’t truly belong here.

    Set in Seattle, “The Killing” will spend 13 hours on one question—”Who killed Rosie Larsen?”—and each hour represents roughly one day in the investigation. Yet this is no mere procedural, and “The Killing” is not foolish enough to try to let just one query support an entire season. Instead, the fallout from the murder constantly causes other questions to be raised as the show explores the costs of holding secrets, the price to be paid for the past, and the cosmic question of whether we ever know anyone, including ourselves.

    ABOUT THE SHOW
    “The Killing”
    AMC, Sunday, 9 ET/PT
    * * * * (out of four stars)

    Our guide through that quagmire is “Big Love”‘s Mireille Enos in a star-making performance as Sarah Linden, a sensible, solemn homicide detective whose plans to leave a drenched Seattle for warmth and marriage in Sonoma are halted by the discovery of Rosie’s body. Sarah hopes to pass the case on to newly appointed replacement Stephen Holder (Joel Kinnaman, a Swedish actor making an incredibly impressive U.S. debut). But when a clue casts suspicion on a mayoral candidate (Billy Campbell, at his most appealing yet ambiguous), political pressures—aided by Sarah’s own growing empathetic connection to the case—force her to stay.

    What follows is an intricately choreographed dance, as promising leads rise and fall and characters and plot points weave in and out of the story. We’re constantly fooled, yet never unfairly tricked.

    But what sets “The Killing” apart are its steady sense of dread, its dense atmospherics—that feeling that rain may at any moment pour from our sets—and its beautifully drawn characters. Sarah and Stephen are as richly amusing a set of mismatched cops as you’ll find anywhere, and Rosie’s parents are wonderfully played by Michelle Forbes and Brent Sexton. Indeed, the scene where they learn their daughter’s body has been found is as moving and true as any you’ll find on TV this year.

    You’ll find it on AMC Sunday. And chances are if you do, you won’t be willing to leave.

    *************************************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    Alan Sepinwall’s review:
    —————————————————————————-
    Review: AMC’s “The Killing” has strong atmosphere, performances
    by Alan Sepinwal

    But can the show tell a satisfying 13-episode murder mystery?

    Friday, Apr 1, 2011 9:00 AM

    Time is the greatest asset that AMC’s “The Killing” has, but it also could be its greatest enemy.

    The new crime drama, which debuts on Sunday at 9 p.m., tracks a single murder investigation over an entire season. The format, adapted from a Danish series (albeit with some major plot details changed so viewers can’t spoil themselves with Google) allows the series to adopt the same measured pace that’s typified most of AMC’s post-“Mad Men” output, and to differentiate itself from the kind of standalone, interchangeable police procedurals that are so abundant in primetime. It’s more televised crime novel than traditional TV cop show.

    The series’ lead producer, Veena Sud, used to work on one of those shows, CBS’ “Cold Case,” but she takes advantage of the concept to tell her story in a way that’s both more leisurely and intense than she could have within the done-in-one confines of her old show.
     
    So there’s time to get to know blue-collar Seattle couple Stan and Mitch Larsen (Brent Sexton and Michelle Forbes) well before they get the horrible news that their teenage daughter Rosie has been murdered, allowing us to track their transformation from earthy lovebirds to barely-functional automatons. We get to sit with veteran cop Sarah Linden (Mireille Enos) and her new partner Stephen Holder (Joel Kinnaman) as they struggle to develop a rapport, and occasionally the action stops as we just watch Linden studying the latest potential crime scene, doing something that plot-driven TV rarely has time to show: thinking. And we can linger on potential suspects like local politician Darren Richmond (Billy Campbell) and Rosie’s rich, cruel ex-boyfriend Jasper (Richard Harmon).

    And a lot of that stuff is terrific. Enos, who played the twins Kathy and Jodeen Marquart on “Big Love,” makes an unconventional but compelling lead cop, one who doesn’t speak unless it’s absolutely necessary (it’s a trait more stereotypically applied to men on these shows), and she absolutely holds the screen as the calm, still center of this chaotic story. Sexton and Forbes have both done screen-time as cops or cop-adjacent characters, and they bring that sort of strength to their performances as two human beings utterly and understandably wrecked by tragedy. A series that was just about the grieving parents of a murdered teen wouldn’t be commercially viable, but interlacing it with a more traditional police investigation format pays big dividends as it goes along.

    Sud and director Patty Jenkins (“Monster”) establish a level of intense dread throughout the pilot episode—helped tremendously by the ominous score by Frans Bak, who did the music for the Danish original—so that even when little seems to be happening, you can feel the darkness creeping around the edges.

    So the atmosphere and central performances feel worthy of telling one story over 13 hours. My concern is whether the story can say the same.

    AMC is very wisely airing the first two episodes back-to-back on Sunday. The pilot establishes the world and its characters, but it isn’t until a closing sequence involving Detective Linden and Stan Larsen that the show really begins to differentiate itself from all the CBS cop shows. By pairing it with the second episode—which has more of those slow, powerful moments—AMC makes it clear from night one what this show is doing on the same channel as “Mad Men” and “Breaking Bad.”

    At the same time, though, those two episodes and the one airing next week combine to show some of the strain that often comes from this kind of long-form plotting for television, in which one story is told over many episodes, but where each episode has to feature elements that stand on their own.

    “24,” which had more episodes to deal with each season and less commitment to narrative coherence, often struggled with this, giving Jack Bauer various assignments that mattered very little within the context of the season but which helped fill time in between Point A and Point B. There’s nothing quite that blatant in these early episodes—Linden and Holder don’t get temporarily reassigned to investigate a different murder, for instance—but a good chunk of time is devoted to Richmond trying to identify a mole within his campaign for mayor. (Moles: the “24” gift that keeps on giving.)

    All the campaign-related material feels especially problematic. Because Campbell is one of the higher-profile actors on the series, and because the show spends so much time on campaign matters that are wholly-unrelated to Linden’s investigation, he’s clearly meant to be our prime suspect. But it’s so blatant—and the political stories themselves so uninvolving in the early going—that the show sets a trap for itself: if Richmond was the killer, it’s predictable, and if he’s not, we’ve wasted an awful lot of time on a red herring.

    For that matter, the pilot episode features three or four different scenes featuring horror movie-style fakeouts where something that seems like it’s going to be terrifying instead turns out to be completely innocuous. (At one point, for instance, Mitch calls Stan with what sounds like awful news, but instead is revealed to be a problem with the kitchen sink.) The pilot keeps hitting beats like that so often that it almost feels like Sud, or Jenkins, or someone at AMC, didn’t trust the material and format enough to grab viewers early, and inserted these teases to keep the audience hanging around until the case really got going.

    There’s not nearly as much of that in the other episodes I’ve seen, but there are some other elements that are more bothersome at length than they would be in a tighter story. Linden catches the case on what’s supposed to be her last day of work before she moves with her son and fiance to a more peaceful life in California wine country, and so every episode features one or two conversations about why she hasn’t left yet, the hold the job has on her, etc. It’s a cliche to begin with, and thus far it’s a cliche just being repeated over and over for what could be three months’ worth of show.

    This may not be a comparison AMC executives want to hear, but at this stage the AMC show that “The Killing” most reminds me of is “Rubicon,” the low-rated, cerebral spy thriller that had fantastic atmosphere and fine performances but tended to stumble whenever it actually had to deal with plot. In particular, “Rubicon” completely botched the resolution to the story of its first and only season. Until we get to “The Killing” finale, there’s obviously no way of knowing whether Sud has a better conclusion in mind, but that’s the risk you take with this type of extended plot-driven series: the 13 hours you spend on a season might feel utterly wasted if the resolution isn’t satisfying enough given the commitment.

    Of course, “The Killing” seems a far more commercially-viable show than “Rubicon” turned out to be. There’s always an appetite for murder mysteries, and the raw performances by Sexton and Forbes give the show more upfront humanity than the damaged eggheads of “Rubicon” could provide. Because of Sud’s experience on “Cold Case” (where they needed a satisfying resolution every week, albeit not one that had to pay off so much story) and because she has the Danish series as a template, I’m hopeful that she’ll bring all the pieces together in a far stronger fashion than “Rubicon” did.

    But I’m also prepared to have to make like Sarah Linden at the end of this and just stare off into the middle distance, pondering the meaning of it all and whether I’d have been happier if I’d just gone to Sonoma.

    ***************************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    Getting very excited about this series.

    **************************************************

    Originally posted by thedemonhog:
    21 reviews so far and an 84 on Metacritic with no scores below 70.

    **************************************************

    Originally posted by Dr. McPhearson:
    I think any AMC enthusiast here is excited at the reception of this series thus far. What excites me most is that the reviews all confirm that the episodes each end with the Danish original series’ tendency of twists and turns.

    P.S. I got chills watching that 4 minute trailer.

    *****************************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    One of my favorite Mystery novels is “In the Woods” by Tana French (I suggest anyone to read it) and this show’s premise reminds me of the her writing style which excites me very, very much.  Can’t wait!

    ********************************************************

    Originally posted by ItsNotMe:
    What’s gonna make or break this show is how they resolve the murder. Given the reviews, at least the beginning of it looks VERY promising.

    *******************************************************

    Originally posted by Dr. McPhearson:
    Very true.

    I suppose what I’m most curious about, though, is what the second season would be about?

    I know that’s a bit ridiculous, as the first season doesn’t even start until tonight. But I’m really curious.

    Will the first season end with us finding out the murderer’s identity? And if so, what will a second season be about? The repercussions of discovering the murderer? Or a completely different case altogether? That was very much the issue that faced Rubigone, and I’m interested where they take this show.

    ***********************************************************

     

     

    ReplyCopy URL
    MicheBel
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 5th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #225967

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    If Rubigone wasn’t a typo it was brilliant. lol

    ***************************************************

    Originally posted by Eoin Daly:
    Episode Title: “Pilot”

    Detective Sarah Linden investigates the disappearance of a young girl named Rosie Larsen; as the election looms, Seattle councilman Darren Richmond prepares to meet with the mayor.

    Discuss.

    ********************************************************

    Originally posted by uncreativename:
    Slate’s review:

    The Killing: A new crime show has some of that Twin Peaks flair.
    By Troy Patterson

    The promotional campaign for The Killing (AMC, Sundays at 9 p.m. ET) asks, “Who killed Rosie Larsen?,” as if hoping to telegraph its intentions or to trigger a Pavlovian response. The line is an unapologetic echo of the question motivating Twin Peaks—also set in the Pacific Northwest, also about the murder of a high-school beauty. The similarities end there—or at least they end after the score swells in an eerie, ethereal Angelo Badalamenti manner as the cops discover Rosie’s dead body—so let’s chalk up the reference to the chutzpah of a crime show eager to advertise its boldness and delivering on the promise. In the suspenseful early hours of The Killing, Rosie’s family goes about its bereavement in muted tones, and a subplot about a mayoral candidate drawn into the crime’s eccentric orbit flashes with potential, and, primarily, our expectations for cop shows are teased, gratified, and artfully upended.

    The show, adapted from a Danish series titled Forbrydelsen, is set in Seattle, which is variously shot to look like an Everycity of the present, an imposing metropolis of the daydream future, a no-frills noir backlot, a Turner painting, and its quietly proud rain-splattered self. The opening moments juxtapose scenes of a faintly haunted detective and a distinctly hunted victim. Here is homicide cop Sarah Linden (Mireille Enos) out on a jog on a paradisal green morning, with her strawberry-blonde ponytail bouncing, her translucent skin aglow, and the pessimistic set of her full lips conveying the loneliness of a long-distance runner. She hoists her chin as if she’s a stand-out cadet at the Clarice Starling Academy for Perseverance.

    And there, a night or two before, was Rosie Larsen—still nameless at this point in the narrative and mostly faceless beneath the gloom of the trees as she struggles to scramble away from her pursuer. There is just enough light to see that whatever she’s wearing is on the skimpy side. The prologue practically functions as a schematic diagram of all the police procedurals—with their virtuous investigators and their quasi-necrophiliac tone—that The Killing seems to deconstruct and reassemble on a higher plain.

    After a detour from her jog—where the rotting corpse of an animal is pressed into the slightly corny service of setting a mood—Sarah answers her cellphone and heads to a murder scene. A uniformed cop tells her which way to head to find a corpse that’s just been called in and, in passing, tells the audience that this is supposed to be Sarah’s last day on the force. Sarah descends into a murky labyrinth in pursuit of the remains of a Jane Doe, the beam of her flashlight following a trail of blood splotches to a body wrapped in plastic and hanging as if on a meat hook. The heroine whips away the wrapping to discover a blow-up doll wearing a blonde wig, lavender scanties, and a “Bon Voyage” sign. A half-dozen colleagues—meaty gray men in trenchcoats—burst forth to slur that she’s a very good fellow. A surprise party! Another gesture acting as an X-ray of a genre.

    So then we sober up to face realistic grief, heightened realism, and above-average exposition. Sarah’s day is supposed to consist of nothing more eventful than cleaning out her office so that she can move to California wine country with her sullen kid and her rugged fiance. But productions such as this render easy getaways logistically difficult and existentially impossible. “I thought you had a plane to catch,” says another cop. “Don’t you got a plane to catch?” taunts another. She will certainly not be catching any planes until she solves this case and exorcises personal demons yet to specified.

    The murder of this 17-year-old—ostensibly an unimpeachable good girl—forces her to partner up with the new kid on the homicide squad, the fabulously inappropriate Stephen Holder, who is played by Swedish actor Joel Kinnaman and who steals his every scene. Stephen has purple bags beneath his insinuating eyes, a skeevy scratch of goatee, and an attitude so loose as to prove thoroughly incredible and incredibly transfixing. Near the end of Sunday’s premiere, he offers a joint to two of Rosie’s schoolmates in order to discover which fetid nook of campus wayward students like to party in. You’ve seen plenty of detectives who don’t play by the book; Stephen has destroyed the book and used its pages for rolling papers.

    ********************************************

    Originally posted by east/west:
    The show so far has this hella slow burn feel to it.

    The opening scene was very “The Silence of the Lambs”.

    The final minutes of the first part of the pilot gave me chills.

    *******************************************************

    Originally posted by Ted Mosby…Architect:

    The final minutes of the first part of the pilot gave me chills.

    that scene reminded me of sean penn and mystic river.

    *******************************************************

    Originally posted by Space:
    Very promising premiere. The first half was much more compelling than the second (until the final few moments), but it did a great job introducing us to the characters and to this world.

    I loved Mireille Enos – there is always so much going on behind her blue eyes and mean face.

    *********************************************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    I hate to be the constant Primetime Emmy Forum Killjoy, but this just wasn’t very good. Both of these first episodes were stifled by awkward pacing/editing and a lot of on the nose dialogue. Mireille Enos was merely passable. Joel Kinnaman was intriguing, but his loopy, uneven American accent was very distracting. Michelle Forbes was the only actor to shine through the clichés.   

    There was this been-there-done-that vibe that wafted through every other scene. However, strong direction and characterization could have overwhelmed the familiarity, but there was nothing exceptional here. This definitely felt like it was written by a producer of a procedural. The plotting was obvious, the mood was aggressive and the whole thing just doesn’t have much personality yet. Quite honestly, most good episodes of The Closer is more effective and subversive. 

    I can see where all the hype is coming from. This season has had a dearth of quality drama and people seem to be reaching for something worthwhile, but based on these first two episodes this isn’t much of a refuge.

    ********************************************

    Originally posted by Space:

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    I hate to be the constant Primetime Emmy Forum Killjoy,

    lol stop, you love it!

    *************************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:

    Originally posted by Space:
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    I hate to be the constant Primetime Emmy Forum Killjoy,

    lol stop, you love it![/QUOTE]

    Yeah, true. However, I do consider myself a champion of underdogs and the underrated. But I will admit that tearing down over-hyped sh*t is a great stress reliever. I was really looking forward to this thing.

    *******************************************************

    Originally posted by Space:
    Have you already torn down “Boardwalk Empire”? Because the more I think about it, the more basic it gets.

    I still have hope for “The Killing.”

    ********************************************************

    Originally posted by east/west:
    I love AMC’s version of a procedural. I think this is a well done show across the board. There’s no reinventing the wheel like some of the reviews would lead to believe. Just simple compelling drama. Like I mention before, the scene when everyone learned of Rosie’s faith was chilling and heartbreaking. Definitly a “Mystic River” moment in that respect.

    Of the actors, Michelle Forbes and the guy playing the detective that was supposed to take over for Sarah, are the standouts. The lead had her moments, but I need more episodes to get a read on her.

    Wonders what kind of ratings this pull?

    **********************************************

    Originally posted by espnfan:
    I may be in the minority here, but I actually very much enjoyed the premiere episodes and thought they were very good.  I also cannot wait to see how this mystery plays out and to find out who actually murdered Rosie Larson, and maybe even why.

    At least for me, I do not mind slow paced shows, and can wait for the end payoff.  This show also seems very much to be in a vein of Breaking Bad, in that it deals in the very real, and sometimes boring/mundane/small, world of everyday people.  And that it will focus on their day to day actions and lives.

    I almost prefer that compared to most dramas nowadays, which seem to run off of the catastrophe of the week format (think Brothers&Sisters).

    While I am not ready to call all the acting top notch, I thought it was good enough, and some of it top notch.  I hope this show will let the acting shine through, and not get caught up in plot contrivances and events.  While I can see why some people are comparing this to Rubicon, I think this show will be much more relatable than Rubicon ever was.

    I hope I am not the only one here who enjoyed this and is anticipating next week’s episode.

    **********************************************************

    Originally posted by Dr. McPhearson:
    Just finished the first episode.

    Strong pilot. Not outstanding, but exactly as good as I thought it would be.

    The one drawback for this series is that it is not as one-of-a-kind as the other shows on AMC are. Unlike with Mad Men, Breaking Bad, and Walking Dead, I can’t say there is nothing like The Killing elsewhere.

    That being said, I already think that the acting here is stronger than in most procedurals. Michelle Forbes will probably break into the acting races, if anybody. And Veena Sud’s writing, which I expected to be the biggest drawback of the pilot, was actually more than adequate.

    About to watch the second episode, “The Cage.” I’m interested to see how they handle the characters.

    ************************************************

     

    ReplyCopy URL
    MicheBel
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 5th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #225968

    Originally posted by Dr. McPhearson:

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    If Rubigone wasn’t a typo it was brilliant. lol

    Haha. No, it was intentional. It worked so well, I was surprised I didn’t read it being used in the press during cancellation.

    ********************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:

    Originally posted by Space:
    Have you already torn down “Boardwalk Empire”? Because the more I think about it, the more basic it gets.

    Been there, tore that. Though I did give Stephen Graham and the episode “Anastasia” credit.

    ************************************************

    Originally posted by 742:
    I was very happy with these absorbing premiere hours. When done well, the murder mystery is among my favorite genres, and this one so far is effective, atmospheric, moody.

    I admired Mireille Enos’s low-key, underrated work on “Big Love” and here she brings a stoicism to her role that I appreciate. Michelle Forbes is predictably excellent. The politician-with-secrets angle could turn out to be trite, but I’m willing to give it a shot for Billy Campbell. A possible stumbling block is Enos’s plays-by-his-own-rules partner, whose cowboy personality doesn’t quite mesh with the prevailing realism of the rest of the show.

    I hope this does well. I was so disillusioned by “The Walking Dead” that I’d like a smart, deliberately paced drama as a counterbalance to WD’s scatterbrained hysterics. It would not bode well for AMC’s creative future if “The Walking Dead” succeeds while both “Rubicon” and “The Killing” fail. I wasn’t a big fan of “Rubicon” (though it improved as it went), but WD made it look like “The Wire” by comparison.

    *******************************************

    Originally posted by Hodag129:
    I liked it.  Very close to loving it.  The pacing holds you and it look like it’s only going to get better til the end. 

    Basically if this show is expanding a procedural the first episode was the discover the body segment.  Let’s be honest no matter how they do it, it’s always the most boring part in your CSIs, Law and Orders, ect.  Yet this was pretty good.  It should get even better during the interesting parts of the case.

    I liked a lot of the camera work in this.  Great direction.  I loved the slow pan of the two interrogations.  So deliberate.  It has a way of making you feel every shot, every scene.

    As of now Forbes is the only lock for a nomination in my book.  Phenomenal.  I don’t think she’ll get a better tape than the pilot though.  It’s strong enough for a win depending on how the rest of the category is stacked.

    Enos is pretty great but isn’t quite settled in.  Her stoic presence is a center for the show, but I don’t know how strong it is.  A lot of her moves have some toughness to them, which I liked.  Like sliding Jaspers phone out of reach, staring down the candidate whos at least a foot taller, then playing him ect.

    Sexton as Rosie’s father was great too.   Kinnaman as the replacement detective was pretty hit an miss.  Sometimes his attitude seemed above the show.  It felt less real than the rest of the characters.  Maybe it’s because everyone else cares and he doesn’t seem to.

    The writing dialogue wise wasn’t phenomenal.  They had big scenes down pat.  But it seemed like for a show that was going for realism, the dialogue was clunky and… not real.

    The more I think about it the more I liked it.  That can only be a good thing.  There was just so much more you could do that you can’t in a usual show, like the older son slowly figuring out what happened.

    So far it’s much better than Walking Dead and Boardwalk Empire as far as new shows go.  If any of those get in (or win) series race it should be this.

    Grade A-.

    (There’s a lot of Twin Peaks connections going on up in here…(!))

    ********************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    Very compelling pilot episode. Michelle Forbes and Brent Sexton were almost too searing to watch in that discovery sequence (though it reminded me of those similarly overblown displays in “Mystic River”). I liked Mirelle Enos on “Big Love” until they fizzled her role away there, so I’m glad that she’s landed on something like this in a role that can certainly grow as the series progresses. I’m not as invested (yet) with the political storyline connection, anything with Billy Campbell’s character, or Sarah’s over-eager narcotics partner. The look of the series is stunningly bleak and Euro-dreary. They’ve more than done their job in maintaining long-term interest with the murder storyline here. Who killed Rosie Larsen indeed.

    *********************************************

    Originally posted by Dr. McPhearson:
    I always find these politician storylines tacked-on to their respective shows half the time, and if not tacked-on, then at least less compelling. Heck, I was bored to tears by 24 when it pulled the same thing, dragging out a buried murder accusation for-freakin’-ever. Billy Campbell is fine, but his character and the entire respective storyline are not as interesting yet.

    I think this show needs someone like Kinnaman’s character, with his edgier sensibilities, etc. I thought that the scene with the two soccer girls was a perfect example of that. His work in undercover narcotics lends an entirely different set of skills to the proceedings. Had it not been for his wilder methods, they might not have ever found the Cage.

    Most murder mysteries lose me once they start pushing the limits of reality, or the timeline becomes inconsistent. Right now, though, I’m really buying it. Can’t wait for the next episodes.

    Episode 101, Part 1 “Pilot” : A-
    Episode 101, Part 2 “The Cage” : B+

    *************************************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    This was terribly good and anybody that says otherwise either does not want to like this show or has some kind of mental disorder.  It was extremely engaging.  Especially for two hours where very little happens.  Not as a slight but shows how strong the slow characterizations are.  The only scene that felt forced and silly was the cop getting the 9th graders stoned but made sense considering where he comes from.  I have a feeling when the season is said and done everyone will be saying this was the best drama of the season.  Go ahead and quote me.

    *********************************************

    Originally posted by dumped:
    It looks promising not a bad pilot at all

    ************************************************

     

    ReplyCopy URL
    MicheBel
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 5th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #225969

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    This was terribly good and anybody that says otherwise either does not want to like this show or has some kind of mental disorder.

    They’re not mutually exclusive.

    I will say that the Mystic River comparisons are apt. This was sometimes just as overblown and awkward as that crappy flick.

    *********************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    I actually hated Mystic River(short of the brilliant Tim Robbins performance) and found this far more engaging.  But I’ve never been a huge Eastwood fan.

    **********************************************

    Originally posted by moretvplz:
    That was pretty sensational. While i do agree the series has more limitations in terms of its originality than, say, “Breaking Bad”, it actually almost makes “The Killing” even more original. The terrific pacing, haunting soundtrack and noir atmosphere make for one compelling pilot.

    And, I’m a longtime fan of Michelle Forbes, but this just needs to be nominated (along with Saxton) – if they’re watching these two sensational performances, they’ll get nominated. And I say this knowing that their parts scream Emmy anyway – it doesn’t matter, they’re that good.

    Enos was good, but her part isn’t flashy and I doubt she’ll get nominated this season. Am I the only one who kept seeing Kathy/Jodeen from “Big Love” when Sarah gazed into the distance?

    Also, does anyone know how the series plans to move forward in the event of a second season? Will it be a new case? I’m curious about this too.

    ******************************************

    Originally posted by Ted Mosby…Architect:

    And, I’m a longtime fan of Michelle Forbes, but this just needs to be nominated (along with Saxton)

    i thought sexton was just as good, if not better, than forbes. everything from him finding out his daughter was dead to explaining to his sons where there sister went. he was great.

    ******************************************

    Originally posted by Dr. McPhearson:
    Moretvplz – That was the same question I asked a little bit earlier. Will it be a new case? Will it be the same case, but with the murderer being tried? How can that be made as compelling as the investigation? Of course, this is all pointless if AMC cuts the series off at a single season, so I’d rather wait and see.

    Brilliance – I hated the hammy hysterics of “Mystic River,” but I actually don’t think these actors are nearly as overblown as the ones in that film (who won Oscars, amazingly). That scene with Mitch and Stan on the phone…. I could tell the two actors were holding back. Brent could’ve easily been more over-the-top, trying to leap over the restraining cops, etc. It was more realistic than Sean Penn’s fight-and-finally-get-brought-down-by-eight-cops Oscar clip.

    **********************************************

    Originally posted by Slam:
    I really loved this as well. Though it’s hard to not draw comparisons other shows/films, this had a very quiet intensity that some of those lack. It was also relatable.

    For me, the politician (thus far) is somewhat of a throw-away, as is the wealthy family with a troubled youth. That slap and the hokey “WHAT DID YOU DO THIS TIME?” line were a bit much.

    But I thought everything else really worked. I also really enjoyed Kinnaman. I thought the scene with the soccer players was fascinating and I loved the scene with her son in the office. (lol’ed at “get something healthy like corn chips”….”or fun-yuns” line)

    Forbes and Sexton were the obvious heavy-hitting actor standouts in these first 2 episodes. I was impressed by Forbes mostly because last we saw her, was as the over-the-top Maryann on “True Blood” (which worked… but this is shockingly different). And all the family’s scenes were heartbreaking. The young actors were wonderful as well.

    As for Enos, hoping her character breaks out of the “by-the-books / the-nose-knows” detective. I thought she was always fantastic on “Big Love” (the “On Trial” episode in season 3, where we actually see both Kathy & Jodeen was one of my favorite episodes of the series). I think she’ll get some more material down the line as her personal life conflicts more with her job, as they’ve already laid the tracks for. The clash of her Kinnaman should also make for some compelling stuff later on.

    Pilot: A (MVP: Forbes)
    The Cage: A- (MVP: Joel Kinnaman)

    **************************************************************

    Originally posted by 742:

    Originally posted by Slam:

    As for Enos, hoping her character breaks out of the “by-the-books / the-nose-knows” detective. I thought she was always fantastic on “Big Love” (the “On Trial” episode in season 3, where we actually see both Kathy & Jodeen was one of my favorite episodes of the series). I think she’ll get some more material down the line as her personal life conflicts more with her job, as they’ve already laid the tracks for. [b]The clash of her Kinnaman should also make for some compelling stuff later on.[/b]

    I love how subtly she plays Linden’s obvious disapproval of her partner. Her reaction shots walk a fine line between “You’ve gotta be kidding me” and “Whatever, you’re not going to be my problem much longer,” like the one she shot him after he promised the girl’s parents to find her killer. She conveys a put-upon professionalism that I like.

    **********************************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    The second episode saved the best for last with the reveal of “the cage.” They’ve painted such a stark and dreary atmosphere already, and this murder mystery is already one that I’ll be invested in all season long. With a build-up like this, anything other than pure astonishment by the season finale over who the killer will probably disappoint me, but it’s as much about the ride as it is the destination. The pilot episode was a tad more accomplished. Things slowed down a bit here, but I liked the Larsens’ settling into their new reality. The scene where they told the young boys the news about Rosie was a devastating one. It’ll take more time for me to become interested in Billy Campbell’s mayorial candidate character’s arc. Some things there feel like tacked on plot contrivances (like his affair with the campaign manager), but something’s boiling with that too eventually I think. Mirelle Enos looks like she’ll be a strong, silent-type lead in this, and as far as female protagonists go, I do appreciate that. The narcotics partner still feels weakest-link-ish. That scene with the two teen girls on the track field fell very flat, and the continued play-up of how these two detectives are so opposite to one another might grow tiresome unless some new dimensions start to develop within their overall dynamic. Amazing start all the same though.

    Grade for “Pilot”: A-
    Grade for “The Cage”: B+

    ****************************************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    People are mostly giving the show a lot of credit solely for its mood. Mad Men and The Walking Dead also had atmosphere-driven pilots. The cliched characters and predictable dynamics so far outweigh whatever great achievement it is to accomplish a dour, slow mood.

    ************************************************

    Originally posted by Dr. McPhearson:
    I can’t believe that the characters already have a body and a potential kidnapping scene, and we still have 11 episodes to go on. I guess I’m so used to having an open-and-shut case in an hour Law & Order-style that I’m surprised at how much time the show is willing to take on the individual aspects of the investigation.

    What I really can’t wait for is when the show starts dropping hints that make us question who the murderer might be. I want to get to the point where I suspect Mitch, or suspect the new detective, or suspect the mayoral candidate. I like the idea of switch theories every episode.

    Right now, I think I know the murderer. But I want to be given clues to the contrary that make me question my theory.

    **************************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    Looks like we have an early hit on our hands!
    —————————————————————————-
    AMC opens strong with “The Killing”
    Cable series draws in 2.7 million viewers
    by Stuart Levine

    AMC made a killing with “The Killing.”

    Cabler’s newest series from Fox Television Studios opened to 2.7 million viewers Sunday night for the 9-11 p.m. timeslot, making it the second-highest AMC premiere.

    Only “The Walking Dead,” which premiered on Halloween, did better when it debuted to 5.3 million.

    For the entire night, including a repeat telecast, “The Killing” drew 4.6 million.

    Show, about a murder in Seattle, is produced by Fox Television Studios.

    ******************************************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    People are mostly giving the show a lot of credit solely for its mood. Mad Men and The Walking Dead also had atmosphere-driven pilots. The cliched characters and predictable dynamics so far outweigh whatever great achievement it is to accomplish a dour, slow mood.

    Hater.   :happyhappy:

    ********************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    ^ And I’m unapologetic with it. Although, unlike some people I don’t judge an entire series purely on first impressions.

    **********************************************

    Originally posted by 742:

    Originally posted by Dr. McPhearson:

    What I really can’t wait for is when the show starts dropping hints that make us question who the murderer might be. I want to get to the point where I suspect Mitch, or suspect the new detective, or suspect the mayoral candidate. I like the idea of switch theories every episode.

    I think that kind of storytelling would irritate me. I like the idea of this show being a straightforward narrative which draws us in with character and story detail rather than by jerking us around with new red herrings every week. I currently don’t have a guess for who’s behind the murder. I think the show’s best bet is to invest in its characters so that no matter who the killer turns out to be, it’s interesting. Once you encourage people to guess, re-guess, and re-re-guess, the ending will be an anticlimax no matter whodunnit.

    ******************************************

    Originally posted by Hodag129:
    ^^ I agree with 742 100%.  I love shows like Lost and Fringe and the like that keep you guessing and are mystery driven.  Red herrings and plot twists are staples of those shows.  But I really hope The Killing stays straight forward.

    I know the mystery is at the core of the show but I hope it doesn’t become my reason for watching. 

    Take Lost which had a lot of mysteries but the characters to back it up.  I sort of hope this is about the characters with a mystery to back it up.

    I’d hate to see this show put all it’s stock into the mystery then once it’s solved it erodes into nothing (Twin Peaks.)  Or can’t be solved withing the realms of reality (Lost, Twin Peaks).

    Reveals like “The Cage”, or pulling the car out of the lake, are perfect linear discoveries in a real mystery and I sort of like it that way.  Those were great “cliff hangers.”  Or the emotional cliff hanger of Mitch in Rosie’s room.

    As for dropping hints and the solve it at home mania that could result from a show like this, I think I’ll stay out of it.  I’m sure I’ll develop my own theories.  But watching the characters solve the crime will be more interesting than watching the fans trying to solve it.

    ***************************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    ^ And I’m unapologetic with it. Although, unlike some people I don’t judge an entire series purely on first impressions.

    If that is a veiled criticism of me I won’t hear it and I won’t respond to it.

    ****************************************************

    Originally posted by thesmartone:
    While at times I think it went too slow, I actually like this show. This is the first time watching a show on AMC for me, and I liked it.

    Michelle Forbes is very well acted. When she found out her daughter was dead, her reaction brought me to tears. It wasn’t immediate screaming and crying like alot of other acting on TV. It was very well paced: shock, sobs, then full out crying.

    Enos, well, she is going to have to grow on me. This is the first time I am seeing her work. So she needs to step it up if she wants an Emmy nod.

    Grade for Pilot: A-
    Grade for The Cage: B

    Grades so far:
    1-1) Pilot: A-
    1-2) The Cage: B

    **********************************************************

    Originally posted by east/west:
    Nice ratings! Hopefully they’ll remain consistent. And of course the quality.

    **********************************************************

    Originally posted by LadyHathor25:
    Still haven’t watched, but it is on my DVR.

    Is the Danish series available to view in the USA anywhere?

    ***********************************************************

    Originally posted by Bazookka Joe:
    Really great first two episodes.

    **********************************************************

    Originally posted by Dr. McPhearson:

    Originally posted by 742:
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by Dr. McPhearson:

    What I really can’t wait for is when the show starts dropping hints that make us question who the murderer might be. I want to get to the point where I suspect Mitch, or suspect the new detective, or suspect the mayoral candidate. I like the idea of switch theories every episode.

    I think that kind of storytelling would irritate me. I like the idea of this show being a straightforward narrative which draws us in with character and story detail rather than by jerking us around with new red herrings every week. I currently don’t have a guess for who’s behind the murder. I think the show’s best bet is to invest in its characters so that no matter who the killer turns out to be, it’s interesting. Once you encourage people to guess, re-guess, and re-re-guess, the ending will be an anticlimax no matter whodunnit.[/QUOTE]

    Maybe you misunderstood what I was trying to say. I don’t want red herrings, per se. I don’t want them to reveal some dirty ragged old drifter who traveled through town and preached the word of Satan. I don’t want someone who is so obviously being used as a decoy.

    What I also don’t want, though, is to exclude the parents from the list of suspects so easily, or the new cop, or the politician’s assistants. I want the ride to be a thrilling one, and if the theory I have now turns out more and more to be true, I wonder if I’ll enjoy it is as much.

    But anyway, I like how contemplative the show is right now. Can’t wait to see what they do with the numerous strands of story.

    **********************************************************

    Originally posted by thedemonhog:

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    I hate to be the constant Primetime Emmy Forum Killjoy, but this just wasn’t very good. Both of these first episodes were stifled by awkward pacing/editing and a lot of on the nose dialogue. Mireille Enos was merely passable. Joel Kinnaman was intriguing, but his loopy, uneven American accent was very distracting. Michelle Forbes was the only actor to shine through the clichés. There was this been-there-done-that vibe that wafted through every other scene. However, strong direction and characterization could have overwhelmed the familiarity, but there was nothing exceptional here. This definitely felt like it was written by a producer of a procedural. The plotting was obvious, the mood was aggressive and the whole thing just doesn’t have much personality yet. Quite honestly, most good episodes of The Closer is more effective and subversive. I can see where all the hype is coming from. This season has had a dearth of quality drama and people seem to be reaching for something worthwhile, but based on these first two episodes this isn’t much of a refuge.

    That about sums it up.  I am definitely in your camp for this one.

    I was not a fan of the lead.  What was her problem?  She spent so much time staring.  And I must have missed something with the ending.  Why was it a big deal?  Why were there so many establishing and panning shots of “Seattle”?  Why should I care?

    Based on the two episodes so far, I would be disappointed if it got series and directing nominations, which are both very possible at this point.  Let’s see some nominations for Terriers and Justified.

    ***********************************************************

     

     

    ReplyCopy URL
    MicheBel
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 5th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #225970

    Originally posted by ItsNotMe:
    I’m not entirely sold yet. My sole real complaint is that the characters feel only like prototypes so far. As they get more fleshed out in future episodes, I think it’ll get better and better.

    ***************************************************

    Originally posted by 742:

    Originally posted by Dr. McPhearson:
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by 742:
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by Dr. McPhearson:

    What I really can’t wait for is when the show starts dropping hints that make us question who the murderer might be. I want to get to the point where I suspect Mitch, or suspect the new detective, or suspect the mayoral candidate. I like the idea of switch theories every episode.

    I think that kind of storytelling would irritate me. I like the idea of this show being a straightforward narrative which draws us in with character and story detail rather than by jerking us around with new red herrings every week. I currently don’t have a guess for who’s behind the murder. I think the show’s best bet is to invest in its characters so that no matter who the killer turns out to be, it’s interesting. Once you encourage people to guess, re-guess, and re-re-guess, the ending will be an anticlimax no matter whodunnit.[/QUOTE]

    Maybe you misunderstood what I was trying to say. I don’t want red herrings, per se. I don’t want them to reveal some dirty ragged old drifter who traveled through town and preached the word of Satan. I don’t want someone who is so obviously being used as a decoy.

    What I also don’t want, though, is to exclude the parents from the list of suspects so easily, or the new cop, or the politician’s assistants. I want the ride to be a thrilling one, and if the theory I have now turns out more and more to be true, I wonder if I’ll enjoy it is as much.

    But anyway, I like how contemplative the show is right now. Can’t wait to see what they do with the numerous strands of story.[/QUOTE]

    I think I understood. When I mentioned red herrings, I wasn’t referring to new characters coming out of the woodwork to be used as decoy suspects. I meant using the characters currently on the canvas as decoy suspects. Revelations from future episodes will certainly build suspicions in different directions, but I don’t want every episode to a function of, “This guy is acting fishy, and now this guy is acting fishy, and I think this guy is acting fishy too.” What will make this mystery satisfying to me will be if the characters are compelling and if the solution is believable on that basis. I don’t want the show to keep me guessing, per se. I want it to absorb me so that I’m not preoccupied with guessing.

    **********************************************

    Originally posted by Slam:
    I agree. I’d prefer this one to be a straightforward linear story, with compelling characters that drive the plot and the “whodunnit?” aspect forward. Rather than the writers just playing with our minds. Of course we’ll continue guessing, but if this is as smart as it appears to be, it won’t become so overly complicated that the audience is, as mentioned above by 742, preoccupied with guessing the basic plot. In my opinion, that’s where “Damages” tended to fail in its 2nd and 3rd seasons.

    *****************************************************

    Originally posted by jss0058:
    I think the best word used to describe the first two episodes is absorbing.   Everything worked together to really draw you into this story.    I’m on the really liked, but not LOVED train as of right now.   Forbes and Saxton were GREAT, IMO, but as of this moment those are the only two Emmy nominations I could get behind (although there is a LOT of show left).   Enos did a fine job and hopefully we get more from her, emotionally, as this case unfolds.  One thing is for sure I definitely want to know who killed Rosie so I will be back…and isn’t that really the point of a show like this?

    *********************************************

    Originally posted by ItsNotMe:
    Veronica Mars’ first season is a good example of how a whodunit story told in a more straightforward fashion, with substantial plotting that moves things forward, while dropping natural clues and deepening the characters, can be good. Season two didn’t go as smoothly, one of the reasons being that it veered off in different directions with subplots that served mainly to introduce red herrings, and that got in the way of the progress of the story. Not only was the mystery solved more satisfyingly in the first season, but also its rewatch factor is much greater.

    (In a nutshell: I agree with what has already been said upthread.)

    *************************************************************

    Originally posted by Moviemjk102:
    There’s not much else for me to say that hasn’t already been said, other than I sincerely hope Michelle Forbes and Brent Saxton must be nominated for Emmys this year. All of their scenes were absolutely heartbreaking. Superb stuff from both of them.

    ********************************************

    Originally posted by ItsNotMe:
    0.7 in the 18-49 demo. Not good.

    ********************************************

    Originally posted by thedemonhog:
    Yikes, this show is old-skewing and after just one broadcast, it the lowest-rated of AMC’s current four shows.

    *******************************************

    Originally posted by LadyHathor25:
    Yes, but Mad Men and Breaking Bad started with low ratings, too. 

    People up thread asked about what a 2nd season would look like.  If they are copying the Danish series, it would be a new case.  Only two actors carried over from season 1 to season 2.  If they aren’t copying it, then I have no idea.  But, a new case would be the thing that made the most sense.

    Anyway, I finally watched it.  It was interesting.  The first episode was a bit better.  So far, it still feels like everyone is still settling in.  I’ll keep tuning in though.  Hopefully they can write a very compelling mystery.

    ******************************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:

    Originally posted by ItsNotMe:
    Veronica Mars’ first season is a good example of how a whodunit story told in a more straightforward fashion, with substantial plotting that moves things forward, while dropping natural clues and deepening the characters, can be good. Season two didn’t go as smoothly, one of the reasons being that it veered off in different directions with subplots that served mainly to introduce red herrings, and that got in the way of the progress of the story. Not only was the mystery solved more satisfyingly in the first season, but also its rewatch factor is much greater.

    (In a nutshell: I agree with what has already been said upthread.)

    It’s probably a good idea to look into how the original series structured things. Were there multiple seasons of the show? Did each season focus on a separate case? Or was it the impact of one case explored through multiple seasons?

    **********************************************

    Originally posted by LadyHathor25:
    That’s okay.  I thought it was funny that you posted that right after me.

    I just looked the info up on Wikipedia.  Netflix doesn’t have the original Danish series available, sadly.  I’d love to see it.  People everywhere I look are saying the ending to this American version isn’t the same as the one for the original.  This just makes me more keen to see the original.  I could watch the whole thing without being spoiled.

    ******************************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:

    Originally posted by ItsNotMe:
    Veronica Mars…  Season two didn’t go as smoothly

    Still miffed at how they f-ed over Beaver, who was one of my favorite elements of the series.

    ******************************************************

    ]Originally posted by adamunc:
    Watched “Pilot” last night (“The Cage” will be tonight) and, despite a couple of issues, overall it was my favorite drama pilot of the season. Michelle Forbes (I’ve been a fan of hers since her stunning turn as the repressed Sonni Lewis on Guiding Light back in the late ’80s) and Brent Saxton already have win-worthy tapes with the pilot in the supporting categories. I was fascinated by Mireille Enos, who is revealing just enough emotion under her character’s studied passivity to make her underplaying riveting. I’m not buying Joel Kinnaman so far, but that may be more to do with not buying his character yet either.

    Something in the storytelling approach reminded me of 24, which in its best seasons always seemed to know when to introduce a plot point, twist the story path, or reveal a misdirect. There were a couple of very clunky scenes of exposition (that background-spouting fiance!) which were jarring given how artfully much of this was done. I also thought the subtle music score worked very well and allowed for more impact when it swelled at the appropriate dramatic moment at the end.

    The constant rain and gloom could go one of two ways–it could get to be a drag, or it could become an iconic look for the show, like the smoky haze in Mad Men. Overall, well done and can’t wait to watch the second hour tonight.

    *************************************************

     

    ReplyCopy URL
    MicheBel
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 5th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #225971

    Originally posted by blueprint:
    it’s such a turn-off for me that the pilot is 90 minutes long. Actually I really want to watch it, but it takes up so much time, it’s movie length…

    ****************************************************

    Originally posted by Hodag129:

    Originally posted by blueprint:
    it’s such a turn-off for me that the pilot is 90 minutes long. Actually I really want to watch it, but it takes up so much time, it’s movie length…

    The pilots 45 minutes.  The second episode is 45 minutes.  There’s a clear end point to the pilot if you want to watch just that.

    ******************************************************

    Originally posted by LadyHathor25:
    Hey, I just noticed that Liam James plays the kid Jack Linden in this show.  Is that why he wasn’t in the last few Psych episodes this year?  He was great as young Shawn on Psych.  Wonder if this show is keeping him from that role.  Too bad because the kid Psych replaced him with isn’t as good as he was.

    *************************************************************

    Originally posted by trashersfan228:
    I thought the 2 hour premiere was a great start to a series with a lot of potential.  I really like how the series takes a standard television storyline of the death of a young girl but make a lot of unconventional twists and turns in the telling of the investigation (such as that the body is not found until the end of the 1st hour when normally it will be found within the first 2 scenes or that each episode translates to 1 day in the time line of the series). 

    Mireille Enos is solid as the lead, but I don’t think she is Emmy worthy yet.  Joel Kinnaman as the partner got a little annoying in the second hour, but he does not hinder the show much.  Nobody from the political storyline is of any note but both of the parents are phenomenal (Michelle Forbes and Brent Sexton).

    In terms of AMC shows, I would rank this as the 4th best pilot (It was only better than the Mad Men pilot) but has potential to be better than both Rubicon and The Walking Dead.

    Pilot/The Cage=9/10

    ************************************************

    Originally posted by seanflynn:
    The LATimes wrote a major mash-note to this show and its creator (a woman producer/showrunner I actually know – weird that this makes two AMC dramas that I have connections to) – lead article in the Calendar section. This is an early indication that this show is “in” and could get a lot of future attention.

    The hook was women in police shows – characters and creative forces, but it was the show that got most of the attention.

    ********************************************************

    Originally posted by east/west:
    The main score is quite effective.

    ********************************************************

    Originally posted by jon:
    Solid third episode.

    I am thankful for the pacing and find the majority of the characters interesting. It might not be original and I have seen other things like it (not to mention the overdone political campaign storyline), but it is intriguing and well-made.

    The show makes me want to know who killed her, and though it is really more about the characters and a portrait of that city, the murder case itself always remains interesting.

    The cell phone seemed more like a plot device rather than natural, but that was the only notable misstep.

    *************************************************

     

    ReplyCopy URL
    MicheBel
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 5th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #225972

    Originally posted by east/west:
    A decent follow up to last week. Definitely feeling the lead more.

    *******************************************

    Originally posted by Slam:
    I agree with east/west. Seemed like Enos took control a bit more tonight. So far, nothing too shocking or different as far as plot goes.

    I love how detailed this is. Even paying attention to what the detectives are eating.

    Forbes broke my heart again with the bathtub scene. The Larsen family will most likely prove to be the most rounded story line.

    And I’ve found nothing compelling of the politcal campaign.

    “El Diablo” B+
    MVP: Enos

    ********************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    It looks like the murder case is getting more and more sordid. The political thread became a bit more interesting with the campaign leak exposed (or supposedly exposed), but it still lags behind the other two main threads. Mirelle Enos made more of an impression tonight. I think she’s going to carry this season well with a quiet control. I do hope they wrap up the “when will Sarah move” scenes soon, since it’s clear that she’s not moving with her boyfriend anytime soon. The Larsen family is a great emotional anchor for things. Michelle Forbes is amazing and can even make small scenes compelling, like that bathtub scene. Brent Sexton is just as strong here. They’re some couple already.

    Grade for “El Diablo”: B

    **************************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    The last five minutes were very good, the rest was a drawn-out Ashley Judd movie. I’ll follow-up with a more thorough bashing later.

    **************************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    This was a definite step up from the first couple of episodes. The direction wasn’t as jarring, and the cliches were dished out at a lesser pace.

    The lead was a bit better, but only a bit. However, Joel Kinnammon is still odd, and not interesting odd, just odd. Forbes remains the standout.

    It would be nice at some point to see these characters given personalities. I think what ultimately may end up being this show’s main detraction, aside from the cloying political storyline, is that the characters are both transparent and depth-less. The characters are mourning parents and they’re investigating cops and they’re nervous teenagers. But they have yet to come off as actual people. They’re still simple archetypes.

    ***************************************************************

    Originally posted by MadScntst:
    I watched all 3 episodes last night based on the strong reviews, and maybe it was too much for one sitting.  I’m still not sold on the show, though I will continue to watch.  The lead leaves me a little cold, and I find myself strangely wanting more of Callum Keith Rennie 🙂  I get the point of the score/atmosphere but it feels a little overbearing so far.  Hopefully I will become more interested as the story fleshes out a bit.

    **********************************************************

     

    ReplyCopy URL
    MicheBel
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 5th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #225973

    Originally posted by jss0058:
    After the third episode, I still find the whole thing very engrossing.  And once again the last several minutes has me wanting more.   I agree that Enos was better here (or more that she was given more to do).  Forbes & Saxton continue to shine.   The political story line actually picked up for me here.  Kinnaman isnt’ quite working as well as the rest of the cast…I’m not sure if it is the way the character is written or the way he is playing it.  maybe they will reveal more about his character that will make it make more sense.

    ****************************************************

    Originally posted by jss0058:
    After the third episode, I still find the whole thing very engrossing.  And once again the last several minutes has me wanting more.   I agree that Enos was better here (or more that she was given more to do).  Forbes & Saxton continue to shine.   The political story line actually picked up for me here.  Kinnaman isnt’ quite working as well as the rest of the cast…I’m not sure if it is the way the character is written or the way he is playing it.  maybe they will reveal more about his character that will make it make more sense.

    *********************************************

    Originally posted by BernardS:
    My guess — it’s either Michelle Forbes or Kristen Lehmann who did the deed.

    Bernie  🙂

    ************************************************

    Originally posted by Eoin Daly:
    Episode Title: “A Soundless Echo”

    The Larsens plan their daughter’s funeral; Rosie’s friend unveils surprises about her life.

    Discuss

    ***********************************************************

    Originally posted by Dr. McPhearson:
    Just finished “El Diablo.” I have to say, I’m finally starting to feel the politician subplot too. It was hanging like dead weight over the first two episodes but it feels like it is coming together now. I love the reveal of the video at the end. I actually think that Jamie’s e-mail account was hacked too.

    The scene with the place-settings was very sad. Force of habits are hard to break, especially for children who still don’t completely understand.

    Pilot A-
    The Cage B+
    El Diablo A-

    ***********************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    Really enjoying this show.  My problem right now is that I am predicting things way too soon.  I know what is next.  And the show is so well done that I done consider it a detriment but it worries me about the future because when I am making predictions I am usually going straight for the cliches.  Good episode, though.

    **********************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    Just when I get engaged by a scene a cliche or overwrought approach takes me out of the action. There was a lot to enjoy about this episode, but it also convinced me that this show will never get near greatness. It has great quiet moments. But once some noise goes up so does the awkwardness. It’s a show that’s trying to use its deliberate pacing (and that loud ass score) to shield its self-consciousness, but it’s not working.

    This was the first solid tape for Forbes. Hopefully Mitch is on her way to healing ’cause her cryface is starting to get a bit annoying.

    That red-herring was something else. They dedicate a whole episode giving us a subject, and within ten minutes of this week’s installment they’re off the hook.  

    B+

    *********************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    The more they’re delving into this murder case, the more seedy just about everyone looking (which I love). The reveals were satisfying enough and open doors for much more later on (the video with Sterling in the “cave,” Stan’s criminal past, and especially the thing with the teacher, which was my one real “whoa” moment of the episode—I knew something felt fishy when he was going on to Mitch about that book Rosie loved and the dreams she had for her life). The scenes with the Larsens planning for Rosie’s funeral and meeting with their priest were very moving and not the kinds of things you’d see on a regular show where it’s about getting to the endgame above all else. That was refreshing and a nice way to set this show apart from other crime shows. I liked how the campaign storyline with the mole took an unexpected twist. And I’d love to see more of Alan Dale in the coming episodes. I didn’t realize that he was going to be a part of this show too. Sarah’s work scenes are great for Mirelle Enos, but the scenes with her son and boyfriend aren’t keeping my interest at all (and it’s especially unfortunate for Callum Keith Rennie, who was so awesome on “Californication,” but is such a nonstarter so far here as the thankless boyfriend when he doesn’t have to be). I’m not a big fan of the partner yet either. But this case is too good to not see through to the end.

    Grade for “A Soundless Echo”: B+

    *****************************************************

    Originally posted by Moviemjk102:
    Very compelling episode. This could be a tape possibility for Michelle Forbes, though she stellar in just about every episode. That scene in the church was devastating.

    ****************************************************

     

    ReplyCopy URL
    MicheBel
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 5th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #225974

    Originally posted by Dr. McPhearson:
    What some people are calling the weaker points of the show, I’m actually really taking to.

    The boyfriend does just enough every episode to keep me from saying, “Okay, buddy. Stop eating up air time.” And his short scene with the son shows that he is still trying to make the connection despite his fiance’s constant quenching of her workaholicism.

    I did not see Sterling being the girl in the video, nor did I see the teacher being a possible love interest for Rosie. Those were both elements that are very exciting.

    Detective Holder is certainly hiding something. But then again, so is Stan. And Mitch. And Gwen. Everybody is up to something somewhere, but it is terrific that the show has yet to muddle its details.

    These episodes are so hard to rate, because I really can’t point out a huge misstep so far. I guess I’ll go with “B+,” but that really equals up to zilch in the end.

    Pilot A-
    The Cage B+
    El Diablo A-
    A Soundless Echo B+

    ***********************************************

    Originally posted by Space:
    I see no point in spending so much time on the conflict with Linden’s boyfriend – if she were going to leave the investigation and move to Sonoma, there’d be no show. We know that’s not going to happen.

    The show has a few interesting moments each episode that keep me watching, but it’s so incredibly slow moving, and we’re just getting the same stuff emotionally from Enos and Forbes.

    I know I have to keep in mind that each episode is one day of the investigation, so realistically, it makes a lot of sense that Mitch would still be an emotional wreck. But watching her stumble around with a pout on her face for almost 5 whole episodes isn’t exactly satisfying to watch as an audience member.

    ***************************************

    Originally posted by Slam:
    ^I agree that they are spending a lot of time on the same things episode after episode. And yes, then I remember that each episode is a single day, so it does make sense. The only story line that really moves forward in each episode is the political campaign, and that to me is the least interesting one… so boo on that.

    It was interesting to see Mitch’s pain turn to outright anger. Michelle Forbes has been brilliant. And the parents ignoring their young boys is heartbreaking and sadly real.

    As for the case, again this episode we discover ONE clue. I’m really invested in the show at this point and will certainly be watching to see who killed Rosie, but I want more with each episode.

    Obviously Holder is hiding something huge. We only get small glimpses/clues into him each week. I actually really enjoy Kinnaman and some if his mannerisms and character quirks so I’d love to see him with some more elevated material.

    All that, and it’s still really beautifully shot and the attention to detail is so fantastic I can’t take my eyes off the TV when it’s on.

    MVP: once again…. Forbes.

    *****************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    The show is becoming deathly redundant, hitting the same beats over and over again. In this episode the beats were hit in a louder, more obvious fashion, which didn’t make them any more effective.

    Slow pacing I don’t mind. The main problem is still that these people are coming off like starch archetypes. I don’t care about who killed Rosie, because I don’t care about these characters.

    *******************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    I think what they’re doing with Mitch and Stan is fascinating. Mitch in the grocery store, Stan’s bathroom breakdown, the two of them picking out Rosie’s funeral dress, the young boys wetting the bed and stealing money to buy milk, etc. That’s the kind of thing an average procedural would never take the time to delve into. It’s a genuinely cinematic approach to the way that grief is explored, and I’m glad that we’re getting that on this scale. I don’t see their scenes as being repetitive, b/c they’re doing this show as a day by day timeline, so this malaise would probably be the mode that the characters stay in for most if not all of the season. But the rest of it, hmmm. The political storyline is moving along at a decent pace, but it’s still the part that’s feeling the most distant from Rosie’s murder storyline. It doesn’t help that Billy Campbell is such a wet blanket, and I don’t have much interest for involved schemes to sniff out campaign moles. Eric Ladin’s becoming the main draw there. Loved the meeting scene with the mayor and that gross scene in the bathroom. Rosie’s teacher became more skeevy and suspect after this episode, but they can’t reveal the killer this soon, so maybe it just ends at him being a perv and something else is going on with the chemicals at his house that were also on Rosie’s body. Mirelle Enos has a quiet intensity that works well here, but I wish she was working alone and wasn’t a single mother. I don’t like Joel Kinnaman much at all, or the contrived “when will Sarah move to Sonoma?” scenes with Callum Keith Rennie. The parallels to this other murder case that consumed Sarah could be good in the coming weeks though.

    Grade for “Super 8”: B

    **************************************************

    Originally posted by Space:

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    The parallels to this other murder case that consumed Sarah could be good in the coming weeks though.

    Yes, this is the thing that I am most interested in learning about in the coming weeks.

    ********************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    I thought this show started off so strong but it is time to add layers to these character.  They are all so one dimensional.  Michelle Forbes crying on being on the verge of tears constantly is growing a little old.  While people dislike Kinnamen, his character appears to have the most layers and intrigue.  Does he have a drug problem?  What was the money for?  Were those his kids?  Why can’t he see them?  What effect did undercover really have on him?  He’s the most interesting character by far in my eyes.

    They need to step up their game because if we enter the second act with these characters acting exactly the same I am going to get bored.  One dimensional characters do not win or deserve Emmy nominations.

    ***************************************

    Originally posted by seanflynn:
    Some real evidence of this show’s early success: they managed to latch on the Agnieszka Holland, a significant film director whose cable work has included quite a few The Wire episodes and the pilot of Treme, for tonight’s (5/1) episode.

    ***********************************

    Originally posted by Hodag129:
    After a weaker past two episodes I thought the most recent “What you Have Left”  was pretty good.  The case picked up, the campaign continued to be interesting and multilayered (Didn’t see that coming from the pilot.)  Less grieving more revenge.  I’m back in. 

    It just seemed like this episode had more movement and energy than the past few which have been very still.

    **********************************

    Originally posted by MadScntst:
    While I still think this show is a tad overrated, I agree with Hodag that last night’s episode was a good improvement from the last few.  The story finally seems to be moving forward a little bit.  Still, as someone noted in another forum, the whole, “I’m leaving tonight…”  “I just have to tie up a few things this afternoon…” schtick is getting old.  By now she should know that she’s not giving up the case until it’s solved, so she may as well at least acknowledge that she’s not leaving for another couple of weeks.

    ***************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    I think she does acknowledge the not leaving thing in the next episode.

    Liked this episode a whole lot more than the previous episodes and I am find the Political arc to be gaining steam.  Still think the ex narco cop is the most interesting.  My guess is that he’s in AA and that guy was his sponsor.  But who knows.  I’ve heard undercover screws people up and am fascinated to find out what his demons are exactly.

    *****************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    This was definitely a step up from the past couple of weeks, probably the best of the series, with the exception of episode three.

    ***************************************

    Originally posted by Slam:
    Finally we have a little movement forward. Now interesting to see exactly what the sister has got do to with all of this. And we are seeing more background into Holder. And more background into the relationship between Sarah and Regi and her past. Not much but something.

    But boy this is a show that you really have to pay attention and listen to EVERYTHING being said. I noticed last night that the teacher made the slightest quiet reference to his wife about laying down carpet at the top of the scene. If you were even chewing too loud you could’ve missed that.

    **************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    The forward momentum was nice. It was necessary to get to Rosie’s funeral for the family’s release, and Michelle Forbes was fascinating to watch all through this episode. Sarah is coming through more forcefully as a character, and we’re getting some minor clues into this other child murder case that she was probably equally obssessed over in her past. All of the “we’re leaving soon” points are tiresome though, b/c if she hasn’t left by now, she’s going to see this case through to the end. Not sure what’s going on yet with the older lady that’s looking after Sarah’s son all the time, or this affair that it looks like Mitch’s sister had. I’m so conditioned to mid-season lulls and red herrings in serialized shows like these, so all of this attention on the teacher seems off to me. It’ll end up that Ahmed is just a fishy perv and his dutiful wife was covering for him with Rosie being at their place on the night of her murder. It seems like a show like this will shoot for the eleventh-hour reveal for the killer, and it’ll be “shocking.” Not someone the cops were onto mid-season. I’m iffy on the father with his mob ties and what that means for whoever the killer is (and Ahmed’s current fate). The campaign thread is heating up some finally. It might not be the automatic weakest link of the three threads anymore. Billy Campbell still is blah and comes off miscast, but maybe there’s time for him to come through at the end.

    Grade for “What We Have Here”: B+

    ********************************************

    Originally posted by Space:
    This was good. I guffawed when Richmond’s commercial ended with him snugglin’ up to that shady teacher.

    Finding myself strangely attracted to Joel Kinnaman…

    And no, you will not be making your flight, so please, PLEASE stop talking about it.

    *************************************************

    Originally posted by east/west:

    Originally posted by Space:
    And no, you will not be making your flight, so please, PLEASE stop talking about it.

    #deceased

    This was one of the better ones. It felt more cinematic and the story was moving. For the first time, I liked the political story, but like most said that Billy Campbell is flat. Wonder what is going to happen to mister man after that car ride. Stay tuned!

    ************************************************

    Originally posted by LadyHathor25:
    This episode was much better than the last couple.  I, too, thought it was more cinematic.  I appreciate the effort to make the political story more interesting.  But, it still does feel very peripheral to the main story.  I wish they would make some kind of connection there to make it all relevant.

    As others have mentioned, it is now time to stop pretending Sarah is going to be leaving at any moment.

    I also think Holder is a very interesting character.  The writing has made him quite intriguing.

    ******************************************

    Originally posted by jss0058:

    Originally posted by LadyHathor25:
    This episode was much better than the last couple.  I, too, thought it was more cinematic.  I appreciate the effort to make the political story more interesting.  But, it still does feel very peripheral to the main story.  I wish they would make some kind of connection there to make it all relevant.

    You don’t think the connection with the car and now the teacher to the campaign has slowly (but surely) started to make it all relevant?

    I definitely thought this episode added another great layer to the story and as others have pointed out really moved the story forward.   I really like Enos’ presence and am really starting to come around to being a real best actress contender however she doesn’t have anything close to a competitive tape yet.   Forbes & Sexton continue to excel and I like that now that the funeral has happened maybe we are starting to explore some areas with them.   I don’t have a huge problem with Campbell, but I am not sure he boasts the kind of strength and charisma you would expect for an actual political candidate.  I’m not buying the teacher or the wife as being the killers simply because we are only mid way through…but they have to be hiding something by acting so strange.   I just hope we don’t get too many of these false leads before we find out who the real killer is.

    *************************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    I’d really like to know what is going on with the sister.  I get the feeling she had an affair with Rosie’s ex-boyfriends Dad or something.  Which seems a little, I don’t know, forced.  But whatever.  Her complete implosion was interesting.

    *************************************

    Originally posted by Space:

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    I’d really like to know what is going on with the sister.  I get the feeling she had an affair with Rosie’s ex-boyfriends Dad or something.  Which seems a little, I don’t know, forced.  But whatever.  Her complete implosion was interesting.

    Me too!

    Also, doesn’t she kind of look like Wendy the prostitute from Breaking Bad? I thought it might be the same actress for a second, but nope.

    *************************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:

    Originally posted by Space:
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by robbypop:
    I’d really like to know what is going on with the sister.  I get the feeling she had an affair with Rosie’s ex-boyfriends Dad or something.  Which seems a little, I don’t know, forced.  But whatever.  Her complete implosion was interesting.

    Me too!

    Also, doesn’t she kind of look like Wendy the prostitute from Breaking Bad? I thought it might be the same actress for a second, but nope.[/QUOTE]

    Interestingly enough, she played the tweaker lady in the episode of Six Feet Under where Keith shot that guy.

    *********************************

    Originally posted by LadyHathor25:

    Originally posted by jss0058:
    You don’t think the connection with the car and now the teacher to the campaign has slowly (but surely) started to make it all relevant?

    Well, as I said, this episode helped.  But, it still isn’t enough for me.  It still feels too peripheral to the story for the show to be spending so much time on it.

    ***********************************************

    Originally posted by adamunc:
    Caught up on the last three episodes last night. “What You Have Left” got me re-hooked. “A Soundless Echo” and “Super 8”, as someone has mentioned before, seemed to be covering emotional ground that was already well-trod. It was nice to see Mad Men directors Jennifer Getzinger (who should be an Emmy nominee this year for “The Suitcase”) and Phil Abraham getting some other work. They brought a nice visual style, but the story momentum just wasn’t there. Things started to build nicely in “What You Have Left”, though, and it seems they’ve woven enough of a fabric and started enough other threads to carry this through the remaining episodes without the lulls that seemed to plague 24 in its off seasons.

    Very pleased with Enos, Saxton, and Forbes, who should all be Emmy nominees. Still not buying Joel Kinnaman or his moving-target accent. And the whole “gotta-get-to-Sonoma for the party/wedding planning/picnic/whatever” is just completely unncessary. Saxton in particular has exploded the past couple of episodes and now sits even with John Slattery for my top choice this year in Supporting Actor. Forbes plays the anguished mother exceptionally well, but it’s time to get to the next beat in her emotional arc.

    ***********************************

    Originally posted by Dr. McPhearson:
    “Super 8”

    Michelle Forbes has been the standout since the beginning, but Brent Saxton is really running with the material that he is given. I like the dark and mysterious past that he has, and you just know that, a la “Mystic River,” it is not going to end well. (His good friend also strikes me as involved somehow.)

    Tying Bennet Ahmed in with the politician’s campaign was something I predicted back when the teacher was hosting the mayoral Q & A during the pilot episode. I did not, however, see the factor of his wife coming. A past student of his? And he happens to have the same chemical used in her body in his apartment? At the same time, though, the season isn’t even halfway over. Surely they aren’t handing us our murderer so soon.

    Finding out who the leak was, I’m actually glad it wasn’t Gwen. Too predictable. The fact that it was the guy who accused Jamie and Gwen was far more realistic, I think.

    The boyfriend character is starting to hang out a little too much now, but I liked his “I should cancel the barbecue” moment. He is starting to realize that she is in this until the end. Now the writers just need to give him something else to do to remain relevant.

    Not sure what the relevance of the Super 8 film reel was, but as one of the last images of the episode suggest, Detective Linden will be looking into it soon.

    Nice developments. Now let’s actually advance the plot.

    *********************************************

    Originally posted by Dr. McPhearson:
    “What You Have Left”

    I’m glad that we’ve finally seen the funeral. It seemed like the next genuine step in getting the plot moving forward. And having Stan find out about Bennet at after-gathering killed two birds with one stone, writing-wise.

    Richmond’s third of the story was the one I used to find the least intriguing. But its interesting now to see the repercussions that the case is having on the poor guy. He seems like an honest and fair gentleman who might be getting the blunt end of a very corrupt politic endgame. I still believe that the Mayor’s people might’ve, in a roundabout way, had Rosie killed in a way that involved Richmond in order to win the election. Sick, but I can see that happening.

    There are few questions I’m still asking, though: What is this past obsession people refer to Sarah having? Was it another murdered child that she became too attached to? Who is the bald guy that Holder is leaking info to? One of Richmond’s guys? One of Jamie’s guys? One of the Mayor’s? Tough call.

    And can anyone tell me who that guy with the grey hair at the condolences was? The one that scoffed when the aunt said “Hi” to him? I feel like we’ve met that character before, but maybe not.

    I’m nervous for Bennet. If he turns out innocent (which sounds unlikely at this point), Stan might kill him without ever finding out.

    **********************************************

     

    ReplyCopy URL
    MicheBel
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 5th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #225975

    Originally posted by Eoin Daly:
    Episode Title: “Vengeance”

     Police uncover new information about Rosie’s whereabouts on the night of her murder; Mitch begins doubting the investigation.

    Discuss

    *****************************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    This episode was eh at best. This show is not an intriguing detective story, or character study, or mood piece. At best, it’s a showcase for a couple of good actors.

    I will officially be upset if this is nominated for Drama Series. I am sick of critics hyping a series based off of potential rather than what’s actually there. They did the same thing with ‘Boardwalk’ and ‘Walking Dead’.

    **********************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    Kind of have to agree.  I keep oscillating back and forth between thinking this show is excellent and kind of contrived.  And I think the potential of it is what puts the rose colored glasses on but this episode was another exercise in illustrating what flaws this show has.  It tries to hard in the wrong areas and is lazy in the areas that need depth.  They hang their hat on a character study but it’s a bunch of characters that don’t really do anything and talk more about doing things than actually doing them.  The FBI bit out of the blue was really disappointing.  As was the Muhammad guy.

    ********************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    Mitch and Stan are a fascinating couple to watch, especially in this heightened context. I would have been pleased with the entire series being centered around Michelle Forbes and Brent Sexton. But as it is, their thread continues to be the major highlight. I’m not sure where they’re going with Stan’s mob past. He seemed pretty close to going over the edge with Bennett. I didn’t think they would spend so much time on Bennett, his wife, or now this Mohammed guy. He seemed like one of those disposable suspects at first, and I was hoping for that since his character isn’t that dynamic. It would have taken things in an entirely new direction if Stan had gone through with killing Bennett. Mirelle Enos is a solid anchor, and Sarah is becoming a more active agent in the case. I’m waiting for what the parallels are to Rosie’s case with this last case that almost cost her everything. Maybe they’ll finally cool it with Sarah’s plans to leave town since the boyfriend appears fed up with her stalling. I wish she were handling the case alone. Holder is borderline unwatchable. I’ll try to give Billy Campbell more time to spark in this role, b/c I feel like something’s coming for him in the campaign thread by the end that will be good and worth the trouble. But right now he’s so drab and blah, and this backstory with Richmond’s dead wife might give him some depth, but if it’s completely unrelated to Rosie’s murder case, it can come off like a waste of valuable time. The good stuff really might be found at the end of the season, but there’s room for things to pick up still until then.

    Grade for “Vengeance”: B

    *******************************************

    Originally posted by Slam:
    If nothing else in this last episode, it gave Enos a little more material to work with. I’m loving watching her more and more with each episode. I also love that this episode gave Mitch a new color. The scene where she threatened Stan’s employee was a little shocking and showed that she’s got quite a bit of power in her marriage and with the family business. Also that maybe she’s done being catatonic and ready to find answers for herself. I found myself even less intrigued with the political campaign this time.

    I will definitely stick with this as now I’m too invested and want to find out what actually happened, but the pace………….. is……….. tough…….. to…….handle.

    ***************************************************

    Originally posted by MadScntst:
    I’ve just never fully warmed up to this show. I must be intrigued enough to continue watching, but it seems like more of an assignment than something I’m really enjoying (if that’s the right word for a murder mystery). If this had been a ~22 episode season I may have jumped ship by now, but I’m invested in half the season so I may as well stick it out.

    I agree with Slam that it was refreshing to see Mitch show a new dimension, which is still believable and fits in with what we’ve seen of her so far.  That was probably my favorite aspect of this episode.  And at least Sarah tried to make her flight this time- I never thought she’d actually make it to the airport- but it is still pushing the boundaries of credibility that she didn’t immediately book the next available flight and *then* get in touch with her fiance.  Does she really need him to make travel plans?  Waiting for him to break down and call her back is just an excuse to stay, now, and to me it really casts huge doubt on their entire relationship (which is probably the point, but it’s still hard to watch without rolling my eyes).

    ***********************************************

    Originally posted by 742:
    I agree that the show can do without the catch-a-flight pretense. They should have just put that to bed in an earlier episode: Linden’s going to stick around until she solves the case. She knows it, the writers and producers know it, the audience knows it. At this point, having her try to make plans feels a bit silly. And the backstory they keep alluding to — Linden is getting too close to the case, just like the last one! — is the oldest murder-mystery cliche in the book.

    Other than those quibbles, I’m still quite enjoying this show. I don’t think it’s one of TV’s very best, but I’d rank it among the very good. It’s thoroughly absorbing, well acted, and very well paced.

    ***************************************

    Originally posted by Space:
    Bah. This show is not much more than a well-acted bore. How do they expect people to become immersed in Rosie’s case if we learn almost NOTHING new in each episode?

    *****************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    “The Killing” Clue Tracker: The detectives get frustrated. We know the feeling.
    by Jeff Jensen

    Like Councilman Darren Richmond’s floundering political fortunes, “The Killing” is taking a hit in the public opinion polls (and ratings) as the AMC murder mystery struggles to find dramatic traction in the middle episodes of its rookie season. Perhaps this was inevitable; serial dramas that mount year-long campaigns of story often spin their wheels right about now. But that doesn’t make the dawdle any less disappointing. “The Killing” does have its unique frustrations. The show has irked many viewers by doting on the anguish of Rosie Larsen’s parents; “grief porn” is a phrase I’ve read here and there. Others, like critic Alan Sepinwall, have been lamenting the show’s formulaic approach to each episode’s investigation narrative, wherein (and I’m paraphrasing Sepinwall’s analysis here) nothing much happens until the discovery of a seemingly significant clue in the last scene, which is then quickly processed or forgotten the following week. (More on Rosie’s alluringly cryptic super 8 movie! Please!) And then there is the political subplot of Seattle’s mayoral contest, which is beginning to strain credulity, and the ongoing matter of Linden constantly delaying her move to California to start her new life with fiancé Rick, although that doesn’t bother me as much as it bothers other people.

    “The Killing”’s storytelling structure—each episode covers a day (or so) in the life—justifies a slower pace and rationalizes whole episodes devoted to minimal-gain grunt work and multi-episode arcs showcasing suspects who may or may not be dead ends. Still, being pseudo-realistic can come at the cost of being genuinely riveting. Last night’s episode—entitled “Vengeance”—was the first time “The Killing” grated on me. Nothing much happened, and the things that did served to nourish some storylines that I’m starting to max out on, specifically the fixation with Bennet Ahmed, who is simply not compelling enough to warrant the screen/story time given to him. It appears “The Killing” wants to make some points about the demonization of anyone with an Arab-sounding name in post-9/11 America. I appreciate the point; nonetheless, I’m growing weary of Bennet. I might be more forgiving of “Vengeance” if not for the irritating cliffhanger: We saw Linden and Holder bust into a creepy back alley butcher shop and break into a darkened locker. I think they saw something (maybe the body of the missing Muslim girl they learned about earlier in the ep?), but they were wrestled to the ground by a raid of FBI agents before we could get confirmation. If “The Killing” is going to commit to a formula where nothing much happens until a final, revelatory scene, well . . . okay. But at least stick to the damn formula!

    ****************************************

     

    ReplyCopy URL
    MicheBel
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 5th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #225976

    Originally posted by Eoin Daly:
    Episode Title: “Undertow”
     
    While trying to arrest a suspect, the police are stymied; the Larsens are fed up with the police.

    Discuss

    **************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    This show is like the drama series version of Glee: a great deal of potential, but it can’t manage to be more than a few good scenes sprinkled on a pile of pretentious sh*t. Nevermind how similar they are when it comes to plot contrivances. And also like Glee I peeped this show out from the beginning. I have an intuition about these things. People need to stop being so damn intimidated by me and take my clairvoyance seriously.

    I’m just gonna give up for now and catch the finale to see who the killer is, not that I really care.

    *************************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    It took you about 1 and a half seasons to realize what a piece sh*t Glee is.  And The Killing is still better in almost every conceivable way than Glee.  It’s almost funnier, even.

    **************************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    I compared it to Glee only to bait you, rp. I wanted to bond. :smooch:

    However, Glee can still be entertaining even when it’s annoying the sh*t out of you. As opposed to this crap, which is like watching the most depressed paint dry. And I still think Glee had a better premiere than Community.

    *******************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    It looks like the show is saving its big guns for the season finale and/or the killer’s reveal. That’s one way to go with things, but if the reveal isn’t a stunner, then all of this will seem driftless and for nothing. If the killer ends up as some eleventh-hour reveal, like a deranged homeless bum or Rosie’s tennis instructor, that’ll leave me nonplussed. A good mystery is as much about the journey as it is the destination. If everything’s leading up to the reveal without creating better character development or sustaining storylines along with the murder investigation, then this should have been made as a miniseries or a longer movie. The murderer’s reveal and the Larsens are the only things keeping me involved right now. Michelle Forbes and Brent Sexton are still great in their scenes together. My favorite scene of this episode was Mitch piecing together Rosie’s room again after Stan took things off the walls and telling her that they need to move on (too soon). Richmond’s political campaign gets my attention in bursts. Going negative against the mayor finally gave Billy Campbell some bite to work with, but the parole storyline is dragging, and it really brings out Billy Campbell’s wet blanketness. Linden working the case alone is when Mirelle Enos shines. All the rest of it becomes tedious—Sarah’s petulant son, Reggie, babysitting her awful partner, still trying to get to her boyfriend in Sonoma (it’s.not.going.to.happen.), etc. Bennett isn’t a worthy or compelling suspect, and all of this terrorism stuff with Mohammed feels like a distraction. But the conclusion is within reach, so hopefully things will come together in a satisfying way in these final hours and it’ll feel worth it getting there.

    Grade for “Stonewalled”: B

    **************************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    And I still think Glee had a better premiere than Community.

    This season?  That’s horse crud.

    *****************************************

    Originally posted by BriGuy:

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    It took you about 1 and a half seasons to realize what a piece sh*t Glee is.  And The Killing is still better in almost every conceivable way than Glee.  It’s almost funnier, even.

    No. I’ve given this show now what 8 weeks and it is sooooooooooooooooooooooo boring.  The only reason I’ll watch it next week is if I can’t sleep.

    The first 13 episodes of Glee (assuming the Killing is only 13 episodes) are leagues better.

    ***********************************************

    Originally posted by FishBiscuit:

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
     People need to stop being so damn intimidated by me…

      :roflmao:

    ****************************************

    Originally posted by FishBiscuit:
    Tis true the show is spinning its wheels but I’ll stick with it.  However, If it turns out that the ambitious campaign guy is the killer I’ll be done for good.

    ***************************************

    Originally posted by 742:
    I still like the show, but this week I could definitely feel its wheels spinning. And its big ending revelation felt like something we sorta knew already (Bennett is hiding something). But Bennett is obviously a red herring (guilty of some crime, maybe, but not Rosie’s killer), so trying to make him look guilty is a waste of storytelling resources.

    Good stuff: Sarah finally coming to terms with her partner after finding out he’s a recovering addict. What I like about this show is that it’ll take time for a character scene like that. But the Linden character arc is moving precariously close to bad cliches. Her boss was thisclose to telling her, “You’re getting too close to this case!”

    **********************************************

    Originally posted by 742:

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    And I still think Glee had a better premiere than Community.

    This season?  That’s horse crud.[/QUOTE]

    It’s way off-topic, but I’ with robbypop. The “Community” season premiere was much better than the “Glee” season premiere. Better than the “Glee” pilot too, but that’s true of most episodes of most TV shows. Brilliance, you need to stop smoking crack; we’re worried about you. 😎

    **************************************

    Originally posted by CS87:
    How many episodes is this season supposed to have? 13? If so, then we’re definitely running the risk for Rosie’s killer to be revealed in a total WTF! moment with zero buildup. That is if Bennett or Mohammed isn’t the killer after all.

    **************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    I’mma keep my crack pipe in tow. 

    The Glee premiere was passable and had me looking forward to the rest of the season. Of course, that anticipation halted when just the next week we were gifted the horrific “Britney/Brittany”. The Community premiere was so awkward and unfunny it made me worried about the rest of the season. (Betty White shooting people with arrows? That sh*t ain’t funny). And the show has been hit-or-extreme-miss ever since.

    Honestly both shows can go to hell at this point, and take this hollow bore-fest with them.

    *******************************************

    Originally posted by selmetell33:
    Anyone think that Joel Kinnaman is gonna get some Emmy love? He’s probably putting in the best performance besides Michelle Forbes.

    ***************************************

    Originally posted by jon:
    I just have to say that I was really impressed with this latest episode “Undertow.”

    One thing that I really appreciate is how they are handling the family’s storyline.

    I have not seen the original version and I do have some problems with the show, but the ideas they are trying to get across are provocative and powerful. Now that Rosie’s dad has (I am speculating at this point) murdered Bennett, he is just as bad as the rest of them.

    It is a disturbing portrait of how grief can turn outward and cause so much destruction. The one thing the Larsens are still having trouble with is forgiveness and closure. Thus, they are banking on the killer being found and punished in order to free themselves, but I can bet that once the killer is found, they will not be healed. I am not a parent, so I have no ability to judge and can never understand their feelings, but the show is making some powerful and important insights to the human condition.

    It is refreshing to see the parents, who are supposed to be the victims, being portrayed so selfishly. It adds so much depth to the characters, and instead of one character being good and the other being bad, they are simply human beings with flaws and complications.

    ******************************************

    Originally posted by Slam:
    ^great post. And yes “Undertow” was really thrilling and made me think about many of the characters in new lights.

    *****************************************

    Originally posted by FishBiscuit:
    “Undertow” might be my favorite episode to date.  That’s likely because things have started moving again.

    ****************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    Strong episode tonight, and this does start to cast the Larsens in a new light. Michelle Forbes and Brent Sexton are a compelling pair that I could watch and watch, and their struggles/flaws/contradictions are what’s keeping me invested in the show right now (along with the inevitable reveal of Rosie’s murderer). There’s some necessary forward momentum finally, though it took a long time to get there with the Muhammed diversions and the Richmond/Adams campaign wrangling scenes. But those last scenes with Bennett! Whew! Here we go.

    Grade for “Undertow”: B+

    ****************************************

    Originally posted by east/west:
    The episode was very unsettling. Hopefully the developments (and all of the big three stories did have some promising ones) will make the show become compelling in the final stretch, b/c besides the aesthetics, I have been bored to tears.

    And I just realized that Joel Kinnerman is a foreigner. Definitely explains his speak.

    *************************************************

    Originally posted by 742:
    Both “Game of Thrones” and “The Killing” stepped it up last night. The show stopped spinning its wheels on the Bennett storyline and finally committed to some serious story developments, both for the Larsen family and the investigators. The ending was disturbing, and the show can really build off of it as it starts to round the home stretch. I have a sneaking suspicion that the killer is one of two possible people who seem to fall under Roger Ebert’s Law of Conservation of Characters: if a character is around and doesn’t seem to serve any particular purpose, that character will be the answer to a major plot development down the line.

    ****************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    That was an extremely evocative episode.  And may have saved the season.  That was the first episode that I felt any strong emotion.  Granted, it was mostly fury for the characters (Linden, the main one and Midge/Mitch (whatever her name is) but I felt something.  And it was strong which only tends to happen in shows I actually care about so it needs to be this stellar from this point on.  This wasn’t an A + episode or even an A episode, but it was extremely effective and makes me hopeful about the rest of the season.

    ****************************************

    Originally posted by Benito Delicias:
    I saw all 9 episodes in two days and I really really like the show. I don’t think it’s anything new, it’s obviously “that show”, a streched out CSI episode, but since it’s 13 episodes long we get to see things we hardly see on procedurals.

    The show began extremely slow but so so nicely produced and acted that it instantly got me. I like Mirelle Enos very much, she has this very creepy look just like in Big Love, but then again everybody on “the compound” creeped me out, and I can’t separate her from her Big Love character. I like her on this show very much, I get a Clarice Sterling vibe from her (which obviously began with the opening scene of the pilot).

    Michelle Forbes is the clear best performer here, but everybody is so far doing a great job. The whole family is doing an awesome job really.

    My only complaint is the Mayor election angle which at episode 9 still doesn’t integrate very well into the rest of the show for me.

    I’m already ****ed becuase I assume next season we won’t see half the people on this cast and it’s exactly the type of show that’s a huge quesiton mark for following seasons, just liek Damages for example.

    ********************************************

    Originally posted by LadyHathor25:
    I actually felt this last episode to be very aimless.  Too much time spent on this teacher/Muhammed angle which was clearly going nowhere.  And the political angle of the show continues to irritate me.  I see no connection between it and the main story of the show.  And it all feels a little ridiculously high stakes for a mayoral election, no?

    I do continue to like the story about the grieving parents.  Michelle Forbes and Brent Sexton are doing a great job.  And I also like the evolving relationship between Linden and Holder. 

    But, I just felt a little frustrated with this episode.

    ******************************************

    Originally posted by doul15:
    13 episodes is way too long for one case. They need to cut the next season to 8 episodes.

    ******************************************

    Originally posted by adamunc:
    Wonder if Matthew Weiner watches his AMC cohorts’ shows? And if he’s noticed that Michelle Forbes would make a fantastic adversary for Don Draper next season.

    *****************************************
    Originally posted by 742:
    Hmmm, right now I’d be surprised if the killer isn’t who I think it is. I’m not sure what outcome I’m hoping for, as long as it makes dramatic sense.

    ******************************************

    Originally posted by LadyHathor25:
    In interviews before the show aired, the producers said they had changed the ending so that audiences who had seen the original Danish version would still be surprised.  I thought they meant they were changing the identity of the killer.  But, right now the seemingly obvious suspect is the same one as in the original Danish version.  So, are they not changing it?  Or am I and everyone I know wrong about the show making one character seem like the killer?

    ************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    They spent a lot of time on Belko tonight, which I think is good mainly to get him out of the way since he was such a glaring suspect for most people. It also brought out the best in Linden and Holder actually working together as partners for a change. I thought they would have killed off Bennett, and I was surprised (in a good way) that Stan turned himself in. That all happened very quickly. The Larsens are routinely the best aspects of the show. It’ll be weird seeing Stan in jail for the rest of the season. Now that we know where Rosie was going the night of her murder (the cops could have reached this point days ago by looking into the Larsens’ phone records), it feels like the path is paved for the killer’s reveal. Does it have something to do with Stan’s gambling or criminal past that he’s hiding, and Rosie was caught up in it somehow? Or will it be some random crazy that got to her instead (which won’t be as satisfying). Footage of Richmond meeting Rosie is interesting. That will probably leak soon, but time’s running out to make that third of the series tie into the murder case in a compelling way. The scenes with Jack acting out with Reggie and bringing the boyfriend back felt like filler. But the real meat of the season looks like it’s here now. It took long enough, and that’ll be one of the faults of this season that besides the strong premiere, there were too many lags midseason before getting to this big conclusion. The serialized season trap.

    Grade for “I’ll Let You Know When I Get There”: B+

    *********************************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    I’m surprised more people aren’t talking about Enos’s performance on this past episode.  If she somehow could get herself nominated, I think she would have a very competitive tape here.  Another strong outing, which makes it two in a row.  And I find Mitch or Midge or whatever her name is to be kind of detestable.  Maybe I find her grieving to be too on the nose but I really dislike the character.

    I love how the current Mayor was made to look foolish for vilifying a man in the media.  Not the most creative or original example of media influence in polluting the perceptions of the public but I still enjoyed it.

    ******************************************

    Originally posted by Space:
    This was definitely Enos’ best performance.

    And I am so tired of Mitch. I never really understood the hype for Forbes in the first place. She’s a more than capable actress, but her performance here quickly became repetitive and boring.

    ******************************************

    Originally posted by 742:
    Michelle Forbes is a fantastic actress, though I don’t think this is her best role. I think she’s limited by the nature of the show. It takes place over the course of about two weeks (every episode is one day in the investigation), but in just two weeks a mother wouldn’t realistically advance very far in the process of grieving for her brutally murdered teenage daughter, so there’s not much range for Forbes to play. Her grief on Monday looks a lot like her grief on Tuesday, and on Wednesday, and so on.

    **********************************

    Originally posted by FrozenBarbie:
    I’m weary of the Mitch character, as well. Michelle Forbes seems to be on many Emmy lists, but personally, I don’t see it. Maybe it’s the role, the writing, the directing, or whatever, but it doesn’t seem Emmy-worthy to me. Neither does this show, for Best Drama. Too many problems with it.

    *******************************************

     

    ReplyCopy URL
    MicheBel
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 5th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #225977

    Originally posted by Eoin Daly:
    Episode Title: “Missing”

    Sarah learns Jack is missing, which halts the progress of the case.

    Discuss

    3 Episodes left.

    *****************************************

    Originally posted by MadScntst:
    Oh dear.  You mean, after last week’s episode finally picked up the pace a little, and with only a couple of episodes left, they’re going to pause to look for bratty little Jack?  Geez.  I know they are going for realism, but it doesn’t seem like now’s the time to lose momentum on solving the darn case.  Well, I hope it will be better than it sounds.

    ***********************************

    Originally posted by FrozenBarbie:
    Maybe, while looking for Jack, they’ll coincidentally, and conveniently, discover a new clue about the Rosie case, something they should have figured out several episodes back <rolls eyes>.

    *********************************

    Originally posted by jon:
    Very impressed with this episode, especially Enos’ brilliant performance. I love how she was almost bothered by Jack’s disappearance because it threw her off track just as the case was getting exciting.

    Perhaps we are finally seeing what it is like to be Detective Linden. Her son should be her highest priority, but something about these cases are so alluring, that she cannot help but return to them. Call me crazy, but even though Jack was missing, I still wanted Linden to solve Rosie’s case. Linden herself probably felt the same, showing how complex of a character she is.

    One thing I noticed was that Jack returned to the motel on his own, despite Linden’s efforts in searching “all over the place” for him. Surely a comment on her profession and how meaningless it is to her personal life.

    ***********************************************

    Originally posted by seanflynn:
    That was a dark episode. Very intense.

    I doubt on a first season an unknown actress on a low-viewership show like this will be nominated, but Enos would be very deserving.

    ***********************************

    Originally posted by seanflynn:
    The episode was directed – very successfully, a big part in its success – by Nicole Kassell, who made a splash at Sundance in 2004 for The Woodsman, the film with Kevin Bacon as a pedophile released from prison trying to reenter the community.

    ****************************

    Originally posted by Slam:
    I’m sure “Missing” is going to be one of those love it/ hate it episodes. I loved it.

    While taking an episode to search for Jack stalls the investigation completely, I think we needed this. It forced Linden & Holder to work together on something else. We learned a lot about each of them through the course of the episode, and there were definitely some surprises and answers in there about both of them.

    Maybe this comparison comes up naturally, or maybe I have no imagination, but it was kind of “The Suitcase” for ‘The Killing’. While we didn’t need the episode to further the main plot of the season, we needed it to deepen the characters, their relationship and connect them.

    Excellent performance from Enos who has been managing to top herself every week, and great layered performance from Kinnaman as well.

    A-

    ************************************************

    Originally posted by jss0058:
    Throw me into the “love it” categorey.  True it probably should have come a little earlier in the season, but I think it was a great episode.  If for nothing else it really helped develop Linden and Holder, and really tie the characters together.  Enos has more than earned a best actress nomination after this episode, IMHO.  I think because it doesn’t really require any prior knowledge of the case it would be an excellent tape.  Even though I didn’t like Kinnaman earlier this season this episode really helped to win me over.

    Pretty excited about the final two episodes…I think to this point the show is for sure one of the top six of the season so its earned a spot in my book.

    *****************************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    An episode like this that was more focused on character-building than genuine forward momentum with Rosie’s case (right when it counts in the final stretch) should have arrived earlier in the season. The casino stuff with Rosie was a weird detour that I wanted to hear more about, but that played a distant second fiddle to Jack’s whereabouts. This stuck out like a sore thumb when it didn’t have to, maybe b/c I don’t care enough about Jack or don’t quite feel the connection that I should with Sarah at this stage of things. The writing was off in places too. I missed checking in with the Larsens, though no Richmond campaign storyline scenes was perfectly fine with me. Mirelle Enos delivered her series-best work tonight, so that counts for something. That scene where she thought that Jack was dead and tried to ID him was crazy intense. If all of this deepens the partnership between Linden and Holder and strengthens their respective backstories, then I guess this episode was worth it, but with only two episodes left for the season, it’s case-solving time first and foremost, and the clock’s tickin’.

    Grade for “Missing”: B-

    *************************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    This was the first episode of the series that felt like genuine story crafting and not just the spinning of random wheels.

    I still can’t support any major nods for this series besides Forbes. The show is still a derivative, meandering mess, and although Enos was very good here, there are too many worthy actresses on better shows with more fleshed-out characters. However, this episode did erase any futures snarl on my face if Enos happens to be nominated.

    ******************************************

    Originally posted by MadScntst:
    I, too, thought an episode like this should’ve come earlier in the season.  I also feel that some of it felt a little forced– why would Jack leave his phone home?  Just as an excuse to make her worry more?  I was glad to see Enos doing a little more than just pursing her lips- she is quite good at pacing around like an animal in a cage, and the scene where she thought Jack was dead was very intense.  I still think that something is a little off with her acting, though- I seem to be in the minority on that.  I actually found myself being more fascinated by Kinnaman pushing all her buttons.  But now, they really need to get back to the case.

    **********************************

    Originally posted by 742:
    This was my favorite episode of “The Killing” this season. Without reading the above comments, I suspect many might be annoyed at the show cutting away from the investigation right at the home stretch, but I thought it was not only a smart choice but a well-timed choice. I myself have been losing some interest in the murder case, and after all the red herrings have been parsed through I’m pretty sure I know who the killer will turn out to be (either way I hope it makes sense on a character-basis), so taking an episode to focus intensively on the two main characters felt like a calculated risk that paid off. It better developed both the Linden and Holder characters and solidified their relationship in a way that felt natural and earned.

    ***********************************

    Originally posted by Hodag129:
    This was the Killing’s “The Suitcase.”  It completely took a break from all the other characters and stories and gave us an hour of character development (and great acting.)

    I for one loved it.

    Loved Linden’s background.

    A from me.  Definitely a series and Enos’ submission.

    ****************************************************

    Originally posted by FrozenBarbie:
    No, I didn’t love it. At this stage of the game, I want to get on with it. The Linden/Holder relationship could have still been further solidified in an episode that dealt with the investigation. This felt like a waste of time to me.

    **********************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    I really enjoyed this and felt much like a bottle episode.  I knew it would be polarizing but I tend to like those episodes most.

    ***********************************

    Originally posted by FrozenBarbie:
    I LOVED the bottle episode, “Fly” on Breaking Bad. That worked really well for me.

    This frustrated me too much. The dead kid fake-out? Jack, leaving his cell phone behind? Really? What teenager would do that? Too many contrivances, for me.

    **********************************************

    Originally posted by seanflynn:
    The Fly/Breaking Bad and this episode rank as the two best hours of dramatic TV I’ve seen since The Wire ended.

    **********************************************

    Originally posted by FishBiscuit:
    It was filler but it was good filler.  I’ll say this much I was happy there was an eppy without any mention of the campaign.

    *******************************************

    Originally posted by seanflynn:
    Maybe if one views the show as a crime thriller this was filler; for me it was the most important and revealing and satisfying of the whole series.

    It was the least “filler” episode so far for me.

    *****************************************

    Originally posted by Slam:
    I don’t want to argue anyone’s opinion but….

    2 people have mentioned now that it was contrived that Jack left his cellphone. To that I say: Haven’t you ever left your cellphone at home or on the charger or in a cab and not realized it until it was too late to go back? It happens to me about twice a year.

    The more I think about the episode, the more I enjoyed it.

    ***********************************************

    Originally posted by 742:

    Originally posted by seanflynn:
    Maybe if one views the show as a crime thriller this was filler; for me it was the most important and revealing and satisfying of the whole series.

    It was the least “filler” episode so far for me.

    I’m of a similar opinion. At the beginning of the series, I mentioned that my hope wasn’t for it to keep me guessing or to constantly dangle red herrings in front of us (it has done okay on that front). What I wanted was a show that would keep me interested because of the strength of its characters and that’s exactly what this episode was about. I was happy to have a break from the case to explore characters. Now I care about the case more because I care more about the characters.

    I, however, wouldn’t go as far as to call it the best episode of TV since “The Wire.” Best “Killing” episode of the season I’d definitely say.

    As for the boy leaving his cell phone, as far as plot contrivances go, it wasn’t much of a stretch. People forget their cell phones all the time. A kid preoccupied by ditching school to see his mysterious dad might be even more prone to forget his phone. Or, who knows, maybe he left the phone on purpose because he thought his mom would use her police resources to trace it. Would the episode have been more satisfying if he had taken his phone and simply wasn’t answering it or had it turned off? I don’t see that that particular decision made much of a difference one way or the other.

    ***********************************************

    Originally posted by FrozenBarbie:
    Teenagers aren’t like most people, who occasionally forget their cellphones. Plus, he was communicating with his father on logistics on where and when to meet. His father sent a text message that morning at 7am, confirming their meeting, yet Jack left the phone at home. Was their meeting time/place already decided, so that Jack didn’t need to get that text? If so, why did he bother sending it? They had Jack leave his phone behind only so that Linden would call it, and hear it ringing in the motel room, and the subsequent fake-out that he was not there after all. Two fake-outs in the same episode was a bit of a stretch for me.

    ********************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    this has got to be the stupidest argument about a  “plot contrivance” I have ever witnessed.  It’s not that far fetched and if you are still trying to justify it to hate the episode it is clear you don’t want to like this show.  So, just stop.  Not saying it was phenomenal but it was better than most of the crap on air in this season.

    ***************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    Not liking this episode doesn’t mean that you’re trying to hate the show. That’s completely wrong. But I do think that “Missing” is inferior to both “Fly” and “The Suitcase.”

    **************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    I didn’t say that.  I am saying quibbling over the cell phone is.

    *************************************

    Originally posted by Space:
    This was quite grood. Kinnaman was likable and funny, even though I didn’t buy either of his background-revealing phone calls. And although she was far from perfect, Enos delivered when it really counted (the body ID scene was so emotionally charged). By far my favorite episode of the series…and it did very little to advance the case. Hm.

    *************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    Picking out plot contrivances (large or small) doesn’t have to mean that anyone’s actively trying to hate on the shows they’re watching. We notice what we notice. The same thing applies here.

    ************************************

    Originally posted by FrozenBarbie:

    if you are still trying to justify it to hate the episode it is clear you don’t want to like this show. So, just stop.

    Oh, good grief…

    Picking out plot contrivances (large or small) doesn’t have to mean that anyone’s actively trying to hate on the shows they’re watching. We notice what we notice. The same thing applies here.

    Exactly. Thank you.

    ******************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:

    Originally posted by seanflynn:
    The Fly/Breaking Bad and this episode rank as the two best hours of dramatic TV I’ve seen since The Wire ended.

    Then you need to seriously watch more television. Other networks exist besides HBO, AMC and Showtime. Snob.

    And there’s no way in hell ‘Fly’ was better than ‘One Minute’, ‘Full Measures’, or ‘Sunset’. And there’s no way that this was better than half the episodes of any good drama this past season.

    *************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    Picking out plot contrivances (large or small) doesn’t have to mean that anyone’s actively trying to hate on the shows they’re watching. We notice what we notice. The same thing applies here.

    Again, quibbling over a cell phone not being on a teenager is not a basis for disliking an episode and if it is, you don’t want to like it.  I could literally do that with every show ever, every episode ever.

    **********************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by seanflynn:
    The Fly/Breaking Bad and this episode rank as the two best hours of dramatic TV I’ve seen since The Wire ended.

    Then you need to seriously watch more television. Other networks exist besides HBO, AMC and Showtime. Snob.

    And there’s no way in hell ‘Fly’ was better than ‘One Minute’, ‘Full Measures’, or ‘Sunset’. And there’s no way that this was better than half the episodes of any good drama this past season.[/QUOTE]

    Agreed.  There were 4 episodes better than Fly.  Fly was a phenomenally acted episode but not better than the others.

    ************************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by Atypical:
    Picking out plot contrivances (large or small) doesn’t have to mean that anyone’s actively trying to hate on the shows they’re watching. We notice what we notice. The same thing applies here.

    Again, quibbling over a cell phone not being on a teenager is not a basis for disliking an episode and if it is, you don’t want to like it. [/QUOTE]

    I no longer want to like it either, but this was an above solid installment.

    *******************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by Atypical:
    Picking out plot contrivances (large or small) doesn’t have to mean that anyone’s actively trying to hate on the shows they’re watching. We notice what we notice. The same thing applies here.

    Again, quibbling over a cell phone not being on a teenager is not a basis for disliking an episode and if it is, you don’t want to like it.  I could literally do that with every show ever, every episode ever.[/QUOTE]

    That wasn’t the reason I didn’t like this episode, but if that was the reason, it would be a valid opinion.

    *******************************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    You’re only involved because you defended the people harping on it.  I knew this episode would be polarizing but when people stick to one miniscule point… it’s like the Lerbon James hate all over again.  It doesn’t matter what he does right, they are simply going to find something to hate.

    **********************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    Your a LeBorn fan?   😡  :upchuck:

    *********************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    I’m “involved” b/c you made a dumb generalization. Nothing more than that.

    **********************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    Your a LeBorn fan?   😡  :upchuck:

    Objectivity is a horrible quality in modern society.

    *************************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    Your a LeBorn fan?   😡  :upchuck:

    Objectivity is a horrible quality in modern society.[/QUOTE]

    The objectivity of liking a self-absorbed, conniving cop-out with about six and a half words in his vocabulary…

    **************************************************

    Originally posted by babypook:
    Charming.

    **************************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    Did I scare you Pook? King James brings that out of me.

    **************************************************

    Originally posted by babypook:
    Well I read over the thread, since I cant get into The Killing and, ultimately, I dont want to.
    Still, telling anybody (twice) that they need to watch more television tells me all I need to know.

    **************************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    ^ That post was very Seanflynn-like i.e. condescending.

    In any given week it’s more likely that a great episode of a quality series will air than a good movie will be released in theaters. And I’ll take the best episodes of most good dramas/comedies over many good movies.

    Last year I only loved two movies (Winter’s Bone and Dogtooth). The best TV episodes of 2010 rivaled those great flicks.

    And many talented writers/directors/actors are cultivating their craft on the small screen rather than trying to scuff up enough cash to get their movies made and try to get a decent run in theaters.

    All I know is that I’d rather watch a really good episode of Fringe than Inception.

    **************************************

    Originally posted by adamunc:
    On balance, I give “Missing” a thumbs-up. It seemed an odd place to stick a time-out episode, but the character progressions were necessary and better late than never I guess. I did like how they used the device of having to wait for the casino warrants–unlike the procedurals where the investigators just crap warrants whenever they need them.

    I still just cannot get into Joel Kinnaman and his wandering, WTF accent. So that’s a minus for me. Enos delivered when she had something more emotional to play. I wasn’t buying her dancing recollection scene, but I think that was more the writing–it felt very soap-opera monologue to me. I’m pretty sure she’ll be nominated and this is a solid submission, particularly in terms of screentime. (I’m assuming the dangling episode principle still applies and this will be eligible for submission.) Still don’t think it touches Moss in “The Suitcase”, though.

    *************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by robbypop:
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    Your a LeBorn fan?   😡  :upchuck:

    Objectivity is a horrible quality in modern society.[/QUOTE]

    The objectivity of liking a self-absorbed, conniving cop-out with about six and a half words in his vocabulary…[/QUOTE]

    Guess his dream of being a poet is out of the question then.

    And thanks for proving my point. lol

    *************************************

    Originally posted by FrozenBarbie:

    And there’s no way in hell ‘Fly’ was better than ‘One Minute’, ‘Full Measures’, or ‘Sunset’.

    I think “Fly” was only brought up because we were talking about bottle episodes, such as “The Suitcase.”

    For me, personally, the cellphone issue in “Missing” was NOT the reason I didn’t like this episode. I didn’t love it because at this stage, I’d rather we picked up the pace, and got on with it, already. I wanted to know how Bennet was doing. I wanted to know if anyone bothered to find out how Rosie left her house after Belko heard her talk on the phone, and if anyone checked phone records to find out who the hell she called. You know, pesky plot details like that. I could care less about Linden’s kid. So, I was frustrated because nearly the entire episode was devoted to finding him… even though we know he’d show up at the end. And, as I mentioned, any further solidifying of the Linden/Holder relationship could have still developed in an episode that dealt with the case. It was great to have a break from Richmond and the Larsens, so I’ll give it that.

    I really wanted to like this series, being a huge fan of other AMC dramas (except for Walking Dead). I miss Rubicon so much, and was hoping this would be at least as good. The title of this episode pretty much describes how I feel about this show… that it’s “Missing” something.

    ********************************

    Originally posted by 742:

    Originally posted by FrozenBarbie:
    Teenagers aren’t like most people, who occasionally forget their cellphones. Plus, he was communicating with his father on logistics on where and when to meet. [b]His father sent a text message that morning at 7am, confirming their meeting, yet Jack left the phone at home. Was their meeting time/place already decided, so that Jack didn’t need to get that text?[/b] If so, why did he bother sending it? They had Jack leave his phone behind only so that Linden would call it, and hear it ringing in the motel room, and the subsequent fake-out that he was not there after all. Two fake-outs in the same episode was a bit of a stretch for me.

    School doesn’t start in most places until 8 or 8:30, so Jack would certainly have gotten that message before leaving to meet his father. So it’s still very plausible for him to have left it.

    I don’t want to get into a big argument about this, but I want to know from people bothered by this plot detail:

    – How would it improve the story to have Jack take the phone with him? If he wanted to be out of contact, he could have stayed out of contact. He could have refused to answer it, turned it off, removed the battery. Would Linden have found him any faster? Would her search for him have been any more satisfying if they changed this plot detail?

    – I think it’s plausible both that he left the phone by accident (preoccupied with meeting his father) or that he left it on purpose (didn’t want his mother to track him down). What specifically about either of these scenarios is implausible? To say simply that no teenager would ever leave behind his cell phone is, I think, an over-generalization of teenagers, even in this day and age.

    Comparisons have been made to the “Fly” episode of “Breaking Bad.” That was an episode that I thought was brilliantly written and acted, except for the heavy-handed metaphor of the fly. But even though I found that setup contrived (a lot more than this cell phone), I think the episode had other great merits that I admired (it was possibly Bryan Cranston’s finest hour). So I don’t understand why the cell phone is such a sticking point.

    But please, this is not meant to be confrontational, only inquisitive. Why does the cell phone matter so much to an appreciation of this episode?

    ****************************************

    Originally posted by seanflynn:
    John Ford, why asked why the Indians didn’t shoot the horses in Stagecoach when they attacked, responded, if they had, there wouldn’t have been a movie. Same thing with the cell phone. If that sort of stuff interferes with a film/episode, it usually means one has other more substantial concerns.

    What makes this episode similar to The Fly, and what elevates in above most TV drama series episodes was the directing. Mediocre directing is what brought down The Pacific to near unwatchable status, and often minimizes Boardwalk Empire’s appeal. Sure, the writing and acting were fine in both episodes, but it was the directors of each who made them both terrific.

    ****************************************

    Originally posted by 742:
    I thought the directing of “Fly” was terrific.

    I thought the directing of this episode was good too, but don’t see what about its direction in particular made this episode outstanding.

    ***************************************

    Originally posted by seanflynn:
    The choice Nicole Kassell (The Woodsman) made in focusing on inidividual gestures, inflections, the overall sustaining of mood and tension, the pacing, the POV divided between the two main characters, the balance between them, the performances she gotten, the overall visual look of the episode (by far the best in the series), for starters.

    ***********************************

    Originally posted by FrozenBarbie:

    School doesn’t start in most places until 8 or 8:30, so Jack would certainly have gotten that message before leaving to meet his father. So it’s still very plausible for him to have left it.

    Except that Linden said the text came just as they left the motel room, at 7am. I still maintain that anyone, teenager or not, planning a clandestine meeting, that was arranged by texting, would not, normally, in real life, leave that phone behind. Obviously, the only reason it happened here, was for dramatic purposes. Hence, that’s why it felt contrived to me. Certainly not the only bone of contention I had with the episode, but just an observation worth noting.  It was also noted by my fellow posters elsewhere, as well as in this rather humorous review of the episode:

     The Killing Recap: Cigarette Break

    ***********************************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by robbypop:
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    Your a LeBorn fan?   😡  :upchuck:

    Objectivity is a horrible quality in modern society.[/QUOTE]

    The objectivity of liking a self-absorbed, conniving cop-out with about six and a half words in his vocabulary…[/QUOTE]

    Guess his dream of being a poet is out of the question then.

    And thanks for proving my point. lol[/QUOTE]

    I never said you weren’t right, but you’re talking to someone born and raised in northeast Ohio, so…

    ***************************************************

    Originally posted by jbboy:
    OMG, I love this show… But I have a question, does anyone know if it’s been renewed for season 2 yet???

    **************************************************

    Originally posted by 742:
    It seems that these detour episodes are always controversial. And I seem to usually like them more than most. I was the one fan of the “Across the Sea” episode of “Lost,” which gave Jacob’s backstory. I admired the “That’s My Dog” episode of “Six Feet Under,” while also appreciating the many criticisms of the episode. I liked “Fly,” with some reservations. And I’m a big fan of this one.

    Perhaps it’s a sense of ambition I get from these shows, willing to sidestep its formula to take a dramatic and creative risk. And I think these examples have paid off.

    *****************************************************

    Originally posted by seanflynn:
    I have similar reactions, and I suspect it is because these episodes are less constricted and formulaic that the directorial voice, and thus the overall quality, comes through more strongly, rather than the anonymous go through the familiar paces efforts in most dramatic TV.

    ***************************************************

    Originally posted by FrozenBarbie:

    I admired the “That’s My Dog” episode of “Six Feet Under,” while also appreciating the many criticisms of the episode.

    The HBO forums went ballistic after that episode.
    I think all the activity overloaded the server, at one point.  While certainly one of the more controversial episodes of that series, I thought it was riveting.

    ****************************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    I absolutely loved “That’s My Dog” and was amazed to see the polarizing reaction i t received.  I thought it was one of the best hours of TV that year matter of fact.  And truly terrifying in the most realistic way.

    *******************************************************

    Originally posted by Brilliance inmorbid:
    “That My Dog” itself was okay, a pure gimmick, but it wasn’t horrible. However, David’s post dramatic stress and paranoia was completely overwrought and unconvincing. So, in a way TMD did represent the end of SFU’s run as a quality series.

    *****************************************

    Originally posted by east/west:
    If this would’ve aired in the middle of the season, I would’ve love this more. Hell it makes more sense to deepen character in the early episodes. The placement took me out of the episode.

    Though a case can be made due to the fact that this is day by day, life does happen so something like the situation w/Sarah and her “son” would take someone off of the case.

    As far from the comparison to the other shows on the network, they are only comparable in their setup for story, but not content. I see this as Mireille Enos tape, but I wasn’t blown away w/the performance. And Joel Kinnerman fluctuating accent is as enjoyable as his performance.

    And as for reading spoilers thanks to the Emmy ballot, it seems like we could be in for for bull****. You have be warned.

    ****************************************

    Originally posted by moretvplz:
    ^^

    Those spoilers made me cringe – exactly what I was hoping they wouldn’t do.

    ***************************************

    Originally posted by 742:
    I consciously avoided those spoilers, so I’ll be keeping my fingers crossed. Cautiously optimistic.

    But I wonder if shows might start to roll back their hanging episodes after this. If the outcome of a mystery series like this is compromised because of its publicly available Emmy ballot descriptions, perhaps they shouldn’t schedule that show near the middle or end of June. Episode summaries are required for submissions, and those summaries are available publicly. This is a problem for a show that builds gradually to an unknown outcome.

    *************************************

    Originally posted by Pieman1994:
    I just watched the series over a 24 hour period, and I absolutely love it. Everyone in this show is fantastic, especially Sexton and Enos. Forbes is great in the pilot, but she’s pretty one note afterwards, which is to be expected, but still. It’s brilliantly paced and directed. The only detractor is how long they drew out the Bennet red herring. Obviously, they need to sustain a series somehow, but they could at least move it other places. Otherwise, fantastic show, and cannot wait for the next two episodes.

    ********************************************

    Originally posted by Slam:
    …… it CAN’T be that obvious……

    The tension of this episode was great, but there must be another twist…..

    IT CAN’T BE THAT.

    ******************************************

    Originally posted by jon:
    Oh My God.

    I just want to say that this was an extremely suspenseful, intense, chilling episode, and the final moments had me on the edge of my seat.

    I agree with Slam in saying that it can’t be THAT obvious. However, if it does end up being the case, I will not have been disappointed. It says a lot about the current times we live in as a metaphor.

    If there is a twist, I am not sure what it would be or how they would pull it off.

    I am very much interested in Rosie’s motives in joining this website and meeting Richmond. Did they meet randomly (a few episodes ago we saw them shaking hands) and then coincidentally again by the website?

    A lot of questions need to be answered, but this episode did a good enough job in bringing the intensity and setting us up, so they better not let us down.

    ************************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    I don’t think it’ll be that “easy” either and it could be another major red herring of some sort, but if this gives Billy Campbell the chance to redeem his wet blanket performance for the majority of the season, then maybe it was all worth it in the end. It’s almost the only way to give his third of the series any real worth or purpose, even if it opens up door after door that the show may not have time to close. If this Orpheus guy is a random that no one’s invested in, I’ll probably be disappointed next week. But at least they’re trying to keep the suspense level high near the end, and this episode certainly did that. Glad to get back to the Larsens and the new shadings formed with both Mitch’s and Stan’s relationship. I was hoping they wouldn’t villify Rosie in the end, but it’s clear that she was into something that was way over her head. The sister is still sending off some weird vibes. Hmmm. They’ve earned the build-up to the finale. Hope they don’t blow it.

    Grade for “Beau Soleil”: A-

    *******************************************

    Originally posted by Hodag129:
    I hope it’s that obvious.  It would give everything a lot more meaning and depth.  Plus it was executed beautifully.  The last scenes were so chilling. I’m hoping for no twists just beautiful television.

    ******************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    ^^^I agree 100%.

    **********************************************

    Originally posted by jss0058:
    Loved every minute of last nights episode.  And I have to agree, I hope it is that obvious too.  The final scenes with the emails in Richmond’s apartment and Holder on the street gave me chills.   I can’t wait to see how everything is wrapped up next week!

    I think the series, Enos, Forbes & Sexton have all earned nominations.  One thing that suprises me is how everyone is putting Forbes on their lists but most don’t mention Sexton, who IMO has been every bit as good.

    *************************************

    Originally posted by Pieman1994:
    It all depends on execution. That’s all this next episode comes down to.

    *************************************

    Originally posted by BernardS:
    I agree — it’s way too obvious…

    I’m guessing it’s either who I’ve guessed from the beginning — Kristen Lehmann’s character (can’t remember her name) — she got jealous of their inappropriate relationships and killed her. 

    I can’t see Mitch doing this, but maybe she snapped because she found out her daughter was a whore and just snapped…

    But I’m guessing it’s Kristen Lehmann’s character.

    It’s too obvious that Richmond did it.

    Bernie  🙂

    ***************************************************

    ReplyCopy URL
    MicheBel
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 5th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #225978

    Originally posted by jon:
    Uh oh.

    Something I noticed when thinking about the episode:

    The email address that Richmond used had the name Orpheus in it, which I presume is a secret email address he used for the website.

    When we were shown the inbox, however, other emails were also in the inbox…from his political friends, informing him of his schedule and other typical political things.

    So, was this a mistake on the show’s part? If so, it is kind of lazy on their part.

    ******************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:

    Originally posted by jon:

    The email address that Richmond used had the name Orpheus in it, which I presume is a secret email address he used for the website.

    When we were shown the inbox, however, other emails were also in the inbox…from his political friends, informing him of his schedule and other typical political things.

    So, was this a mistake on the show’s part? If so, it is kind of lazy on their part.

    Not really.  He could easily have all emails sent to that address directly routed to his personal email address.  Also, anyone with access to the Orpheus account could have emails re-directed to that email address.  When someone at my job gets fired or quits I get their work emails because IT has them directed to me.

    ************************************
    Originally posted by robbypop:
    Also, I don’t know if it’s been stated how Richmond’s wife died already but if they haven’t (I miss some details because Sunday I drink all day) my bet is she drowned and that’s why he asks.  Some weird grieving thing.

    *************************************

    Originally posted by jon:

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by jon:

    The email address that Richmond used had the name Orpheus in it, which I presume is a secret email address he used for the website.

    When we were shown the inbox, however, other emails were also in the inbox…from his political friends, informing him of his schedule and other typical political things.

    So, was this a mistake on the show’s part? If so, it is kind of lazy on their part.

    Not really.  He could easily have all emails sent to that address directly routed to his personal email address.  Also, anyone with access to the Orpheus account could have emails re-directed to that email address.  When someone at my job gets fired or quits I get their work emails because IT has them directed to me.[/QUOTE]

    Did not know such things were possible. Thanks.

    *********************************************

    Originally posted by Pieman1994:
    ^^ I think she died in an automobile accident, or at least that’s what I thought was mentioned.

    *******************************************

    Originally posted by Space:
    I thought that Richmond and his wife were hit by a drunk driver, but I’m not 100 % positive.

    *********************************************

    Originally posted by CS87:
    Maybe Richmond’s wife was hit by a drunk driver and her car crashed down a bridge and into a river. She might have tried to get out, but wasn’t able to and drowned.

    *******************************************

    Originally posted by moretvplz:
    Simply a great episode.

    Agree with what’s said above, I’m glad it was obvious, and I pray they don’t take a sudden detour which eliminates the weight created by this revelation. Billy Campbell’s performance is suddenly more powerful.

    ***************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    It’s weight that Billy Campbell and his character haven’t earned yet. Maybe it’s coming next episode, but I’m almost hoping that the killer is one of those two from his campaign covering up for their boss.

    *************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    I’m not so sure that I agree.  I think the fact that it was such a surprise revelation is a testament to how well Campbell played it.  He successfully manipulated all of us.  Maybe he seemed too obvious, maybe not – and even if he isn’t the killer, he proved that he and his character are very good liars.  And when you think how vehemently he defended Bennet Ahmad – he may have done so because he knew all along that he was innocent.

    Also, I love that Sexton’s character finally called out Forbes’ character.  I always forget their names. That has been a long time coming and Forbes’ very one dimensional turn is nowhere near deserving of a nomination, while Sexton’s conflicted portrayal has been a wonder to see.

    ************************************

    Originally posted by Ted Mosby…Architect:
    i gave up on this after like 4 episodes i really couldnt get into it but i see now that amc has all the episodes online so just wondering is it worth catching up?

    ***********************************

    Originally posted by adamunc:

    Originally posted by Ted Mosby…Architect:
    i gave up on this after like 4 episodes i really couldnt get into it but i see now that amc has all the episodes online so just wondering is it worth catching up?

    Wait ’til next week and we’ll tell you if the payoff is worth some of the dreary midsection.

    *********************************************

    Originally posted by robbypop:
    To be honest, the last 3 or 4 episodes have really changed my overall opinion of the show.  With the momentum it has gained I don’t see how they could screw up the finale.

    *********************************************

    Originally posted by Hodag129:

    Originally posted by Ted Mosby…Architect:
    i gave up on this after like 4 episodes i really couldnt get into it but i see now that amc has all the episodes online so just wondering is it worth catching up?

    The last 3 or 4 episodes are worth it.  If you don’t care about the mystery or skipping ahead, you could always just jump to those.  It’s gained a lot of momentum here heading into the finale.

    ********************************************

    Originally posted by MadScntst:
    At first I thought it was too obvious that the killer would be Richmond, but as I think about it, I really don’t want there to be yet another red herring in the case.  Been there, done that.  I don’t mind if there are still twists to come, but I think I will feel let down if he’s not at least partly responsible for Rosie’s death.

    I agree with those who say the last 3 or 4 episodes have been much better than the early part of the season.  I just heard that the show has been renewed for a Season 2, and I think I will probably be back for another season.

    ***************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    If there had been more shadings of what Richmond was really capable of, maybe, but I don’t think Billy Campbell has played this role the way he could have, or as well as he should have, throughout. Maybe it’s the writing that failed him, but they’re going to have to do some backing to sell this about-face if he’s really the killer. It’ll all hinge on the finale.

    **********************************************

    Originally posted by MadScntst:

    Originally posted by Atypical:
    If there had been more shadings of what Richmond was really capable of, maybe, but I don’t think Billy Campbell has played this role the way he could have, or as well as he should have, throughout. Maybe it’s the writing that failed him, but they’re going to have to do some backing to sell this about-face if he’s really the killer. It’ll all hinge on the finale.

    Well, there was that one episode where he was at the hearing for the drunk driver, and then turned around and let the dirt on the mayor leak.  I agree that it wasn’t a lot, but it did give a peek at another side to his character.  Maybe I am just remembering Billy Campbell being on The 4400, but I never really did trust Richmond completely 🙂

    **************************************************

    Originally posted by east/west:
    The show has been  renewed[/url].

    *************************************************

    Originally posted by Atypical:

    Originally posted by MadScntst:
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by Atypical:
    If there had been more shadings of what Richmond was really capable of, maybe, but I don’t think Billy Campbell has played this role the way he could have, or as well as he should have, throughout. Maybe it’s the writing that failed him, but they’re going to have to do some backing to sell this about-face if he’s really the killer. It’ll all hinge on the finale.

    Well, there was that one episode where he was at the hearing for the drunk driver, and then turned around and let the dirt on the mayor leak.  I agree that it wasn’t a lot, but it did give a peek at another side to his character.  Maybe I am just remembering Billy Campbell being on The 4400, but I never really did trust Richmond completely :-)[/QUOTE]

    Yeah, when Richmond went negative against the mayor, that was the one time I felt a spark with Richmond and something interesting that Campbell could work with until now. But that and all of this seem so far apart in tone. It might be all we get and will have to be enough until next week.

    *************************************

    Originally posted by 742:
    I’d be surprised and sorta disappointed if Richmond turned out to be the killer, and I have a feeling he’s probably the last red herring. The show overall, though, has been excellent the last few weeks. If the season had been maybe 2-3 episodes shorter it might have solved some of those middle pacing issues.

    **************************************

    Originally posted by FishBiscuit:

    Originally posted by FishBiscuit:
    Tis true the show is spinning its wheels but I’ll stick with it.  However, If it turns out that the ambitious campaign guy is the killer I’ll be done for good.

    I wondering if I was right, I hope not. Praying that Richmond is not another red herring.

    *******************************************

    Originally posted by Moviemjk102:
    I’ve enjoyed “The Killing” with reservations since the premiere, but the back-to-back punch of “Missing” and “Beau Soleil” proved that with good writing, this show can truly excel.

    Excellent work from Enos in “Missing”. If she can get nominated, that will surely be her tape. As for “Beau Soleil”, I’m in the majority that isn’t entirely sold on Richmond as the killer, but damnit if that last sequence wasn’t superbly directed by Keith Gordon. I was on edge that whole time.

    *********************************************

    Originally posted by LadyHathor25:
    The episode was good.  However, this show does not know how to write a mystery.  If Richmond is the killer then they did a very poor job of setting it up.   Either that, or the writers are big fans of Agatha Christie.  I am a mystery addict, but I hate this style of storytelling.  Zero foreshadowing with a “pull a rabbit out of the hat” ending is not my thing.  This is what’s known as “unfair” mystery writing.  Unfair because there is no way for the audience to solve the crime on their own.

    If the show wants me back for season 2, they can’t do Agatha Christie storytelling.  They have to learn the art of misdirection.  Sprinkle the real clues in the show, but use sleight of hand to distract the audience.  It would take real talent to do this in a season long show, I know.  But, I can’t get invested again in a mystery which is impossible to solve.

    ********************************************

    Originally posted by adamunc:
    I’m sort of reserving judgement to see if there’s one last twist here, but if the councilman did it, that will be disappointing. I was pleased that the reveal for Mitch’s sister was more interesting than I’d thought it would be. (We knew there had to be something up with her; she’s been around too long for no real reason.) The ending was certainly tense, but I thought the jailhouse visitation scene was poorly done. It was almost like they didn’t have the shots they needed from the right angles–too many long holds on the person who wasn’t speaking for no good reason. It was like maybe one camera set-up produced unusable footage and they had to cover in editing.

    So much of this show reminds me of 24. Not the pacing certainly, but the time-compression angle, the interweaving of political stories into the main plot (with very mixed results), and especially the way most episodes end. There’s generally an intercutting of two-three reveals or very tense moments overlaid by ominous, Sean Callery-esque music. “Beau Soleil”‘s ending was so reminiscent of 24 I was a little surprised there wasn’t a ticking clock at the end.

    For the most part, I’m glad this was renewed. Some of this season has been frustrating, but on balance I’ve enjoyed it. Enos has been aces, and to me Brent Sexton has been the best supporting player on the show. Forbes started off gangbusters, but then we never got to see Mitch develop any real shades.

    Oh, and watching this episode I finally put it together that the guy playing Jamie is the same one who played Betty’s brother on Mad Men.

    ***********************************************

    Originally posted by John Nova:
    Just watched ”Beau Soleil”. Don’t think Richmond did it. There is a sneak peek on IMDB and the announcer says “Don’t miss the shocking season finale”, so I guess it means we don’t have our killer yet.

    ***********************************************

    Originally posted by MadScntst:
    I seem to remember, too, that last week on AMC after the show, the teaser said something along the lines of the last 5 minutes will have everyone talking.  So it sounds like something pretty big will happen at the very end.

    I’ve been flipping back and forth all week about whether I’d prefer for it to be Richmond or not. There are pros and cons- on one hand they could just make a great story over how and why Richmond did it, or on the other hand they could treat us to one last big surprise. (If the latter, that doesn’t necessarily mean that Richmond is off the hook from other twisted behavior as Orpheus!)  Either way, I just hope it’ll be something well told, and something that will make sense and be satisfying.  (Stating the obvious 😉 )

    *****************************************

    Originally posted by FishBiscuit:
    I’m really excited for tonight.

    *****************************************

    Originally posted by BernardS:
    So, the cop is bad…but we still don’t know who killed Rosie Larsen.  Hmmmm….

    That’s what next season is for I suppose…if that.

    great season finale!  Can’t wait for next summer!

    🙂

    *************************************************

    Originally posted by seanflynn:
    2nd best episode of the season for me (after the missing son one two weeks ago).

    Satisfying as to what is the core of the show – the atmosphere and details and relationships within a group of detectives and their world – as well as the secondary aspect of the mystery (with a neat surprise at the end) to appeal to those for whom that is the raison d’etre for this kind of show.

    ****************************************

    Originally posted by east/west:
    This show crashed and burned so fast, I will be annoyed if they get any Emmy nominations outside of the technicals (which they are deserving for). This probably worked for people invested in the series, but I checked out in terms of investment a long time ago so this meant nothing.

    So I am assuming they will continue the story threads they left which would make it a departure from the original? B/c isn’t the original a new case per season.

    Oh well, dissapointing TV viewing tonight for me.

    ***************************************************

    Originally posted by doul15:
    I was really disappointed by the episode. I feel like I wasted 13 weeks just to still not find out who the killer is.

    ***************************************************

     

    ReplyCopy URL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 18 total)
Reply To: Official THE KILLING thread, Season 1

You can use BBCodes to format your content.
Your account can't use Advanced BBCodes, they will be stripped before saving.

Similar Topics
Sab227 - Dec 14, 2017
Television
Guest2014 - Dec 14, 2017
Television