The Mrs and I made comments to each other that are echoed on these boards:
It is slow, but doesn't fill the audience with suspense or interest
For example, she's looking out her window at a train, irrelevant
Seems to be not enough to actually fill more than an episode of NCIS, but they're making 2 years of it.
For example, In Columbo we know who did it at the start but at least we get closure by the end of the show and can move on
For example, she's looking out her window at a train, irrelevant
Keep watching. A lot of really great shows don't develop quickly. The problem with NCIS is that you don't really get to know the full mind of the killers. If you don't find that intrigueing then this show is not for you.
shareI've just watched the first episode of this on Netflix here in Australia and I don't want to read any of these boards in case they give something away but can someone tell me if the case is closed by the last episode of the first season or does it keep on going on and on into the second season? Thanks.
shareKeeps going. Enjoy!
shareThanks for the answer but no thanks to something that doesn't finish. I won't be continuing. True Detective was good and it finished after the first season. I started watching the second season of that but stopped after a few episodes as I didn't like it.
shareYou are aware that it will finish though aren't you? And therefore if you're interested in it then it's probably worth watching.
shareThe show creator's intention was to offer an 11-episode season, but BBC agreed to 5 episodes, because they weren't sure the ratings would be good. So Cubitt went with the offer, wrote 5, with a mini cliff hanger (which isn't offensive at all). The ratings turned out to be phenomenal, so he was allowed to do 6 more (which he had planned anyway), which bring satisfactory conclusions to at least two big plotlines.
Second season is a real slow burn. It gets riveting last couple eps.
shareFYI season 2 of TD is completely different from season 1. Anthology! Please don't expect season 2 to be even remotely similar to 1.
2 is more action and moves faster.
Hope you'll reconsider True detective s. 2 it's totally worth it
I BUFFY/ Sarah Michelle Gellar/ KATNISS Jennifer Lawrence
You mean the cops finding out who the killer is or actually catching him? What's your definition of "ending"?
shareWhat would you call a good show?
shareI spent a whole night watching the first season so,yeah, I disagree with you..This show is just perfectly done and the most enjoyable and exciting part is that it gets into the mind of the killer,his beliefs and reasons..It's just perfect and the male leader's(Jamie Dornan)performance is wonderful..Can't wait for the third season(the last one)after that cliff hanger.
And btw I watched his confrontation with Stella in the last episode maybe 5 times because the acting in this scene was great especially their face expressions..just perfect.
I enjoyed it immensely..mainly because it took the time to show the good and the bad of the killer...his down time with his kids...then his down time drawing his victims..all the planning...then going to work as a therapist...strange, compelling, award winning TV.
shareI thought it was great, it really built. I see so many non-UK posters lambasting UK shows for being slow. Some shows are wham-bam but the better ones allow you to think, to ponder, to surmise , TO USE YOUR BRAIN.... rather than being rapidly force-fed and having plot rammed down your throat with no space to digest and cogitate. I have given up on so many shallow shows that seem to be action packed but are in fact nothing but candy floss. I prefer a good stew. Something to get your teeth into, with time to ruminate over the possibilities. Why did he do that, what are his motives? Rather than being spoon-fed everything in it's simplest lowest-common-denominator form.
It's nice to be able to use your brain. And not be half watching whilst posting something else on facetweet.
'tler
I don't mind thinking, that's not a problem, but there are too many repetitive scenes that go nowhere. Do we really need to watch Gillian swim, repeatedly? The first few times were fine, it's how she processes the case and reviews the actions of the suspect in her mind with no distractions. We get it, I understand so let's move along with the story. They seem to want to drag things out and far too long. I don't want to be spoon-fed either. I'm not looking for a Columbo ending here or just one more thing.
I'm intelligent, I can make my own conclusions about the characters, their psychological actions and behavior, what makes them tick. But, it also takes away from the suspense/thriller side to the story and the characters. Prime Suspect was an amazing show (UK version), it had suspense, that was well timed, paced and more cohesive, scenes were not just put in for the sake of the writers and actors, they were part of the story that also moved it along. I think that's what is missing here. This is a story about a serial killer and is a character study of his behavior and actions, that an investigator wants off the street. What motivates them? Especially him.
I'm watching season 1 finale and man the story is slow moving, walking in quicksand slow. The story is fascinating though, the psychology of a killer, what he thinks, feels and I'm not sure he understands why he does it, maybe in the next season it will become clearer.
What I find distracting is the sounds from the background and it's sometimes hard to hear the dialogue. The US uses filters and sound screens over the microphones and the actors to remove and block the background sounds, but most of the UK tv series that I've watched seem to all have that issue. House of Cards, Prime Suspect and a few others. Do they want to keep it real? As if the audience was there during a conversation, listening in? Even with close caption it's still distracting. I would rather hear than read. Reading the dialogue takes away from the scenes and visual imaginary. It's like watching a foreign film.
I agree this is an excellent series. The characters are fully developed instead of the one dimensional type seen in some shows.
Someone above was critical of the show because we don't have a resolution by the end of the episode, as compared with the old hit series Columbo. Columbo was a great show, but the format was different. Each episode was a different case and the audience knew from the start who the bad guy was.
This series follows the police work of a single case for 11 episodes. We do find out who the killer is early on in the series. But the show is more realistic than the one episode police shows, as real life cases are not solved in an hour. We get to follow the police work as they piece together information. We see the killer committing several crimes and see him in his day job. We get a peek at his mental state, how he gets his thrills from the murders, his double life, his interactions at his job and with his family. He is an interesting well developed character.
Some think the show moves too slowly. It depends on what you expect from a show. If you prefer the hour show format where things develop quickly and the crime is solved by the end of the hour this show may not be for you. While some of that type of cop shows are well done, others can be a bit flashy, more like adventure shows than police shows.
This show tries to be more realistic and therefore is more interesting to me. The fact that it takes several episodes to identify the killer, and even more to build a tight case against him means that the story is more fully developed. It is more believable.
I tend to be a bit critical of cop shows; I often watch them and throw up my hands and scoff at the unrealistic portrayals, the lack of verisimilitude. Some of that is unavoidable I guess. Writers have to develop conflict and tension, they have to put characters in dilemmas, in danger, etc. And to do that they frequently have characters make stupid mistakes, things real people would rarely if ever do. I hate that.
But this show avoids most of that.
I really hope the third season comes out soon. Gillian Anderson is good in this. She is very different from Scully on X Files.
Must not like drama, real drama, not NCIS whiz bang crap.
shareDon't post here just clicked by mistake. That said, NCIS is far far far from whiz bang crap and will be on long after The Fall is gone.
shareDon't post here just clicked by mistake. That said, NCIS is far far far from whiz bang crap and will be on long after The Fall is gone.
I have to completely disagree. I found the first episode enthralling and very intriguing. In fact, I watched the whole first season/series in less than 24 hours. That's how intriguing I find this show. And all of those "irrelevant" shots, don't you think maybe the director is trying to have the audience get the feel of the location and build the atmosphere? You clearly don't appreciate or know about the art of filmography. I know that everyone is different, has different tastes, but don't bash a good show. Yes, it moves a bit slowly, I guess. But it builds, there's depth. Subtleties, it's a play on Psychology, really.
shareits slow nicely paced its only 6 episodes per season so not enough for burn out imo keep goin not like you have to sit for a full season of 22 episodes.
share