Featured Post

Tuesday, 10 February 2015

Broadchurch 2: Why Series 2 should have never happened

When Broadchurch first returned I bemoaned it's complete unnecessary-ness. Now, we're two episode from its conclusion and I've never felt so disconnected with a piece of drama as I have with this.



It just all feels half arsed, and pointless. If Chibnall wants his audience to give more than a monkey's toss about the Sandbrook case he should've introduced the key players in a better way so we could connect with and start to care about them. Instead, when the story shifts to Sandbrook case it's like we're with strangers. I'm so disconnected from the case of the two missing/dead girls that I mentally switch off as soon as the story shifts.

There's potential in certain aspects of the story, but those don't seem to be the avenues the lackluster scripts are exploring. I'm interested in the dynamic between our two lawyers, one has a son in prison who has been on the receiving end of a beating, but that's overlooked in favour of a quite frankly dull mystery surrounding two girls we've never met!

Without wishing to repeat myself, my main issue with the Sandbrook case is that I believe it's there because Chibnall worried people wouldn't enjoy Broadchurch 2 without Hardy & Miller solving another nailbiting crime. In reality it's the addition of this new mystery element that has viewers turning off. It's so mind-numbing it's truly hard to believe it has been written by the same person who so carefully and expertly plotted the first series.

The sad thing is, even as we plod slowly to its conclusion, it doesn't matter to me. It would be hard for me to care any less about who's dead/missing, or even if Joe Miller gets away with the original murder. It has sullied the first series which I admired so much. I'll stick with the final episodes but only because there's football or New Tricks repeats on BBC1.

No comments:

Recent Posts 2

Popular Posts Logo

Popular Posts

Popular Posts