Don’t care as long as it had David Tennant.
Does he ever sleep?
There is also a second season of Broadchurch coming, filming now.
I will be watching the second season of Broadchurch!
I didn’t care for “Broadchurch” very much, so maybe the American version will be better.
This thread prompted me to finally get around to trying the show. Definitely an interesting ending. It would be hard to come up with something else equivalent.
Though I must admit that I’d probably rather that someone did.
The show bangs on at us time and again that age laws on relationships are arbitrary. It comes uncomfortably close to being NAMBLA propoganda, at the end of the day. And that may just be the result of the writer(s) getting lost in their subject matter, or actively trying to be thought provoking, just for thought-provokingness’ sake. But to accomplish it, they’ve put in all the pro- arguments, and never give any con- arguments.
Basically, I think it’s a well-done series, and I’d like to see Tennant’s star continue to rise. But if the rewrite does something to correct the above, I’d say that’s something worth doing.
Except that many people who wouldn’t or couldn’t see the original will be able to see this one.
Are the leads the same? Wait, I thought Tennant’s character said he was retiring?
I don’t want to watch it with different leads. 
They played off of each other so well.
Yes, the leads are the same.
I wish to respond to this. How do I do so in spoilers?
<spoiler>Stuff In Spoiler Box Goes Here</spoiler>
Just replace the point brackets… <>
with square brackets…
Thanks.
With regards to the age laws: I think the writers tried to humanise the killer(and to an extent the ex-teacher). After all the killer was living under the nose of the heroine detective for a decade or so. The writers had to try and make him as “normal” as possible not as a serial paedophile with long term paedophile habits. The female detective would have failed as abysmally as a wife and mother had she missed a decade or more the signs of paedophilia in her household. The desires of the killer towards the victim had to be an aberration rather than a habitual desire.
Sure, but that’s not the issue.
[spoiler]Here’s the sum total of relationships in the show:
Mark and Beth: She was underage. They got married. All’s well!
Chloe and Dean: She is underage. They’re doing well, and Chloe is an intellectual and emotional equal of her parents.
Jack Marshall and ?: She was underage and he was way overage. BUT, they get married and (for all the show tells us) lived happily as equals together, until his WIFE AND CHILD WERE KILLED in an accident. And then the evil townsfolk drive him to his death.
Danny and Tom: Two underage (probably homosexual) boys had a fairly serious relationship. They’re equals, both in the same place and in the same situation.
Mark and Becca: He just wanted to do something outside the box. (Not particularly relevant, this one.)
Susan’s Husband: Molested and killed his daughter.
Olly and Karen: They’re using each other for their own gain - though of course, he’s much younger and her pupil.
So of 7 relationships, five involve and paint as reasonable underage and/or uneven power balance relationships, one is unrelated, and one is negative (but does not get anywhere near the amount of airtime as Jack Marshall’s story.
To follow five vindications of underage/uneven power balance relationships, we’re then presented with a last one where they were just “in love” and Joe was probably just acting as an older mentor, to help him understand his interest in men… Yeah, no.
American Beauty did a good job of showing a real-world relationship between an adult man and a teenage girl. He think’s she’s cute right up to the point where he actually talks to her for five seconds and suddenly realizes, “Woah there, this is not an adult, rational person that can act responsibly. Any relationship between us would be me taking advantage of someone who doesn’t have all the experience and knowledge that I do.” There’s nothing like that in Broadchurch. The only children we see are Chloe, who is written to be as adult as her parents, Tommy - who I admit is presented as childish fairly often, but also presented as a forlorn ex-lover, and Danny in his lover’s quarrel with Joe where they are, again, presented as equals. Danny is standing up to Joe, making arguments, deciding how to behave on his own, etc. You could replace the actor with a 30 year old woman, change some pronouns, and none of the dialogue would sound out of place or immature.
All that said, I don’t feel like this was intentional. The writer (Chris Chibnall, I guess), probably just isn’t very good at writing children or thinking like a child. He probably figured that he might as well work back from his suspect to fill in a whole motif for the series, without thinking about the implication. But at the end of it, the series does - IMO - come perilously close to saying, “Hey look, all of these other cases are okay! Shouldn’t this one be too?” And the answer to that is, of course, “No, my friend. Go back and write the children as children with childrens’ minds, and then we’ll review the question again.”[/spoiler]
To be honest its a while since I watched the show. I’d forgotten about many of those relationships.
[spoiler]I have no issue with the shows take on underage sex between two youngsters of fairly equal age. It happens. Perhaps it was a bit idealistic on the “its all healthy” angle. Underage sex between a 15 and 17 year old can be as healthy or nasty as most any other activity at that age.
I agree about the Jack Marshall storyline. It seemed to be a cheap way of showing “the mob” in its usual bad light. And as a way of stretching out the narrative. I still believe that the major relationship between Joe and Danny needed to be treated in a specific way; a way that minimized the evil nature of Joe. That was probably why Jack’s story was treated in a similar way.
I dont disagree with you in all this. I just believe that with one or two of the major relationships the writer had his hands tied in how he could deal with them.[/spoiler]
This may be old news, but per an article in the current Entertainment Weekly, Gracepoint will have “a different ending” from Broadchurch.
Which means, I guess, that as you watch Fairpoint, the only person you can be sure didn’t do it will be
the dead kid’s best friend’s father, who is also the husband of the local police officer investigating the case.
Unless they make those two different characters. Which I thought was a terrible idea until I realized that, if they’re changing the identity of the murderer, why not?
I wonder if those making the American version will have noticed the ‘relationships between adults and minors often work out well’ theme of the original (as discussed in this thread). And if they have noticed it, and still choose to include it in the new series…that really should become a problem for Fox. Surely advertisers won’t want to be identified with that sort of message.
Because Fox has never had a show with sexually active teens. :dubious:
Yes, Fox has had many shows with sexually active teens, from what I hear. But ‘teens and adults’…is that a Fox thing? Not to mention “11-year-olds with adults” which was one of the Broadchurch plot situations; I’m no expert on Fox–is that a thing, there?
Considering that the 11-year old dies and it’s not considered healthy by anyone, I think we’re on the clear
And yes, teens and adults is old hat on Fox and many other channels. Off the top of my head, it played a big part in Boston Public and that ran for four seasons.