I watched one 3 or 4 years back on Netflix that was set in Blackpool in England, I forget the name of it, but it was so full of plotholes it was laughable. I haven’t bothered with any others since, although I have read a couple of the books and they were reasonable as potboilers go I suppose. Why do all the Netflix shows seem to have James Nesbit in them (he was in the one I saw)? What have Netflix got on the poor man?!
We finally finished this show. The good news is, all the disparate horror elements introduced after an episode or two are woven into a reasonably coherent narrative of what exactly was happening.
Did I actually enjoy the show? I’m not really sure. It’s sort of relentlessly grim. Apart from the threat they are facing, several of this group of neighbors hate each other and are constantly letting each other know about it. Characters make the dumb choices they typically seem to always make in these types of horror / terror scenarios. I wasn’t sure how much I bought the explanation for the threat they are facing once it’s eventually made clear about halfway through. Not that it was implausible in the context of what it was, just kind of silly and derivative. I know I’m being pretty oblique, but I can’t say much more without spoiling things. Yvonne Strahovsky was good in this. She was the strongest character and had a quiet intensity. Seems like she should get more feature roles.
Anyway, it’s a relatively short watch. 8 episodes, ranging from a half hour to under an hour per episode. I know that’s faint praise-- “I’m not sure I liked it, but at least it doesn’t last long!” The season ends at a ‘soft resolution’ point-- not a cliffhanger, but in a way it can continue if it’s renewed for another season.
We finished Run Away just before we started His & Hers. We liked it. It’s hard to find something we both like!
After the pause in the final season of Stranger Things, we’ve never been able to muster enough interest to spend another seven+ hours with it. Thought about just skipping ahead and watching the final episode to see how it all turns out but that episode is over two hours long and we just don’t care that much.
If it helps, there are no slow or boring bits. The whole season barrels along at a rollicking pace.
Except for the frequent and interminable pity parties and hugfests.
i have moved onto the very easy cozy “father brown”. i am amused. easily amused.
Murderbot
Partway through this series. Funny…but I wish it was funnier.
I like the original stories and I have enjoyed the series, although it does start to run out of steam eventually (12 series is a lot). But it is definitely cozy.
When my father in law was still alive, my wife and I would bring him dinner every Sunday evening then watch a couple episodes of TV. We got through all of “New Tricks” this way then started on “Father Brown”. I don’t think we got all the way through… six seasons maybe? It was enjoyable enough but after my FIL passed away we never really felt the need to finish it up on our own.
i did enjoy new tricks. father brown is easy, you can do other things while watching.
I started His & Hers, but quickly realized I’d read the book awhile back. I vaguely remember whodunnit, but not why. One and a half episodes in, I’ll probably stick it out.
Father Brown does have a non-typical Hollywood star as it’s- a rather pudgy guy in fact. And they are 'cozy mysteries", But rather formulaic . Yes, nice shows to watch when you dont want a lot of thinking done- good acting too.
We just finished season 1 of A Man on the Inside. I liked it quite a bit. A lot of heart. Pretty funny at times. When they were dealing with dementia it was a tough watch for my wife.
They are running out of people to murder in the Cotswolds.
Here’s the formula for practically every Father Brown episode ever made, and many other cozy mysteries, too.
- At the start of the episode, five new people arrive in the village. One of them turns out to be very unpleasant. He/she is murdered.
- Circumstantial evidence implicates one of the remaining four, who is promptly arrested. Father Brown visits him/her in jail and promises to get him/her released.
- Suspicion falls on two of the remaining three, one of whom may also be arrested. Red herrings implicating both of them abound.
- Evidence emerges exculpating the falsely imprisoned suspect, who is released.
- The last, least suspicious, of the newcomers, offers to help Father Brown with the investigation.
- One of the regular cast members, in the course of some ordinary activity, makes an innocent comment that gives Father Brown an epiphany to the key clue in solving the mystery.
- At the inevitable showdown in which Father Brown, the chief constable, and all the suspects are gathered, Father Brown will reveal how the key clue led him to proof that the least suspected, most likeable person was in fact the guilty party.
There. Now you don’t have to watch any of them.
Why is it that small country villages in England have more murders than London, New York, and Los Angeles combined?
Six times a year?
And over 600 per year in those three.
Father Brown is set permanently in the early 1950s. Despite it running for 13 years it’s been 1953 almost the whole time, so really the rate of murder in Kembleford seems to be two per week.
Okay, sure. 
I just watched the 2nd epi of the new season of The Rookie. While still continuing to be a good show, they are leaning hard into the creepy and unethical Tim/Chen romance. Unethical and against regulations because while yes, they are both sergeants, Tim is now Watch Commander and thus her superior. Creepy because the relationship came off their mentor/student thing, with Tims illegal and cruel “Tim tests”, amounting to mild torture. Thus she is “in love” with her abuser.
I prefer the Poirot bbc series. David Suchet is excellent as the detective.
Father Brown is pretty good. But comes in third behind The Rabbi books.
Heh, every whodunit procedural has pretty much the same formula:
-
CSI / NCIS / FBI / (Other alphabet law enforcement agency) interviews a handful of people who are either witnesses to a murder, or associates of the victim.
-
One of the interviewees seems suspicious, so they focus on that person’s story, and find out something they said is a lie. They’re brought in for a grilling (a quick check of run time left shows 20 minutes to go, so obviously this is a red herring).
-
Sure enough… “I didn’t kill them! I lied because (having an affair, hiding minor crime, etc.)”. This checks out.
-
Eventually (with 10 minutes or less time left, so you know it’s the killer) they close in on the most innocent-seeming, previously helpful interviewee. They either find a key clue that nails them dead to rights, or trick them into confessing. The end.