Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Now Playing - TV Show Talk' started by bryhamm, Jun 13, 2011.
It's got to be a red herring, right? Seems too obvious to have it be Richmond.
That's what I'm thinking.
I'm with ya. I think it's a red herring also. It is an interesting twist though.
(I'm really afraid to comment too much in this thread because, like Rob, I've watched the entire first season of the original. I will say that it's coming together much like that one did - some of the same plot points and twists are similar. I can't quite put my finger on exactly what this version is actually missing, but I really enjoyed the original much more.)
You don't think the billionaire was the red herring? I think with one episode to go, Richmond has to be the guy. We need a whole lot of resolution.
I'm not sure I understand the whole Beaux Soleil thing. So Terri is a hooker there and so was Rosie? But they didn't know about the other? And coincidentally, Rosie is depositing her hooker money into an account in her aunt's name? Odd.
My guess is Richmond is the herring.
My Guess who the real murder is.
I do think it is the blond campaing assistant. He wanted to cover for his boss who likes underage hookers that reminds him of his wife.
I think it's too late for any more red herrings. Like Tracy said, throughout the episode, they made us think it was Drexler and then the surprise at the end was that it was Richmomd. The finale will just deal with how Linden gets away, etc.
What a ***** Mitch Larsen turned out to be. And what did Stan do with the money he got from Janek?
Every herring is red but one. Plenty of time to reveal who the real killer is, still. Probably somebody close to Richmond, but we don't KNOW is close to Richmond yet. Although... (see below).
That is what I got from it too. yes, odd.
That was my first thought, even near the beginning of the series.
His face when he was below the glass-bottom pool at the billionaire's house was a giveaway. He did NOT want to be there. Combine that with the "What's it like to drown?" references he seems like the choice to me.
I thought since he spent all the savings on the new house, he didn't have any money for the funeral and stuff. I thought he borrowed the money for that.
I guess this ep should shut the yaps of those of you who have been whining like babies about the lack of plot progress....
Yes and no. Great episode. But we spent 4-6 eps in the middle of the series just floundering about.
I thought about this last night after watching the episode, and decided I don't like the pacing of the series. Enough that I'm out for next year (IF there is a next year). It's a great story w/ good acting, but too many episodes were boring. The series should have been 5-6 hours long, or have a more compelling story for us, to fill up 13 hours (less commercials).
I don't like the way they brought in the father in the last episodes; how can we care when he means nothing to us? They waited until week 11 to have a Linden/Holder bonding. I have no idea what's going on with the son; you see him some eps, and then you don't. Who keeps him, where is he? No wonder the kids runs off. And to tell us that Rosie is a hooker in the penultimate episode, w/o ANY premonition? Again, they just keep dropping stuff on us.
I also don't like the "red herring of the week" we went thru for several episodes. I'm not a writer, and I don't know how I would have done it, but I do know I don't like the way THEY did it. I'm one and done. I would bet so are a significant percent of the viewing audience.
The more I think about this episode, the more I am convinced that the writers had no idea what they were doing with this series. Which is strange, because they had the blueprint from the Danish series and should have been able to adapt it with only minor differences. I haven't seen the Danish version, but I can't imagine that the pacing and plot were so poorly done.
-We spun our wheels for several weeks with red herrings and no clues, only to have everything important fall in our laps in the second to last episode? I realize that red herrings are necessary for a multi-episode thriller like this, but they were used poorly.
-They save all the interesting developments until the very end, and then throw them out at us so quickly that they can't even explain them properly? I realize they have to save the best stuff until they end since that's when the crime will be solved, but they could have leaked more of this stuff throughout the show and then only had them get the clue that linked it all together right at the end. Instead, it now seems that virtually all the clues they found in the preceding episodes were pointless.
-Episode 11 out of 13 is a complete departure from the overall mystery and is instead a character-development episode so we can get to know the main characters? In episode 11? Really?!?
-The whole season we're being asked to care about who killed this smart, promising, sweet young high school student. Then in episode 12 out of 13, we find out she was an underage hooker? And we're still supposed to care?
-The ridiculous stuff with Linden and her fiance and moving to Sonoma. We get it. She can't commit.
-Linden is a single mother who works 15 hour days, yet she has a 13 year-old son who she never sees or cares for, and she's somehow surprised when he shows signs of being troubled?
The integration of the Larsen family has been horrible. Mitch has done nothing but brood and be a ***** (understandable, but we don't need to see it), Stan is now in jail so there's not much point to showing him anymore. And now we find out that Aunt Terry, who was the only one holding the family together, is a hooker?
I really wanted to like this show, because I liked the idea of a single crime being solved over the course of several episodes, rather than the standard procedural where DNA results come back in 2 hours and the case is solved in 24 hours. But the creative team has really dropped the ball, to the point that I'll actually be surprised if AMC renews the show. Every single critic I've read feels the same way about what a mess this show is. Without a major overhaul in the creative department, and some way to get the word out to the viewing public that the change will make the show better, I don't see many people coming back for S2.
I didn't get the sense that the Beau Soleil girls hung out at a local brothel waiting for tricks. It was purely an internet thing, where they advertise themselves (without facial photos or real names) and the johns contact the girls directly. So it's no surprise that Terry and Rosie could both be participating without Terry knowing about Rosie.
And Rosie borrowed her aunt's ID to open a bank account. It's not surprising Terry didn't know about the account or the money if Rosie set it up without Terry's knowledge. Maybe not the brightest move by Rosie, but after all, this is a girl who decided to become a hooker at age 17, so her decision-making process is already suspect.
Flunked out of charm school, didn't you?
You're only noticing this now?
...with flying colors....
Right. I understand how they might not know about each other, but it just seems like a crazy coincidence. I mean, being a high-priced internet call girl in Seattle probably isn't all that common. For two women in the same family to be independently involved is bizarre. And the whole bank account thing was just a lazy way to bring it back to the aunt so that we could get the info we needed. And....who needs to be 18 to open a bank account? I could swear I got a checking account when I was 16.
News just broke that The Killing was renewed for a second season. It will be interesting to see what changes (if any) are made and whether the ratings take a nose dive.
Edit: And it's been confirmed that Veena Sud is returning as showrunner. No word on whether they're making her replace any writers.
Here's the official word....
I would guess that there will be some re-tooling to accommodate the short attention span of most U.S. teevee viewers...present company, of couse, excluded....
I don't think the criticism of the show has to do with short attention spans. I think it has to do with ridiculous plotting. I'm totally fine with them taking 13 episodes to solve a single crime. In fact, that's what drew me to the show. But the way it's played out has been very poorly done.
I was skimming thru the comment thread on TVLine, trying to get a feel for how people felt about this renewal*, and it's 50-50. Which, if you think about it, is not good. Since people who have -zero- interest in a show typically aren't following it online, the fact that half the commenters are so negative on its renewal can't bode well.
Unless I hear some compelling reason(s) to come back during the off-season, next week will complete this series for me.
And my attention span is not that sh..., so what did y'all think about the Tony's last night?
* Yes, I realize there's more science in astrology than what I did. Sue me.