MovieChat Forums > Broadchurch (2013) Discussion > Finished Season 1, A Question about Seas...

Finished Season 1, A Question about Season 2

posted 8 years ago by TooDrunkToWalk
6 replies | jump to latest

I finished season 1 and I would rate Broadchurch as a great drama, series rather than a great mystery series.

I really liked the overall feel to the show, the acting, the direction, the camerawork, its all just top class.

With mysteries like this there is often a take it or leave it element to the 'whodunnit' aspect, and personally for me it was a let down. It seemed they all sat around and said okay guys who really is the least likely guy, and once we settle on him, we will pin a reason for him to have done it.

It is often the reason part that is the key. Often in great mysteries, when the killer is revealed, there are two elements to is - 1) Usually not the first person you would think of, 2) it could really have been no one else, once everything comes to light. That is to say, while no doubt another person could have done it, the person who is revealed to have done it, is the best fit.

With Broadchurch, in conclusion it never felt like it was the most natural choice. Almost any of the suspects could have done it. I as not greatly pleased about the motive either. It seemed a case of okay 'X' is the least likely guy, now lets find a reason for him to have done so. With so many things going on, perhaps another person, with another better motive would have made for a better reveal.

However this issue apart, season 1 was just top notch.

So now the reason why I did this post, I have read up on season 2 a little bit, and it seems to be a continuation of season 1. Now the question I want to ask is, does this season 2, naturally flow from season 1, or does it feel like Broadchurch was meant to be a one season show, but then for season 2, they opted to sort of attach it to season 1, as we already care for the characters. Does the sequel seem forced?

Secondly is it still the same show. Season 1 was a detectove work, but does season 2 take the detective element away and become a courtroom drama. If it does, then is it a better show for it?

Thx

 

 

[–] lrichterusvi 8 years ago

I was afraid of the same thing. It flowed really well into a new chapter of the old story but also weaves in a totally different story line that we've never heard of before but involves some of the same characters.
I was pleasantly surprised. I really enjoyed season 2.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] yogibear-3 8 years ago

Broadchurch was originally envisioned (like, when Chris Chibnall came up with the idea, years earlier) as being a trilogy, a single story told over three series.

The second season covers the trial which is the logical next step once a murderer is arrested. Plus there's a new mystery involving new characters.

[–] jalola298 8 years ago

What was wonderful in series 2 for me was the discovery that there were clues in series 1 left for uncovering in series 2. Some viewers felt that was Chibnall reinterpreting things in series 1, but I felt they were deliberately put there in a way that we didn't notice them until they came up as a problem in series 2. I have a strong feeling there are similar things planted in series 1 & 2 that will come up important in series 3.

As each nugget was revealed in series 2, I was compelled to go back and re-watch the relevant parts in series 1. I ended up rewatching the whole of series 1 a couple of times. How brilliant is that -- to get viewers to rewatch a previous series for clues in the next one.

Now maybe this intricate laying of hidden clues along the way took away from some of the suspense or believability, but it is fictional TV. I enjoyed it immensely.

[–] There_Is_No_Sayid 8 years ago

Does season two flow naturally or does it feel like Broadchurch was a one season show which got an extension. The answer is a bit of both. Season two has two main plotlines. One is dealing with the trial of Joe Miller and the fallout from that. The other plotline is them looking back into the Sandbrook investigation which gets mentioned several times as driving Alec to Broadchurch.

But both of these feel a bit like they were made up to justify a second season. We didn't need to see Joe's trial and it doesn't work very well as a plotline.

[–] DendelionBlu 8 years ago

It flows naturally and stays true to the characters

It's good

It isn't nearly as breathtaking as season 1

And does become a bit bland at times and exaggerated in the court room

There's a new detective story and I bought into the a lot

The courtroom drama is second rate though and that's difficult to let slide

The characters are all there though and they don't miss a beat, especially Hardy and Miller

So I actually really enjoyed it