Pretty good episode overall, obviously a take-off on the Tonya Harding Nancy Kerrigan debacle. My understanding of the story line is that Julie and Debbie are rivals, but Debbie is better so Julie pays a guy to attack her and make it appear that Debbie was behind the attack. I guess she figures she will get the endorsements even if she doesn't win because the other girl looks bad. Dr Sloan discovers that she has an old injury that no one knows about that keeps her from doing a triple axel which is why she can't win. So all of this makes sense, but when we get to the end, suddenly we find out she CAN do the triple axel, because she reversed it to land on her other leg (which is how Mark figures out she is the murderer); so that means, being the only woman who can do it, she WILL win. This is where I get confused. If she can do this move that no one else can, she's sure to win; so what was the point of the whole fake attack in the first place? I must have missed something somewhere.
2 Reviews
Very subtle themes in Murder with a Triple Twi$t
safenoe17 February 2020
Some Diagnosis Murder episodes are straight forward in their plot (but still entertaining). Here, yes there's a murder of course, but the motives are not what they originally seem. In some ways the murderer's motives are an indictment on the need for fame and endorsements and having your face on a cereal box rather than being on the top of the podium. This episode is (yes you guessed it) based on the Tonya Harding-Nancy Kerrigan saga, but all credit to the writer Robin Madden for exploring notions of success on the ice rink.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews