Change Your Image
stanhin1
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Suspects (2014)
Fly on the Wall Documentary Style
It is filmed as if a documentary cameraman were right there with them. A couple of times, that becomes explicit. For example, the detectives find a laptop computer in a home and recoil at the child pornography images on it, but as the camera looks at the laptop, the images are blurred out, as if they had been edited out of the documentary before we view it, and then a detective looks directly into the camera and shuts the door in the imaginary camera man's face to keep him from seeing more of what is going on in the room. In many (most) other shots the camera is very close to the characters, so close that you can only see their faces or only one character at a time. It is definitely different from the norm, and, so far, I like it.
Witness Number 3 (2022)
Is It Believable? Spoilers
I've only seen the first episode so far, and maybe there will be an explanation for this later on, but the lead character is the sole witness left who can identify an important criminal and she is clearly being harassed and intimidated to discourage her from testifying yet the police do not put her under full protection. Maybe it will turn out that all of the police are actually part of a cover up, but, unless that is the case, this is not credible. It will be hard for me to ignore that problem if it persists, but the story of the actual intimidation and the witness's indecision about whether to testify is engrossing.
Chylka (2018)
Plots Are Full of Holes
Apart from the fact that the female lead character is over the top, which many other reviewers have noted, the frustrating thing about what could be a very good series is the huge number of gaping plot holes and inconsistencies in the plots. Here is just one of many examples. In season 2, one of the lead partners at our heroine's legal firm and a crime boss go to great lengths to force her to tank her defense of an alleged murderer so that he will be put away forever. She, nevertheless, gets him off, and then it is revealed that he was actually guilty, partly by means of photos of him leaving jail in the happy embrace of the crime lord who wanted him convicted! Then, the same firm partner who had wanted her to tank the case fires her because she had let a murderer go free and therefore had spoiled the firm's reputation??? Like a defense firm is supposed to vigorously represent only innocent clients and let the guilty ones be convicted? In season 3, however, that same partner is shown to be friendly and in close cahoots with the murderer. I could go on and on and on. I'm continuing to watch as much for how many plot inconsistencies I can spot in each new episode as I am for the parts that are actually enjoyable. I will give the show one pat on the back. The female lead does a great job of playing a character that has become a full-fledged drunk at the beginning of season 3.
Accused: Guilty or Innocent?: Jealous Shooter or Innocent Fall Guy? (2022)
Hiding the Ball
The defense's theory to explain the defendant's fingerprints and DNA on the shell casing found at the crime scene was that the informants had gone to the defendant's hunting cabin, picked up a bullet that he had left lying on the ground there and transported it to the crime scene to frame him. Apart from the obvious problems with a timeline this would have created, the show never mentioned how the defense planned to explain that the murder weapon, which was clearly identified as such, and which was the defendant's and his dad's gun, was found at the defendant's/dad's hunting lodge. I think the series was just trying to create suspense that really wasn't there. With such compelling evidence against him, there really was no question that the defendant would either take the deal offered by the prosecution or be found guilty.
Craith (2018)
Season 3--Don't Worry About Spoilers
Two episodes into season 3 and there's no need to worry about spoilers from me because the series, so far, is needlessly obtuse. I realize it is a mystery, so it can't reveal everything at once, but we have several principal characters who just walk around in a daze, obviously with something bothering them, but without a single clue as to what it is, which gets tedious especially for this viewer. How many times per episode am I supposed to watch some character acting peculiar and being asked by his friends what is wrong without a hint of even a partial answer? I'll keep watching, but I hope they don't save every single answer until the final 10 minutes of the final episode. That would not be suspense--it would be complete boredom.
Forbrydelsen (2007)
Huge Plot Hole in Season 3--WARNING SPOILERS
In episode 3 (? I think it's 3), Lund is supposed to deliver ransom money alone. As she is riding one underground train (accompanied by a police friend in the same car but at a discreet distance), the kidnapper calls and gives her instructions to get off that train at the next stop and and immediately board another one that is leaving on an adjacent track. She does as she is told, but,just as the door opens for that second train, she notices her son standing with his very pregnant girlfriend down the way. She is very surprised and misses that second train. The kidnapper immediately calls her and gives her alternate instructions. She is to walk down the tracks just a bit and then climb out of the underground on a ladder. She does that, emerges from a manhole, and sees a masked man on the top of a nearby building with a hostage. He tells her that she should have come alone and then throws the hostage off the building. That scene was obviously planned and staged well in advance. So, how did the kidnapper know she would miss the second train? She had plenty of time but for being distracted by her son. Unless her son was in on this, it makes no sense, and, even if he were in on it, how could the kidnapper guarantee that she would be distracted long enough to miss the train?? Love the series, but it occasionally has big bloopers like this.