Broadchurch - S01E04.

Last week Broadchurch really got it right, the week before that, not so much. Time will tell what this week brings!


Right off the bat I will say that episode four of Broadchurch is by far the best episode of the series so far, I thoroughly enjoyed it. It's just a beautifully crafted piece of drama, it's chock full of twists, turns and mood changes and each one is seamlessly blended and crafted to have the most amount of punch in that current moment of time. This is probably the first time I've watched something that seemed to genuinely benefit from having less focus.

My favourite scenes were probably the wonderful dialogue exchange where Miller and Paul (the reverend) laugh about the former IT teacher and Hardy immediately follows this up with 'Where were you on the night of Danny's death (this particular word is practically spat)?' - neither Miller nor Paul or even I had stopped laughing at their silly little exchange before that question was hurtled at me at 200mph and I think it was because of those laughs that I momentarily forgot they were interviewing a possible suspect and the reminder of all of that had a profound emotional effect. Plus it leads into another wonderful scene that is chronicling Miller's evolution.

The other was Hardy round for dinner. This scene in general was a stroke of genius in terms of storytelling. My patience was wearing thin with our central duo, for all of Miller's growth, their actual relationship didn't seem to be changing at all but the dinner allowed both the characters and their relationship to feel oddly familiar but strikingly different. It was wonderfully written and acted too with sharp but controlled mood changes from laugh out loud funny to hide behind the pillow intense.

Perhaps more importantly that scene also raised an uncomfortable question. Steve warned us that Danny's killer was someone close and with that claim hanging over our heads, it made me think a lot about why exactly they bothered to give Hardy and Joe a quiet moment together. Miller's husband is someone close and although this show generally avoids the obvious, Miller and Joe are practically perfect and when do we see a woman who is able to balance both a career and a home life on TV, ever?

Sadly that isn't to say it's all good, however. Surprise surprise the creepy old newsagent who runs the Sea Brigade turns out to be a convicted paedophile and our prime suspect by the end. I know, be shocked! Since he's revealed as a key suspect at the end of the half way point episode it would certainly suggest he's going to have a whole lot more to do with this than Mark turned out to but he obviously didn't do it.

Whatever Jack's ultimate involvement in it all turns out to be, I hope they do something slightly more interesting with it than they did this week. So far one of the shows greatest strengths is to give a stretched definition of realism around a story that would seemingly demand sensationalism but turning Jack into a convicted paedophile just seems way too obvious. I hope his cries that it isn't how it seems play a larger role later in the series and this isn't as straightforward as it is now otherwise I'll be pretty disappointed in the show for the cheap shot.

Then again another key character, Susan (or whatever her real name may be), is just as laughable as Jack is. Susan is so ridiculously evil and so heavy handedly mysterious she seems more like a pantomime villain than an actual human being. It was silly in the first episode but now we're four episodes in and she's still just bizarrely stood around being as scary as possible. I know her line “I know men who would rape you” was meant to be threatening but it's just so ridiculous and over the top I burst out laughing. She stands out so much, in a sea of such well written, human characters, I can't help but wonder if this was done very deliberately for some reason to be revealed later. Honestly if it wasn't for the skateboard reveal so early on, my money would be on her.

Perhaps even stranger still is the shows tendency to lean into the supernatural without overtly specifying it as such. Despite Steve being debunked in the very same episode even with his oddly specific 'message' to Hardy in the first episode, later the town all goes to church, even the non-religious folks and no one can explain why. It was...odd to say the least and didn't really add to anything other than to shine even more of the spotlight on our, too well recognised an actor to not play a big part in this, insomniac hip vicar.

Perhaps a bigger problem is this episode introduced a lot of new things in very small scenes and as I try to avoid just doing a straight recap of the episode, I only mention things I feel I have something to say about. However I feel at the same time that I might lose my audience as seemingly throwaway sequences come centre stage episodes later. For example what was with Nige hiding his crossbow? And his ridiculous confrontation with Susan in the alleyway? No fucking idea but at least you can't say I ain't mentioned it!

It's bloody impressive when you lose the ability to tell the difference between bad writing and a deliberate trick on the audience - or maybe this is just mastery of hack writing. Whatever it is, Broadchurch is bloody enjoyable telly, despite being about a murdered little boy. This was the best episode so far, providing television at a level of quality that is rare but utterly rewarding if you come across it.

Pros;

• Dramatic shifts in tone really do work for great effect when you know what you are doing.
• I love the characters, well minus Susan.
• I've never really been one to indulge myself in pet theories for shows like this but it's just set up so wonderfully here. 

Cons;

• The creepy old guy is a paedophile what a surprise!
• If Susan isn't written and directed like she is on purpose, then she is by far the weakest character on the show.
• So why'd everyone go to the church?

Think About It!

-Locke

What would you rate, 'Episode Four'?