Acceptable Risk

This is one of those programmes that seems to have been written for people who think of it as a high-gloss, clever drama. But, sadly, it isn't.

What a shame. The usual predictable plot: a bad thing happens to the new husband of a nice woman, and she is left finding out more and more about the truth re his life. All the while she is struggling to be a good mum to her 2 children. The peace of her life is ruined. We have seen this type of story a thousand times before . . . !

Layer upon layer of her husband's true circumstances are revealed . . . So it should have been interesting as a drama. But instead there are too many incredible plot points.

The main character has an old job that her previous employers beseech her to return to. This is ludicrous, as no boss has ever done so in quite such a self-humiliating way. She is clearly meant to have a high-level demanding job, but somehow we don't see her as the executive type. It all seems made-up. The character is unlikely; rather like Nancy Drew, thinking she can solve the crime when the cops can't. Teenagers believe in Nancy Drew - but then they're teenagers, so that's to be expected! So maybe younger people who watch this series will believe this near-on tosh. As for adult viewers, I'd have expected grown-ups to be told a tale about a more believable character. So why do the producers think their adult audience will believe in our protagonist, when she is created so cartoonishly?!

Overall, it looks as if the producers decided that if they pop a female character in shiny, sexy, mega-heeled red shoes - and add a trouser suit - then she will come across as a clever executive . . . But this is not the case! If instead they had created her character as a woman working in an average job, I'd have had more respect for the drama. Then the story would have felt more realistic, rather than just an excuse for a dress-up.

The woman seems to have gone through a marriage ceremony without having found out anything about her intended. She hadn't even asked him where his relatives are, and which of them will be turning up for the wedding day. As she'd only recently lost her husband to a fatal accident, this quick marriage is also unbelievable. To have 'snaffled' husband #2 so quickly, with two young children in play . . . ! She also has seen no photos of his past. That a woman could do that, with vulnerable kids to protect? And - as we are told that she is a lawyer - would a woman of her executive status, achievement and intelligence really make such a risky move?! Daft indeed!! In fact, IMO this is just one example of the series being purposely designed to make some viewers feel superior - superior to a character who could make such foolish decisions. Again, tailoring the drama series to a particular type of audience. This restricts its target viewership.

Other hackneyed plot features also get dragged into usage - like the sister who is her only support, but rather conveniently (for our heroine to look the better of the two) is less successful in a steady career, plus is divorced with a conman for an ex-husband. A nice line in sisterly competition then reared its predestined head. Very soap'ish.

Plus the old tropes: Was her obsequious old boss the evil killer? Is the head of the police department part of the deception? Why had her hubby the business sales director secretly carried a gun? Was her sister also secretly involved in some way? And had her previous husband also been murdered as part of the same cover-up?

Not to mention overdoing the dramatic ploys. Just when we think we have seen every type of conspiracy possible, there is another introduced. The Americans (CIA), the Canadians, the garda, local Irish politicians, ex-policemen, big pharmaceutical company businessmen . . . Is NO ONE free of suspicion, the world over?! Do me a favour! TV banality, indeed. At times verging upon predictable trash.

Plus the pace of the story in this TV programme is - as is the case with many badly constructed TV dramas - too slow. Dear, oh dear . . . By the second episode I was already frustrated by the overall dallying of the plot. That's not good, considering there were still 4 episodes to sit through.

I all too often find the output of recent TV miniseries dramas dull and predictable - as if made on a shoestring budget and as if expected to be put straight to video. The style of these programmes is frequently clichéd and lazily formed; almost made to a bad TV movie standard.

So I began to wonder, when watching this particular series, if maybe I'd had little expectation of quality. Meaning I had set the bar too low, and so I saw what I feared I might? Thus a self-fulfilling prophecy, perhaps? But no, I then realised, as I have seen the lead actress, Elaine Cassidy, play several well-created parts in excellent dramas, I WAS expecting an average - or even better than average - TV drama. Sadly, I saw instead a finished product that was just a plain old let-down.

It is not all bad - it doesn't have a bad storyline, for example - but I don't like all the unbelievable parts. They seem unnecessary, a case of repeated deus ex machina. These plot strategies make the story both stupidly simplified and at the same time annoyingly elongated. Surely audiences don't need pandering to the lowest denominator, that much?!

It wasn't the worst ever TV miniseries I have seen, but it wasn't good enough to have spent 5 hours of my life watching. And it took me over 3 months to plough through all 6 episodes of the drama: I found it so unlikeable, I kept putting it off.

So this WAS one of those predictably mediocre outpourings. And a disappointment.

Disclaimer - I only watched 2 episodes. Then I bailed.

Lots of little things add up to a poor series. Some bad acting (Canadian Detective, 2nd husband), obvious villain's (Pharma head), and some low budget constraints perhaps (both Canadian and Irish detectives working solo without partners). Elaine Cassidy knows literally nothing personal about her husband, and he was just murdered and she shows almost no grief (I know- she was just holding it in).

I'm a stickler for good research and continuity. I got off to a bad start with the scenes in Ireland being in early fall and the ones in Montreal (supposedly happening at the same time) being in freezing cold February. When production errors like that happen, it's distracting and I find I simply can't get fully absorbed into the plot.

And could they not find a francophone actor to play the Montreal police Detective Dusquene? Instead, they chose Alberta-born Geordie Johnson, who I'm sure, could at least have uttered a few words of French now and then to give him some credibility.

At best, the acting is OK, but maybe I was spoiled from just finishing the amazing Night Sky, with Sissy Spacek and J. K. Simmons.

I made it to the end, which is something. But without the above glaring issues, I would have rated it much higher.

I do not regret the decision to spend the time of the six episodes in the company of the Irish mini-series 'Acceptable Risk' (2017) written by Ron Hutchinson and directed by Kenneth Glenaan and hristian Langlois. One of the reasons is that the story takes place in Dublin, a city I love and whose combination of traditional architecture with the futuristic atmosphere facilitated by the Irish high-tech explosion of the last few decades seems to me very suitable as a background for a crime thriller that takes place in the world of big and dangerous business (specifically that of the pharmaceutical industry) with reverberations in politics. My expectations were not disappointed. Without being a masterpiece or excelling in originality or violence, 'Acceptable Risk' has a complex and interesting plot and proposes a gallery of characters (almost all women) that we start to care about as the action progresses.

The first of the six series begins with the description of a murder in Montreal. As spectators we see as much as we are allowed, so that the atmosphere of 'whodunit' is created from the beginning. The victim is a marketing director of a concern based in Ireland. His wife, Sarah Manning, with whom he had spoken on the phone minutes before the murder, will become the main character of the story. Before long, Sarah will discover that she knows very little about the man she has lived with for many years. Tim Manning had been a CIA agent, and his assignments within the pharmaceutical concern included suspicious and dangerous contacts with politicians and influential people around the planet. Sarah, herself a lawyer and former employee of the firm, will be helped by an honest policewoman who is ready to risk her career to find out the truth, and by her sister, a woman who also hides some secrets in her biography and who entertains a very different lifestyle from the one of the recent widow left with two children to care for In a short time, the three women will realize that between them and the truth are not only the interests of the big pharma company, but also Irish political pressure, FBI and Canadian police investigations, and the activities of the American and German secret services. The story takes place in Dublin, but the implications are international.

The story is well written, the tempo is alert, something interesting and often unexpected is constantly happening. We can criticize the narrative by claiming that the sequence of events seems a little too complicated and that too many of the characters disappear to violent deaths before we have been given enough time to get to know them. This is offset by the excellent characterization of the main characters and the way their relationships unfold and progress with the investigation. Irish actress Elaine Cassidy holds the title role. I was not very excited by her performance, it seemed to me that in some places she was repeating herself and in others she was exaggerating the drama. Angeline Ball, on the other hand, creates the character of an intelligent and empathetic detective, and I would not be sorry at all if she became the heroine of a series that extends over several seasons. I also thought that Lisa Dwyer Hogg was very good, in the role of the sister who will prove to be more than just a member of the family. This triplet of characters confronting the political, police and espionage systems of multiple governments in their quest to learn the truth infuses a strong and authentic feminist message to the action. Danish actor Morten Suurballe plays the interesting role of the head of the pharmaceutical concern. We suspect from the beginning a villain behind his imposing and charismatic figure, and perhaps if the writers had provided more details about his biography and motivations, the story would have been even more complex and interesting. The finale solves the mystery of the crime and somewhat does justice, but some things will have to remain forgotten, and the world looks like it will continue with the same tricks of corruption. 'Acceptable Risk' is one of the good thriller series I've seen lately and I recommend it.

"Acceptable Risk" is the Irish version of the Welsh drama "Keeping Faith". The similar plots only differ in the fine details. Both are well worth watching with strong female leads and some good supporting actors. Both have a loving wife and mother discovering secrets about their absent husband.

The intriguing mystery is cleverly built up as evidence is gradually uncovered. Both then come to rather a brief conclusion. Tidying up all the loose ends in a rather simplistic fashion. "Acceptable Risk" probably has the edge in the quality of the production and the credibility of the characters.

Both are fast paced though this is more evenly sustained in "Acceptable Risk." The constraints of this pacing caused me to knock off a couple of points as, sometimes the plot was whisked along at the expense of subtlety.