Perfect crime

This BBC mini-series was short on credibility but pretty long on tension and suspense, helped by convincing acting and pacey direction. David Tennent, who appears to be everywhere on TV at the moment, is a hot-shot young city barrister who gets a sadistic murderer off on a technicality, but who by snubbing him after the trial wreaks a terrible fate for his family. Although an eye-witness to the horrific crime perpetrated on his wife in their holiday cottage, Tennent finds himself the biter-bit as the perpetrator turns to his chief rival in the "Young Lawyer of The Year" stakes, Sophie Okinedo, who also appears to be everywhere on TV at the moment, as his defence solicitor, her character's detachment and ambition now ironically reflecting Tennent's own character earlier.

Like I said, the plot was unbelievable but once you cottoned onto this and surrendered to it as a sort of UK-based John Grisham entertainment, it was an engaging enough production. The acting helped to paper over the plot holes, Tennent as the high-flier brought to earth with a crash, Toby Kebbell as the clinical but devious psychopath Liam Foyle and Okinedo as Tennent's young legal rival, her ambition clouding her judgement in taking on the case of such a brutal killer.

Spread over three nights you could see the padding and as I indicated earlier the sensationalist story-line probably belonged more in a Stateside rather than London-based setting, over the top final confrontation and all.

I personally prefer my thriller dramas when they're a bit more grounded in reality but as escapist nonsense I suppose it just about justified three hours of my time.

Suspenseful, dark and frankly more than a bit creepy in paces. David Tennant is excellent in this. The (brilliantly cast) adversary is uncomfortable to watch,. If you took the facial features of Tim Curry, Stephen Mangan and Steve-o and removed the menacing parts from each and smooshed them all together, you would get an oddly attractive bad guy. This is him.

Definitely an implausible storyline and utterly far fetched, but then many compelling dramas have peculiar twists, and often events would never happen in reality. So I wouldn't consider this to be a valid criticism. The principal cast are talented and accomplished, and the acting is the strongest element. The final episode seems to cram into the plot too many crucial aspects of the story that weren't suggested or introduced in any way during the preceding episodes. This gave the impression that the story was somewhat rushed towards the end. Setting out the storyline in greater depth earlier in the series would have allowed the whole thing to make more sense. However that would probably have required an additional episode, which presumably the producers wished to avoid.

This is one of the finest televised dramas I have ever seen. I was watching it on the TV channel that brings us wonderful British shows, Part 1, knowing that Part 2 would be aired the next week. About and hour into the telecast, the TV went dark and I looked about and there were no lights anywhere. We were undergoing a power outage. Determined to see the entire production, I ordered the DVD which I then did as gifts for film aficionados. I had no prior introduction to the work of David Tennant but was so impressed. Learning of his amazing career is a pleasure. He admires Derek Jacobi, an actor long admired in the States beginning with "I, Claudius." I was privileged to have drinks with Sir Derek in Stratford in the autumn of 1982 following his stellar performance in "The Tempest." He continues turning out marvelous performances.

As others have pointed out, there are irritating problems with logic throughout the story. But I found the show clearly worth viewing - because the dialog was great, the premise was a good one, the acting and directing were outstanding, I cared about the characters, and the ending was satisfying.

The writing of a screenplay has a number of important components, and not every good writer is a master of all. David Wolstencroft was the author, and his dialog is very good, his character development excellent, the basic scenario good, his plot creativity good, his resolution of the story rather brilliant. His one fault, as I see it - and it's a big one for me - is believability. In order to advance his story, he resorts to plot twists that defy logic, and characters who act stupidly and have emotions that don't fit - and he does it over and over. A serious failing. I've often thought that every screenplay that wants to be considered as serious art should go through a logic evaluation process before screening.

Still, it was a riveting series, and I couldn't wait to see how it would turn out. I worried about some of the characters, the villain was memorable, and I loved the ending; it was so clever that a little implausibility there didn't ruin it for me.