Avis des utilisateurs

The first mystery was based on real life events, this second one is totally fictional, Mr Whicher, now outside of The Police takes up a private case, that of a woman who's niece is found dead.

If I'm honest I preferred this to the first one, it's a very dark affair, but benefits massively from the presence of Olivia Colman, she is terrific here, adding some real star quality.

I like how the appearance of Whicher is explained, his character is clever and still respected, but slightly feared by The Police, Paddy Considine is excellent here.

It looks great, it's intriguing, it just works. 8/10.

I was looking for a shoot em up kind of movie tonight with a lot of action. Then something told me to click on this movie. Within the first 5-10 minutes or so I was like man, I should be watching an action movie. But I continued watching and man did I enjoy this movie. I loved the twists and turns and how the plot developed. I guess we are so forced fed by Hollywood and their action block busters that we forget that we don't need all that to make a good movie.

Watching Cosidine and Colman act together is truly a treat. But then I'm betting you know that already.

This is good and worth watching. But if you do, watch the four movies in order.

Paddy Considine returns as the broody, Mr Whicher. While the first story was based on factual events.

This one is entirely fictionalised. Mr Whicher has taken early retirement from the Metropolitan Police, somewhat under a cloud because of the Constance Kent fiasco. (The real Mr Whicher remained in the police and rose to the rank of assistant superintendent.)

Whicher comes to the aid of a country lady Susan Spencer (Olivia Colman) who has come to London to search for her missing 16 year old niece Mary. It turns out that Mary was murdered and she had just given birth to a baby.

It does not take long for Whicher to track down the baby who is in a home for fallen woman run by a priest.

Suspicion for the murder falls on the baby's father, a young man with a violent past. Susan Spencer's own past is entwined with the baby's father's family. Her father was murdered some years earlier.

Whicher comes into conflict with his former colleagues at the police as he carries out his own investigations. This includes probing the priest that runs the home for fallen women, but also a psychiatric institution who does not like Whicher poking his nose about.

There is a suspicion that Whicher is unhinged when he exhumes a body. A gambit that goes wrong. It leads to more squabbles with the police with only one officer who shows him some support.

The story is very much Whicher going about in his dogged way. Once again he tries to use science and deduction. Every which way he faces obstacles.

The denouement though gets very complicated. I felt it was rather unfathomable and difficult to take seriously.

They cant hold Detective Pork Chops down. He always gets his man and his mutton.

A bit of a strange one, this. It's a sequel to the ITV production of THE SUSPICIONS OF MR WHICHER: THE MURDER AT ROAD HILL HOUSE, which was in turn based on a book documenting a true-life murder case from the 19th century. THE MURDER IN ANGEL LANE has the same character this time investigating a fictional murder case in Victorian London. I suspect it was made to cash in on BBC1's successful RIPPER STREET, although this is a one-off drama.

The best thing about the production is Paddy Considine, who returns as Mr Whicher; older, wiser perhaps, and certainly more embittered. Considine gives a finely-judged and mature turn as Whicher, and he certainly holds the attention whenever he's on screen. It's a shame, then, that the rest of the story is so hackneyed and done-to-death.

The plot involves the murder of a young girl, seemingly robbed and killed on the street by a stranger. Inevitably, it transpires that the story runs much deeper than that, with all kinds of skeletons lurking in cupboards and mixed-up family secrets to complicate matters. It's passable fare, but there's nothing that hasn't been done before here, and better too.

The thing that most interested me was the cast; there are lots of half-familiar faces , and most of the actors give performances that are interesting at the very least. Ironically, the least interesting of the bunch is the most prominent, flavour-of-the-month Olivia Colman, who seems to give the same wide-eyed angsty turn in everything I've seen her in.

Still, with Considine steering the investigation it could be a lot worse, and it'll do as an adequate time-filler until RIPPER STREET comes back next year.