lewis-51
Iscritto in data ott 2004
Ti diamo il benvenuto nel nuovo profilo
I nostri aggiornamenti sono ancora in fase di sviluppo. Sebbene la versione precedente del profilo non sia più accessibile, stiamo lavorando attivamente ai miglioramenti e alcune delle funzionalità mancanti torneranno presto! Non perderti il loro ritorno. Nel frattempo, l’analisi delle valutazioni è ancora disponibile sulle nostre app iOS e Android, che si trovano nella pagina del profilo. Per visualizzare la tua distribuzione delle valutazioni per anno e genere, fai riferimento alla nostra nuova Guida di aiuto.
Distintivi4
Per sapere come ottenere i badge, vai a pagina di aiuto per i badge.
Valutazioni799
Valutazione di lewis-51
Recensioni76
Valutazione di lewis-51
I like this series, and I like this episode. It's well done, as usual. Good acting, good plot, very good cinematography. I like the lead detective and the second-in-command. She is much better than the second-in-command in the first series. There are fun little flourishes of characterization.
That's all great, but there are two main problems. The first is an unnecessary side-plot with Ashley, the medical officer. I understand they want to give the characters depth, but this was just too unlikely. Secondly, a big part of the plot hinges on a speech the victim is about to give. In real life, he would not have given such a speech. Not even close.
That's all great, but there are two main problems. The first is an unnecessary side-plot with Ashley, the medical officer. I understand they want to give the characters depth, but this was just too unlikely. Secondly, a big part of the plot hinges on a speech the victim is about to give. In real life, he would not have given such a speech. Not even close.
I love the first seven seasons of Shetland. Jimmy Perez and company are a great set of characters. The plots, inspired by the books of Ann Cleeves, are excellent.
Unfortunately the new characters staring with season eight are not as compelling. Season eight was pretty good, but this season, nine, is not. It's confusing and manipulative.
I wouldn't think of giving away any spoilers, so I won't. It's tempting. Suffice it to say there are many intriguing subplots and threads. Some are well developed and plausible, the best being the thread with Annie Betts as mathematician. As we approached the final episode, we were struggling to remember all the characters. The final episode is a huge let-down.
It's not the acting or the production values. It's the silly threads, most of which are left hanging like an old worn macrame. Really, this series is not worth your while.
Unfortunately the new characters staring with season eight are not as compelling. Season eight was pretty good, but this season, nine, is not. It's confusing and manipulative.
I wouldn't think of giving away any spoilers, so I won't. It's tempting. Suffice it to say there are many intriguing subplots and threads. Some are well developed and plausible, the best being the thread with Annie Betts as mathematician. As we approached the final episode, we were struggling to remember all the characters. The final episode is a huge let-down.
It's not the acting or the production values. It's the silly threads, most of which are left hanging like an old worn macrame. Really, this series is not worth your while.
A nice mystery with an unexpected ending (but aren't they always?). Good acting, good direction, lovely scenes, and classic English small-town setting.
The plot involves three women, ages around 40 - 65, who become involved as amateur sleuths in a series of murders. The leader is Judith, a retired archaeologist who lives in a classic old mansion bequeathed to her by her great aunt. The other two are a vicar's wife and a dog walker.
The police officer in charge of the investigation is also a women, due to a recent retirement or similar change of personnel (frankly I forget exactly). That opens up the well-used plot twist of the new "guy" trying to prove herself. It also makes it slightly more probable that the police would actively enlist the services of the three amateurs. Slightly. But in real life? It's not going to happen. This is one weakness of the plot.
Another is the basic improbability of it all. I won't go into any more detail, as I don't want to reveal any spoilers.
The other big weakness is the heavy-handed "women in charge" aspect. It becomes almost a political tract.
Too bad. The basic idea could have been handled a lot better with these good actors and lovely sets.
The plot involves three women, ages around 40 - 65, who become involved as amateur sleuths in a series of murders. The leader is Judith, a retired archaeologist who lives in a classic old mansion bequeathed to her by her great aunt. The other two are a vicar's wife and a dog walker.
The police officer in charge of the investigation is also a women, due to a recent retirement or similar change of personnel (frankly I forget exactly). That opens up the well-used plot twist of the new "guy" trying to prove herself. It also makes it slightly more probable that the police would actively enlist the services of the three amateurs. Slightly. But in real life? It's not going to happen. This is one weakness of the plot.
Another is the basic improbability of it all. I won't go into any more detail, as I don't want to reveal any spoilers.
The other big weakness is the heavy-handed "women in charge" aspect. It becomes almost a political tract.
Too bad. The basic idea could have been handled a lot better with these good actors and lovely sets.
Sondaggi effettuati di recente
2 sondaggi totali effettuati