Thirteen

Thirteen. That's the point. It was Ivy's age when she was abducted. It was how long she was in captivity. The world stopped for Ivy that day. For thirteen years after that she lived in an alternate universe. And yet, no one, with the possible exception of her sister, is willing to consciously acknowledge that fact. Ivy didn't grow up, at least not in anything that would make her a true 26 year old woman in anything except her physical body. And yet, the police, her family, Tim, and Eloise, seem to expect her to respond as a twenty-something woman. It is clear to the viewer that this person is still a child in many ways, but apparently not to the police. It is also important to remember that Ivy will never completely return to the "normal" universe the rest of us live in.

What was it like for her? We actually learn very little about her life as a captive. It appears she spent a great deal of time in the dungeon, probably in the dark. She said she didn't have any measure of the passage of time. I don't think that was a lie. At least it was true for the first year or more. What is that like? Can we know? Could her family? Could the police? It is interesting that there is a huge elephant in the room - there is almost no allusion to what must have happened to a girl held helpless captive by a man. (She did admit to her mom that she has had sex, but even that is a casual, almost second-hand statement and almost irrelevant.) That puts this physiological thriller in an unusual category. While sex must have been an overwhelming factor, this horror story does not focus on sex. There are a few references to physical abuse, but they are almost obligatory and for most of the series not central to the story.

So many reviewers have slammed the police. At times, I wanted to slam just about every character in the film. (By the way, some reviewers say they want to shake Ivy. Of course, you do. That's the point. She is not a normal woman.)

We learn early on that this case is unprecedented in British police experience. I guess that is supposed to justify the absolute stupidity of everything they do after that. One question that rises to the top in my mind. Why didn't you consult with the American FBI who has tons of experience with this kind of situation? I know the answer. You Brits will accept nothing from us Americans that might admit we know something you don't. But the fact remains that the whole paradigm followed by the police is wrong, and as a result it is cruel to Ivy. It is because they proceed assuming that they are dealing with a 26 year old woman. (It's funny they acknowledge Stockholm Syndrome but then they forget about it. They make absolutely no allowance for it. I guess that's "hanging a lantern on it" which put another way is how the writers dismiss the obvious and move on as if it is irrelevant.)

Yes, the police screwed up, repeatedly, but I don't think it was intentionally cruel or even devoid of compassion. They had a life and death problem, and they were out of their element dealing with it. When I read all the negative reviews, I almost expected to see them use a rubber hose on Ivy. After watching it, I see that each of them, even DS Merchant, was struggling with how to treat Ivy fairly and compassionately.

Elliot was a human being, but also a police officer. He had so many failings. He caused so much harm. But he tried and he did do some good.

Another complaint about the police was the way they kept making her relive her torture. Yet I think that this gave Ivy a chance to prove her courage as a contrast to her uncertainty and insecurity. It made Ivy so much more of a complex character. Yes, the police were still screw-ups, but doing this allowed a deeper look at so many things.

I wanted to hate this series and almost passed on it after reading the negative reviews. I think that most of those missed the point.

All of the previous discussion is one element that makes this series so compelling.

Meanwhile, virtually every other character shafted Ivy in his or her own way. How did that happen? Selfishness. The world also stopped for each of her family and friends on that day when she was thirteen. One difference is that it also restarted for each of them at some point, but in different ways and to different degrees. Ivy's life stopped. The life of each of the others restarted, and as a result, each had to deal with his or her own struggles when life reset thirteen years later when Ivy returned. This also makes this series compelling. The series presents interesting character studies of several different people and none of them are the same. None of them are cardboard characters.

This all requires some good acting on the part of many actors. It is surprising to see so many good performances with such difficult roles.

The story has some good twists and turns. At first I focused on Ivy's struggles with great sympathy, but like the detectives, even I began to see there was something important being held back. It is shocking when it is revealed, but the explanation makes a lot of sense.

The last episode changes completely. Intense is not even close to the word. And many of the things I have said earlier don't apply or apply differently about everything except the fact that the world stopped on that day when she was Thirteen. It will never be the same for anyone involved.

In summary, there was a great deal of excellence in this series and it gave us so much that one looks for in a thriller, if you can get past the role of the police.

A woman escapes from a house in Bristol. At first the police are skeptical of her story but it turns out that she is Ivy Moxam, who was kidnapped 13 years ago at the age of 13. Now begins the task of reuniting with her family and friends and restarting her life. Meanwhile, the police are trying to catch her kidnapper, Mark White, but questioning Ivy makes the details of her kidnapping and imprisonment murkier and more inconsistent. Moreover, it appears that Ivy wasn't always a totally involuntary prisoner. Then Mark White kidnaps another girl.

The plot to this series initially sounded similar to the movie Room, but this is different to Room in many ways. While Room concentrated on the mother and son and how they (especially the son) cope with life on the outside, Thirteen has more of a mystery drama feel to it. It does cover Ivy's having to adjust to life after 13 years of isolation, but it also covers to a very large extent the police's attempts to unravel what happened while she was imprisoned, their relationship with Ivy and their attempts at catching her kidnapper.

Very intriguing, the mystery/crime-drama side, with a few good twists and turns. Even at the outset you aren't sure that she really is who she says she is, and later we start to think she may have been more accomplice than victim. This creates a wonderful greyness to Ivy's innocence, and fuels the intrigue.

The human drama side is also done pretty well, though does feel a bit slow and clumsy at times. Reasonably emotional though.

Solid performances all round. Jodie Comer is OK as Ivy, though doesn't really shine. The best performances probably come from Richard Rankin and Valene Kane as DI Carne and DS Merchant respectively.

Great opening song - "In your dreams" by Dark Dark Dark.

Well worth watching.

Thirteen taps into the much overdone "I'm back after vanishing for an inexplicable period of time", mystery crime drama, sub genre.

All the obvious questions bubble to the surface yet again. Is Ivy Moxham, the abducted girl, who and what she claims to be? Does she have an ulterior motive or some other nefarious intent, lurking in the background for her relieved but confused family and friends? Will the two intrepid British detectives uncover some hidden, awful truth?

In other words, Thirteen is not really doing anything terribly original. You can pretty much predict the likely plot twists and turns. Naming the main character Ivy is a bit obvious, too. Ivy, a plant that twists and turns and smothers. Not hard to see where she might lead those who suddenly find her in their lives. Nowhere good, that much is obvious, without giving anything away.

Whilst all this may have you reaching for the remote, I can say, thankfully, this series is well cast, with excellent acting talent and intelligent narrative. These factors lift Thirteen above other drama's and films cast in a similar vein and dampen down, the dulling sense, of deja vu.

So what to do I think about Thirteen? Look, like most dramas out of the UK, with a few exceptions, its a quality production. As such, its inherently watchable. Just don't expect anything that has not been done before, in one way or another. Seven out of ten from me.

It had so much potential with such an intriguing premise, but unfortunately fell short.

The script was overworked and hindered with unnecessary subplots, ideas and characters which never properly served the central story, but rather diluted it. So many pieces introduced that were left unanswered or just didn't have enough payoff to justify its inclusion.

So much scope for an exhilarating and sophisticated mystery/thriller, but sadly it took an underwhelming and predictable path.

As I like both British and Scandinavian crime thrillers, I usually watch them by turns, largely relying on IMDb and Wikipedia assessments as life is too short for all of them anyway :) The one in question began to develop from the first moments - which I tend to prefer - and then, in following scenes, we obtained a versatile and realistic picture of both the life in captivity and the one of the rest of the abductee's family; due to certain subsequent events, the intrigue and misery continued, and both the police and the family had to deal with several shadows from the past and changes in the present. Well, the pace was sometimes uneven, particularly in the final episode, when about 3/4 was too slow and then last 1/4 seemed to round up the story in a certain rush. In my opinion, the total of almost 5 hours could be easily reduced by one-fifth or even one-fourth, without impairing the general concept, mood and course of events.

As for performances, the series is strongly dominated by the female lead - Ivy Moxam (Jodie Comer), who is present both visibly and in the minds of all people around her and dealing with her case. The rest were not too memorable, I recalled I had seen Stuart Graham a couple of times in some films and series, and that's it. Apparently the sketchiness of supporting characters did not enable the actors and actresses to "open out"; even the accused was not so special.

Thus, perhaps a 1-episode-too-long, but still a good suspense series by BBC, referring to Scandinavian Noir in many aspects. However, those fond of constant chases, shootings and obtrusive cops should probably find something else.