Next Sunday, and then the last one is on a week after that. Why the second one was scheduled differently to the others I've no idea.
What the bloody hell?
I assumed it was 2 episodes next week, all 4 over 4 days would have been good.
Bet they loose a good few punters next week.
What's up with their schedulers, this can't have been cheap to make, then they bollox the scheduling.
What the bloody hell?
I assumed it was 2 episodes next week, all 4 over 4 days would have been good.
Bet they loose a good few punters next week.
What's up with their schedulers, this can't have been cheap to make, then they bollox the scheduling.
Given the narrative structure it would've been much better to have screened all the episodes over four consecutive evenings. I watched episodes 1 and 2 back-to-back on 4oD and it worked really well.
Oh right thanks, I just assumed it was going to be consecutive nights .
I did too. It's a strange setup. Maybe they thought it would lose too many viewers if they didn't move the first two close together, but it seems to me that could still happen anyway given the long wait for ep3.
I watched episode one and two tonight. Didn't enjoy it one little bit. Far too much flicking backwards and forwards, very confusing. Too many errors - how could the social worker get through police lines to go upstairs and see the dead mother?
Lack of emotion from the pub landlord when learning his family had been killed.
I'm not sure who we are supposed to be sympathising with. None of the characters are particularly likable, and I can't remember most of them.
i don't understand these people saying it's confusing. i think this is what happens when the country's fed crap like eastenders four times a week :-0
as for the way people are behaving. i assume it's shock..
the killer was still on the loose when shirley henderson turned up at the house, everyone was milling around, no one seemed to know what was going on, the police as much as anyone else.
everyone is being told to stay indoors - the guy whose family were killed is in the pub with a load of men all of them shocked by what has happened. drink + shock = people not behaving rationally. i imagine the husband feels like it's all a bad dream.
i don't understand these people saying it's confusing. i think this is what happens when the country's fed crap like eastenders four times a week :-0
as for the way people are behaving. i assume it's shock..
the killer was still on the loose when shirley henderson turned up at the house, everyone was milling around, no one seemed to know what was going on, the police as much as anyone else.
everyone is being told to stay indoors - the guy whose family were killed is in the pub with a load of men all of them shocked by what has happened. drink + shock = people not behaving rationally. i imagine the husband feels like it's all a bad dream.
Must be. I am genuinely amazed that people are finding this confusing.
Well I can't speak for others but I've never watched Eastenders in my life, nor any other soap. I usually love drama series like this, certainly loved Broadchurch, and way back State of Play with John Simm.
But I just don't like Southcliffe and don't like any of the characters, which is probably the main problem for me. We haven't had sufficient time to get to know or care about any of them because the narrative keeps jumping about.
Must be. I am genuinely amazed that people are finding this confusing.
I think these posts are very unfair. Just because some people are not finding it confusing to follow, it doesn't mean others aren't. Everyone understands and follows things at their own pace.
I think it is a little too close to home. Starting with a family member, driving around small local roads. A seaside town and rural location. A large plant in lock down. Killing someone in their car etc. Why 2nd November? The 2nd was the date of the West Cumbrian shootings.
My girlfriend's friend lost her brother because of Bird.
In the radio interview Tony Grissoni said that we would learn a lot more about the various characters in the last 2 episodes. I'll definitely be watching, I like a show that doesn't treat the viewers as if they've got an IQ of 100.
I think these posts are very unfair. Just because some people are not finding it confusing to follow, it doesn't mean others aren't. Everyone understands and follows things at their own pace.
Fair enough but it's not exactly Coriolanus. It's a post-watershed adult drama/thriller on Ch4 that has a slightly disjointed narrative. I don't think anything in it justifies the way people have been carrying on.
How much did I miss in the first episode, my recording started at the killer running along and going home to see his mum?
Nothing. A woman in her garden was shot at the very start but then we see him running along the path. Clearly the woman getting shot was a 'flash forward', in case you had problems understanding it
The other thing I am struggling with is the soundtrack - why all the 1980s music - I thought it was a period drama in the first episode. Didn't make sense to me.
I thought this was well observed. People like baldy man and his mates use music to relive their glory days and to bond.
Also gives the impression that the whole place is stuck - in the house, in the mud, in the past.
I just watched the two episodes back to back. Not sure what I make of it. I can appreciate the arty cinematography and staging, but I can't forgive the sound quality. At first I kept rewinding to work out what was said, but eventually gave up because it was disrupting the narrative (not that it would be easy to disrupt it any more than the editor did).
I don't mind timelines jumping around, but I found it quite annoying in this case. I really think it's one of those things you need to watch all in one go, or striped across successive nights. By next week I'll have forgotten some of the more subtle bits that will obviously be featured from another angle in the next episode.
So... good story, good cinematography, spoiled by extremely poor sound quality and slightly poor choice of editing.
It just feels like they lived and breathed it, sat and watched it as a whole to see how it felt etc.. forgetting that we see it mostly punctuated by adverts and then randomly on over the space of three weeks.
Listening to the director on the radio just confirmed this to me. His protestations about it not being about other mass shootings were pretty risible.
Nothing. A woman in her garden was shot at the very start but then we see him running along the path. Clearly the woman getting shot was a 'flash forward', in case you had problems understanding it
Hmm, winking smiley notwithstanding, some of your comments are a little patronising, Kapellmeister. Many of us have no problems following other examples of films/series with complex structures; Pulp Fiction, for example, uses exactly the same mix of non-linear narrative and multiple point of view as Southcliffe but was a breeze to follow. This isn't.
It's a matter of execution, then, rather then concept, and as I and others point out, the desaturated colour and muddied audio don't assist.
Great if you have no trouble and enjoy it, but try to understand others don't but it isn't a reflection on their intelligence/ability.
Comments
Oh that's disappointing. I'd hoped they would be shown much closer together.
What the bloody hell?
I assumed it was 2 episodes next week, all 4 over 4 days would have been good.
Bet they loose a good few punters next week.
What's up with their schedulers, this can't have been cheap to make, then they bollox the scheduling.
Oh right thanks, I just assumed it was going to be consecutive nights .
Given the narrative structure it would've been much better to have screened all the episodes over four consecutive evenings. I watched episodes 1 and 2 back-to-back on 4oD and it worked really well.
Lack of emotion from the pub landlord when learning his family had been killed.
I'm not sure who we are supposed to be sympathising with. None of the characters are particularly likable, and I can't remember most of them.
as for the way people are behaving. i assume it's shock..
the killer was still on the loose when shirley henderson turned up at the house, everyone was milling around, no one seemed to know what was going on, the police as much as anyone else.
everyone is being told to stay indoors - the guy whose family were killed is in the pub with a load of men all of them shocked by what has happened. drink + shock = people not behaving rationally. i imagine the husband feels like it's all a bad dream.
Must be. I am genuinely amazed that people are finding this confusing.
But I just don't like Southcliffe and don't like any of the characters, which is probably the main problem for me. We haven't had sufficient time to get to know or care about any of them because the narrative keeps jumping about.
I think these posts are very unfair. Just because some people are not finding it confusing to follow, it doesn't mean others aren't. Everyone understands and follows things at their own pace.
My girlfriend's friend lost her brother because of Bird.
Fair enough but it's not exactly Coriolanus. It's a post-watershed adult drama/thriller on Ch4 that has a slightly disjointed narrative. I don't think anything in it justifies the way people have been carrying on.
Nothing. A woman in her garden was shot at the very start but then we see him running along the path. Clearly the woman getting shot was a 'flash forward', in case you had problems understanding it
I thought this was well observed. People like baldy man and his mates use music to relive their glory days and to bond.
Also gives the impression that the whole place is stuck - in the house, in the mud, in the past.
Fantastic programme.
I don't mind timelines jumping around, but I found it quite annoying in this case. I really think it's one of those things you need to watch all in one go, or striped across successive nights. By next week I'll have forgotten some of the more subtle bits that will obviously be featured from another angle in the next episode.
So... good story, good cinematography, spoiled by extremely poor sound quality and slightly poor choice of editing.
I like how it's focusing on different stories from the village each episode. I'm enjoying it so far.
Listening to the director on the radio just confirmed this to me. His protestations about it not being about other mass shootings were pretty risible.
Hmm, winking smiley notwithstanding, some of your comments are a little patronising, Kapellmeister. Many of us have no problems following other examples of films/series with complex structures; Pulp Fiction, for example, uses exactly the same mix of non-linear narrative and multiple point of view as Southcliffe but was a breeze to follow. This isn't.
It's a matter of execution, then, rather then concept, and as I and others point out, the desaturated colour and muddied audio don't assist.
Great if you have no trouble and enjoy it, but try to understand others don't but it isn't a reflection on their intelligence/ability.
Same here. Slow. The time lapses are confusing. And the actors are mumbling so much i can't hear what they are saying.
Yes it is.