Just watched the first two of case 2 and it is even better than case 1.
Looking forward to episode 3 but it will have to wait as it is late and there is a referendum to watch.
Just watched the first two of case 2 and it is even better than case 1.
Looking forward to episode 3 but it will have to wait as it is late and there is a referendum to watch.
I didn't think there was an episode 3 for case 2? I thought it got resolved in episode 2.
I didn't think there was an episode 3 for case 2? I thought it got resolved in episode 2.
You are rootin' tootin' right!
Turned off to save the last bit of episode two as OH fell asleep as he often does when we watch TV in bed.
Went to watch it and episode three last night and shock horror, a good hour and a bit of TV turned into about 12 minutes. :D
Roll on July 7th!
I have only just seen that case 2 has been put on the Iplayer so I have downloaded both of them onto my tablet to watch in bed but!...... I want to watch all episodes back to back and am a little bit frustrated with the drip feeding!... if they are going to put it on there why not put all the episodes on in one go!.... I cant bear this waiting a week between each one on the tv, these sort of stories are too complex lately and you forget the intricacies of the story.......
This is one of my favourite shows. I love the bromance between the guys. It was weird seeing the lovely Geoff from Casualty being cast as a bad guy though !!!
I did think of the Candy brothers myself (hubby had never heard of them) as they are supposed to be quite ruthless. Also - the stealing of art from London parks was in the press a few years back.
The writing a bit lame not to say downright lazy There is now way the new phone of the dead lad would have been left by the cops on their first visit, while no cop would be so inept as to be bladdered before going on an all night obbo
The writing a bit lame not to say downright lazy There is now way the new phone of the dead lad would have been left by the cops on their first visit, while no cop would be so inept as to be bladdered before going on an all night obbo
Way to nitpick over nothing. They left the phone because the stupid cop thinks the death was an accident so there was no need to take his phone. He didn't get bladdered on purpose, he had one drink that he didn't know the strength of.
It's fun, and the central buddyship makes it all worthwhile, but it really is the biggest load of old toot, as Mr Sugar might say. Looking back to the first three-part story, as far as I could figure out it went like...
A UK pharma company tests a new drug in India, but rather than using freely available locals for thirty quid and a bed for the night, it opts to recruit travellers at £600 a pop.
One of these five testees (or, presumably, many hundreds - even a dodgy pharma company wouldn't consider a five person clinical trial to be even worth carrying out, much less definitive) has a funny turn, due to his enthusiasm for recreational drugs.
Years later, the company, realising that one or more of the other five might have been a witness to his funny turn, and let the cat out of the bag, thereby imperiling their cash cow (which presumably has by now been used by hundreds of thousands of people who have unaccountably failed to go psycho) decides that rather than print a warning saying 'DO NOT TAKE IF FULL OF ILLICIT SUBSTANCES' the best thing to do would be to recruit The Sinister Sisters, have all the other triallists murdered, and pin the blame on the chap who had a funny turn.
And then when it all unravels, everyone immediately admits everything, some of them get snuffed by The Sinister Sisters (last seen riding off into the sunset) and all the loose ends are wrapped up neatly in, ooh about an hour and a half.
The End.
I mean, it's still fun, but it really does test new limits in tv drama implausibility. If not incoherence.
Way to nitpick over nothing. They left the phone because the stupid cop thinks the death was an accident so there was no need to take his phone. He didn't get bladdered on purpose, he had one drink that he didn't know the strength of.
It said 95%, not nitro-glycerine. A schoolgirl might get that drunk on that much, but not a grown man. And as for the phone, it was clearly material and potentially crucial evidence in a case of a thus far unexplained death - there's no way even the stupidest cop wouldn't have grabbed it.
It said 95%, not nitro-glycerine. A schoolgirl might get that drunk on that much, but not a grown man. And as for the phone, it was clearly material and potentially crucial evidence in a case of a thus far unexplained death - there's no way even the stupidest cop wouldn't have grabbed it.
Only in a suspicious death would they take the phone as evidence, it was ruled accidental by the crap cop the second it was given to him. A grown man who doesn't drink much would though.
First thought was the BBC must fear it's a turkey if they put it on during the Euros. Really liked the first two parts of story 1. Conclusion of story 1 and first part of story 2, I'm back to the turkey theory.
It's fun, and the central buddyship makes it all worthwhile, but it really is the biggest load of old toot, as Mr Sugar might say. Looking back to the first three-part story, as far as I could figure out it went like...
A UK pharma company tests a new drug in India, but rather than using freely available locals for thirty quid and a bed for the night, it opts to recruit travellers at £600 a pop.
One of these five testees (or, presumably, many hundreds - even a dodgy pharma company wouldn't consider a five person clinical trial to be even worth carrying out, much less definitive) has a funny turn, due to his enthusiasm for recreational drugs.
Years later, the company, realising that one or more of the other five might have been a witness to his funny turn, and let the cat out of the bag, thereby imperiling their cash cow (which presumably has by now been used by hundreds of thousands of people who have unaccountably failed to go psycho) decides that rather than print a warning saying 'DO NOT TAKE IF FULL OF ILLICIT SUBSTANCES' the best thing to do would be to recruit The Sinister Sisters, have all the other triallists murdered, and pin the blame on the chap who had a funny turn.
And then when it all unravels, everyone immediately admits everything, some of them get snuffed by The Sinister Sisters (last seen riding off into the sunset) and all the loose ends are wrapped up neatly in, ooh about an hour and a half.
The End.
I mean, it's still fun, but it really does test new limits in tv drama implausibility. If not incoherence.
Most of your abjections are spot on, but you have one thing wrong.
It was not the company for whom the tests were done that was arranging the killings (which would have been absolutely the worst way to deal with any problem), it was their rival, the American company, who were doing it in the hope that the British company would get the blame and be 'brought down'.
I was recording the whole series to watch at some future time, but my Freeview PVR evidently didn't realise that it was on tonight instead of tomorrow and has not recorded it. Am I right in thinking there is no repeat showing? I haven't actually watched any of the episodes so the iPlayer isn't much use to me here.
This is so frustrating because there are elements that are quite good, I like the background political intrigue, I like the choice of crime subjects but the writing has to wriggle to get itself off the hook when it cooks up some ludicrous set piece and the way it's produced is somewhat annoying - it seems to be aimed at impatient and possibly deaf 12 year olds.
Comments
I hate CGI explosions and gunfire - just do it for "real" with models and pyro
Looking forward to episode 3 but it will have to wait as it is late and there is a referendum to watch.
Great fun, if absurdly unrealistic.
I think the chemistry between the two male leads is excellent.
I didn't think there was an episode 3 for case 2? I thought it got resolved in episode 2.
You are rootin' tootin' right!
Turned off to save the last bit of episode two as OH fell asleep as he often does when we watch TV in bed.
Went to watch it and episode three last night and shock horror, a good hour and a bit of TV turned into about 12 minutes.
Roll on July 7th!
I agree, the chemistry between them is really great. I caught up with the two eps of case 2 last night and it's even funnier than case 1!
I got that immediatly.
No, there isn't an episode 3 for case 2. At the end of ep 2 of case 2 you can see "next case" at the bottom of the screen.
I did think of the Candy brothers myself (hubby had never heard of them) as they are supposed to be quite ruthless. Also - the stealing of art from London parks was in the press a few years back.
Way to nitpick over nothing. They left the phone because the stupid cop thinks the death was an accident so there was no need to take his phone. He didn't get bladdered on purpose, he had one drink that he didn't know the strength of.
A UK pharma company tests a new drug in India, but rather than using freely available locals for thirty quid and a bed for the night, it opts to recruit travellers at £600 a pop.
One of these five testees (or, presumably, many hundreds - even a dodgy pharma company wouldn't consider a five person clinical trial to be even worth carrying out, much less definitive) has a funny turn, due to his enthusiasm for recreational drugs.
Years later, the company, realising that one or more of the other five might have been a witness to his funny turn, and let the cat out of the bag, thereby imperiling their cash cow (which presumably has by now been used by hundreds of thousands of people who have unaccountably failed to go psycho) decides that rather than print a warning saying 'DO NOT TAKE IF FULL OF ILLICIT SUBSTANCES' the best thing to do would be to recruit The Sinister Sisters, have all the other triallists murdered, and pin the blame on the chap who had a funny turn.
And then when it all unravels, everyone immediately admits everything, some of them get snuffed by The Sinister Sisters (last seen riding off into the sunset) and all the loose ends are wrapped up neatly in, ooh about an hour and a half.
The End.
I mean, it's still fun, but it really does test new limits in tv drama implausibility. If not incoherence.
It said 95%, not nitro-glycerine. A schoolgirl might get that drunk on that much, but not a grown man. And as for the phone, it was clearly material and potentially crucial evidence in a case of a thus far unexplained death - there's no way even the stupidest cop wouldn't have grabbed it.
Only in a suspicious death would they take the phone as evidence, it was ruled accidental by the crap cop the second it was given to him. A grown man who doesn't drink much would though.
Remember 9/11?
Two planes loaded with thousands of gallons of fuel fly into the twin towers and explode and are engulfed in a massive fire.
Within a couple of hours the Americans were claiming they'd found the passports of the perpetrators.
Most of your abjections are spot on, but you have one thing wrong.
It was not the company for whom the tests were done that was arranging the killings (which would have been absolutely the worst way to deal with any problem), it was their rival, the American company, who were doing it in the hope that the British company would get the blame and be 'brought down'.