|
||||||||
Jonathan Creek |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#126 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Buckingham
Posts: 28,537
|
Perhaps the stalker saw the new address and thought it was way too far to walk carrying that big heavy knife?
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#127 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 4
|
I quite enjoyed it.
One thing with the stripy unicorn plot I found a bit amiss was how did they know exactly where her drink would be on the side table when the ball of poison fell into it? I thought the solution to that one would have been the old poison on the book pages so when she licked her finger to turn the page it killed her. Much more realistic
|
|
|
|
|
|
#128 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,151
|
First time I've ever watched.
Most certainly the last! |
|
|
|
|
|
#129 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Surrey
Posts: 3,310
|
Quote:
First time I've ever watched.
Most certainly the last! |
|
|
|
|
#130 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 4
|
Quote:
Yeah I wouldn't recommend starting here as the show is very different to how it used to be. I wouldn't think it's not worth watching based on this - the early series was great and might still be on YouTube.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#131 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 650
|
Quote:
I quite enjoyed it.
One thing with the stripy unicorn plot I found a bit amiss was how did they know exactly where her drink would be on the side table when the ball of poison fell into it? I thought the solution to that one would have been the old poison on the book pages so when she licked her finger to turn the page it killed her. Much more realistic ![]() I thought they were two different people. The idea of a pill rolling along a shelf into a glass of water - a cool idea. Not that far fetched, I guess. Obviously the timing of the roll would be a bit hard to predict or guarantee. |
|
|
|
|
|
#132 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Honiton, Devon
Posts: 1,930
|
Quote:
I quite enjoyed it.
One thing with the stripy unicorn plot I found a bit amiss was how did they know exactly where her drink would be on the side table when the ball of poison fell into it? |
|
|
|
|
|
#133 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Folkestone
Posts: 10,537
|
Quote:
I often lay awake for weeks after a JC episode, ripping the plot to shreds, but this (BiB) did occur to me this morning. If the guy installing the cameras was Stephen's brother in law, how did Stephen not recognise him? Or had he never met him?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#134 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Honiton, Devon
Posts: 1,930
|
Quote:
Among the other glaring plot holes already mentioned, why on earth did the man wanting to kill JC hide inside the magician's box (which none of the removal men noticed, of course - it didn't become heavier at all)? He looked at the paperwork, got JC's address, but didn't think to just go to the house.
I've only seen a couple of JC episodes in the past, and they've been as ridiculous as last night's which is why I won't be bothering again. |
|
|
|
|
|
#135 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Folkestone
Posts: 10,537
|
Quote:
The show's premise is based on the most wild of coincidences or deductions. Jonathan Creek must have the highest IQ of any person to figure out most of his cases. Heck, I couldn't even realize Stephen was the same guy we saw six years ago!
I thought they were two different people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#136 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Honiton, Devon
Posts: 1,930
|
Quote:
My quibble - would Stephen have brought his archive of research papers with him to the house?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#137 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Honiton, Devon
Posts: 1,930
|
Quote:
Indeed we have to assume they never met die to distance or the sister never having liked Stephen anyway. Not impossible, just unlikely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#138 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 4
|
Quote:
Didn't need to. It was a trick that could be done over and over until it fell right. If it missed and didn't simply bounce away out of sight it could be dismissed as a bit of dirt brought in on a shoe or something.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#139 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,424
|
Quote:
Didn't need to. It was a trick that could be done over and over until it fell right. If it missed and didn't simply bounce away out of sight it could be dismissed as a bit of dirt brought in on a shoe or something.
Although it flashbacked to the victim finding the note on the same night it could be that this was just a tale told by the murdering husband and in fact he didn't put the note there until the wife had died. Therefore the victim wouldn't have seen that note at all as it would have been planted after her death. Also the husband could have adjusted the position of the glass so it was in the right spot and we weren't shown this. |
|
|
|
|
|
#140 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Honiton, Devon
Posts: 1,930
|
Quote:
Yet the victim found a note in her book saying she would die that same night.
Although it flashbacked to the victim finding the note on the same night it could be that this was just a tale told by the murdering husband and in fact he didn't put the note there until the wife had died. Therefore the victim wouldn't have seen that note at all as it would have been planted after her death. Also the husband could have adjusted the position of the glass so it was in the right spot and we weren't shown this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#141 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,424
|
Quote:
By George, I think she's got it!
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#142 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Honiton, Devon
Posts: 1,930
|
Quote:
Or perhaps the glass was on a coaster and the husband made sure the coaster was in the right spot? Several variants.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#143 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,040
|
I quite enjoyed it. Not as good as the early classics but better than the specials over the last few years.
It's somewhat implausible that Jonathan would have missed the antimony / Anti-Money / research scientist connection 6 years ago. Surely forensic examination and post-mortem would have detected antimony as the poison? I agree that Warwick Davis was the star of the show. They could replace Jonathan and Polly with him. An eccentric vicar with a enthusiastic passion for 'locked room' mysteries would make a refreshing change from a somewhat disinterested Creek and a reluctant Polly. |
|
|
|
|
|
#144 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South
Posts: 10,848
|
I quite enjoyed the episode but have to agree with the comments that the show isn't what it once was.
In the original series there was usually one main mystery, introduced early on, that the rest of the story hinged on - something that seemed completely impossible but was actually fairly simple. The fun of the episode was trying to put all the clues together before Jonathan did (which I think I only did once). So what was the main mystery in this episode? The death of Alison's mother and sisters? Well no, because it wasn't a mystery to anyone other than Alison and it didn't really impact the plot (beyond the fact that Stephen didn't want her to know she potentially had a fatal genetic disorder) How the man is 'thrown' across the room to his fiery death? Again, no because we assume at the start that it's just a movie special effect or a illusionist trick. Until Stephen is killed none of us know that it's real. The murder of Stephen's first wife? No, because it's obviously a 'side' mystery. It's funny because they kind of highlight this issue in the show by calling all his previous cases by a simple name - the mystery of the stripped unicorn etc. What is this one going to be called? "The case of the girl who's family died of a genetic disorder but wasn't told about it who then met a man who killed his wife in a complex way but then realized she didn't have as much money as he thought so then met the aforementioned woman and was hoping to inherit her wealth but didn't realize that the wife he killed bother in law was secretly tracking him down and waiting for some random way to kill him, and then found a secret murder room designed to scare women". |
|
|
|
|
|
#145 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Honiton, Devon
Posts: 1,930
|
Quote:
I quite enjoyed it. Not as good as the early classics but better than the specials over the last few years.
It's somewhat implausible that Jonathan would have missed the antimony / Anti-Money / research scientist connection 6 years ago. Surely forensic examination and post-mortem would have detected antimony as the poison? |
|
|
|
|
|
#146 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Honiton, Devon
Posts: 1,930
|
Quote:
It's funny because they kind of highlight this issue in the show by calling all his previous cases by a simple name - the mystery of the stripped unicorn etc. What is this one going to be called? "The case of the girl who's family died of a genetic disorder but wasn't told about it who then met a man who killed his wife in a complex way but then realized she didn't have as much money as he thought so then met the aforementioned woman and was hoping to inherit her wealth but didn't realize that the wife he killed bother in law was secretly tracking him down and waiting for some random way to kill him, and then found a secret murder room designed to scare women".
I'm not saying this is the daftest criticism I've read (would that it were!) but it's up there in contention. The way that all the puzzles were interwoven into the one story (let's just call it "the mysteries of Daemons' Roost" - nice and simple) was nothing short of brilliant. What does it matter if it's not the same formula as episodes from 1997? If it had been there's have been complaints that Renwick hadn't had an original idea in 20 years and the the whole thing was stale and predictable. I really don't know why writers bother anymore. Whatever they do will be wrong. |
|
|
|
|
|
#147 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,239
|
Quote:
Rest assured, after the powers of observation you have displayed on this thread we will never call on you to solve a mystery.
![]()
|
|
|
|
|
#148 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,424
|
Quote:
BIB: that sounds like an entirely different kind of show to me!
I'm not saying this is the daftest criticism I've read (would that it were!) but it's up there in contention. The way that all the puzzles were interwoven into the one story (let's just call it "the mysteries of Daemons' Roost" - nice and simple) was nothing short of brilliant. What does it matter if it's not the same formula as episodes from 1997? If it had been there's have been complaints that Renwick hadn't had an original idea in 20 years and the the whole thing was stale and predictable. I really don't know why writers bother anymore. Whatever they do will be wrong. Of course its never going to quite reach the heights of the initial Maddie / Carla / Windmill series again - Warwick Davis's joke with the cafetiere and Devils' Chimney early on was an amusing tip of the hat to the 'not as good as it used to be' brigade. |
|
|
|
|
|
#149 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,409
|
Quote:
I really don't know why writers bother anymore. Whatever they do will be wrong.
She just drags the show down for me, I want to see someone encouraging Jonathan to take these cases on like before, not trying to stop him. |
|
|
|
|
#150 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Dagenham Essex UK
Posts: 9,715
|
Poor, thats all I can say.
The moment the words "Anti-Mony" came up, it was obvious the guy had killed his wife. And the idea that Creek wouldnt have twigged is just silly. Hope this is the last, because frankly it cant get much worse. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:17.





I thought they were two different people.