MNPD assemble! It's Broadchurch time

[EauRouge]

Notebooks at the ready We should have enough information at the end of the first episode to start cooking up some slightly implausible theories.

I thought Ellie's youngest was going to go missing, as he was left in the car alone.

we heard the click of the car locking

Is the suggestion that Mark may somehow have been involved with Tom as Joe was with Danny, or simply wants to escape into a father-son relationship ? Why was Tom not staying with Ellie , the boys were only about 11 or 12 so wouldn't have really had much say. Tom has grown so much taller in a few months but neither Fred nor Danny's sister seem to have done !

American shows may be sophisticated. But that doesn't mean a show shot in the UK should have all these unlikely things ha penning just so that it might be more interesting for American viewers who are not familiar with our legal system.
Exhumation in the middle of the day with no permission or knowledge of the next of kin?

And the family rushing and legal bods running round the graveyard? Ruined it for me it was so ridiculous.

Certainly the style of the opening and strong music track was more US than UK.

If I have the time I'm going to have to watch each episode at least twice now. It was a bit creepy when we found out Claire and Lee were the girls neighbours sitting there all calm. I wonder how DT wife mucked up the case and why exactly.

The guy who did the music did the last series too. He's Swedish I think. Not sure if he's done other stuff - I didn't google that far!

Norfolk I've had the same thought about watching the episodes twice. It was so tense last night, I need to watch again now I know whats happening.

I think I am setting myself up for a fall if I think Broadchurch 2 is going to be as good as the original. I will watch with an open mind and just enjoy Olivia and David's acting.

The Dad is Shaun Dooley, who has been in loads of things, including Rebus and Eden Lake.

I'm wondering whether the envelope that contained the bluebells being addressed to a PO Box was relevant? Seems to indicate that Claire is maintaining some sort of contact with her previous life. Does Alec know about this, do you think?

Thanks It's I knew I knew him from somewhere! That would have driven me crazy for days

The prosecuting barrister thing I can see happening at a push. It's a small community. The CPS was telling them that they (the CPS) needed the best and Pickles took it upon herself to persuade Rampling.

Probably not likely but makes good telly so I'll let them off.

No, it really, really wouldn't happen. The CPS is a national organisation, and whilst it can and often does instruct barristers in private practice, it maintains a list in each area of approved barristers. One of the reasons for this is stated on their website specifically to be to eliminate "local patronage". There is no way on God's earth that a retired barrister would be on that list.

And I really don't think it makes good telly either when a sizeable proportion of the viewing population knows it's utterly ridiculous; it's just naïve also to assume that most people won't find out. Haven't they heard of social media? If you're going to suspend reality to make "good telly", why not go the whole hog and have the murder done by someone with an invisibility cloak?

As far as her visiting them at home, this might just about be possible too, given that Maxine Peake did the same sort of thing when she was prosecuting in Silks!!!!

Silks is definitely not something you should take as a demonstration of normal practice. The whole business of visiting prosecution witnesses at home would be grossly improper professionally, and again no prosecuting barrister would ever do it. The whole point of prosecution is that it is meant to be impartial. The prosecution is meant to act with complete fairness and, for instance, if it finds information that favours the defence it has an absolute duty to pass that information over - whereas the defence has no similar duty. Can we really see a barrister who has become emotionally involved with the victim's family doing that?

There is clearly something odd going on with Claire. Why ws she so convinced, that one day, that her ex was back?

And also, when Hardy took Ellie back to Claire's house, and she stayed over, the next morning, Claire was really snippy and off with Ellie - it was odd she was so rude, considering Ellie was there to help her. I am thinking she was involved in the Sandbrook murders, but that's surely too obvious for this early on?

I did start to get a little bit annoyed with so many different story lines being set up (mark and Tom, the prosecution/defence legal teams/the vicar still acting oddly etc) but then remembered that a large part of the first series was lots of intertwined stories, some dodgy, some not some only seeming dodgy and so on. That why it worked - it could have been anyone, as they all had their own lives, worries, and problems.

I also don't understand why Tom isn't living with his Mum. Wasn't there something a bit iffy and irresponsible about Ellie's sister in the last series, like she's an alcoholic or something? Is it feasible that she would be allowed to look after Tom?

I also recognised the Dad from the Sandhurst case. I think he was in a program where his wife died of a brain tumour and it showed the time leading up to her death and then after with him and the kids. I seem to remember it was very good. Am off to find out what it was.

I think it will get very complicated very quickly trying to run both storylines simultaneously. Last nights episode seemed a bit muddled.

PandasRock: Yes Claire said something really odd the next morning to Ellie while she was trying to feed her son. I had to rewind it as I couldn't work it out and her whole stance just seemed wrong. I still couldn't work it out but and not sure if it was relevant but the exchange was definitely off kilter.

Claire knew it was her husband because she had 9 (?) calls from an unknown number. How did she know that Hardy would be at the court? Suppose it must have been in the news.

I thought the "puppy" remark to Ellie was v mean too.

Re the US remake, I posted about the different ending on The Missing thread and a link to the Guardian article. Did wonder last night if they would use that, or a variation of it.

"Aren't you the little puppy?" she said when DT told her they had to leave right away.

Yes Claire was very off with Ellie the next morning implying she has a darker side. Not sure she's the killer but she might be lying about not being with Lee when maybe she actually was.
Or maybe she wasn't with Lee because she is the murderer or at least knows who is the murderer or at least knows what happened to the girls.
The bluebell could be from the 19 year old missing girl to show she is still alive? We have no idea if they knew each other or how close they may have been.

so, series two is about the trial? Joe says not guilty and then the sandhurst murders (Hardy's 'failure) gets linked in ?

I saw series one but missed last night's. Can I pick it up from episode two do you all think?

radiobedhead - he's Icelandic. He has done 'other stuff' (including Broadchurch 1) but not other telly. I saw a couple of his gigs last year he was superb.