Dept Q SPOILERS Thread

[xsquared]

This thread is for those who have already seen Dept Q in its entirety and want to discuss the plot, as I know that the other thread is still getting new viewers.

OK, now that I've seen it all, we're still non
the wiser about who shot Mork, Hardy and Anderson.

I am loving Akram and want to know what he did in Syria!

Lyle/Sam messed up her prosecution by making sure the criminal found out about the witness who had met the wife in the women’s refuge causing the murder attempt on the witness where she lost an eye. I assume he became Sam to generally mess with her life and gain knowledge/access as a journalist that he otherwise couldn’t have gotten - also it was extra revenge on Sam…?

Oh dear … Now I’m worried about stabbed eye woman all over again. Is there any hope that the criminal justice service would have provided her with the full spectrum of witness protection once she was released from jail?

I think that the (apparently) throwaway rainfall comment was supposed to explain the blood not being present at the top after Sam was found. So no suspicion of foul play.

Im not surprised that Merritt failed to refuse Lyle nearly 20 years on. She probably paid him scant attention anyway, he was just her boyfriend’s annoying younger brother. And adult Lyle had that eye injury.

The lodger was unnecessary and hammy as a pp said. But I loved everyone else. Even Rachel, the mediocre therapist ! Such outstanding acting. I spotted Gail Platt from Corrie’s reflexologist ex boyfriend too 😆 - the elderly dad.

Hoping for a S2 - an interesting new cold case and I need to know what the deceased uniformed officer was up to - why he was there, why he deliberately left his fingerprints. Would like to meet Akram’s daughters.

I don’t trust Moira!

Mark Bonnar - Stephen Burns in the show, is going to be on the celebrity version of The Traitors.

Does anybody else think that Matthew was channelling Benedict Cumberbatch's Sherlock? There were a few Sherlock references Carl made, and I think it was deliberate as production would have anticipated comparisons.

yes, i still enjoyed it and will definitely watch again.

Ooh you're all good. The plot holes mostly washed over me but then I'd make a lousy detective.

I did think that Merritt would have recognised Carl enough to at least give him a longer look though. And she looked in unrealistically good shape after what she'd experienced imo.

Absolutely loved the Akram character but am unsure that I want to find out any more about his past. His delivery of the line 'Tik tok influencer made us both laugh till we wheezed though.

I agree the therapist behaved extremely unethically in going round to Morck's house and flirting with him. A GP registrar has just been struck off for having an affair with a patient he knew was vulnerable. Anyone a therapist sees as a patient has some sort of psychological problem or they wouldn't be there so they should never form relationships with patients or expatients. Your therapist should not be trying to be your friend..

We guessed the kidnappers quite early on so felt a bit disappointed ‘that was it’ at the end of ep 8 but I though ep 9 was great and didn’t feel let down.

we did also query all the blood after Sam’s murder then remembered the rain thing. But a touch convenient that you check the weather before you take the opportunity to murder….

i did get a bit confused about why the first investigation was a bit shit. Was that deliberate? Like Mark Bonnar didn’t let Kirstie testify because of his daughter but was that enough to corrupt the disappearance investigation?

Could someone remind me how Harry died?

William drew that picture and it took a while for the team to figure out where it was from. Had none of them heard of Google Lens?

Questionable ethics all round, further plot holes etc but Matthew Goode has enough charm to carry it. I loved Akram as well, I'm such a fan. Hope we learn more about him in series 2.

If Harry was Lyle’s brother, I think he took the blame for Lyle but fled on the ferry and either fell off or jumped off and drowned. Correct me if I’m wrong though.

I was confused as to the extent the island policeman (Cunningham?) was in on it. He obviously didn’t know that Merritt was being held prisoner but he seemed to have some sort of knowledge or deal with Lyle. What was the deal and why would he even make one?

Wow that was a frustrating show. Great lead performance but such rubbish storytelling. Every episode had something ludicrous.

• as pp mentioned, a Google reverse image search would have cleared up the whole thing in about episode three

• the incredibly convenient coincidence that Lyle and the real Sam Haig looked so much alike

• the fact that Lyle and Elsa could have achieved their goal just by locking Merritt in a cellar, in time-honoured fashion, rather than an elaborate hyperbaric chamber leading to all sorts of pressure -related plot twists

• also, how were Akram and Morck able to just walk into that hugely pressurised chamber at the end, without any of the protective equipment Lyle wore when he went in?

• Lyle must have been a bafta-worthy actor to convince Merritt that he was a sane, sorted, knowledgeable investigative journalist, and never set her alarm bells ringing (in addition to the recognition issue mentioned above)

• they could have just summoned her up there by text without him going through all that rigmarole, and "he did it because he's crazy" is a cheap plot get -out card

• why did Cunningham's son not call for a squad to search for his father? Why did no one have any backup, ever?

• why did no one from the police look into that claim about the very first victim being an informant? They let it drop for like four episodes, until Morck pieces together his genius theory out of whole cloth with no evidence at all.

That ended up being very long, apologies - but it was just so frustrating! Don't these people have script editors?!

I happen to know that the script writer was changing the lines right up to the last minute. It really didn’t hang together very well in the end with lots of obvious holes and things that didn’t make sense.

@Sauvinthis was what I didn’t get! He knew that they had played some part in her murder or going missing. But how?

1st episode, Akram claims his wife made the pastries he's handing out to the officers.

Middle of the series he replies that his wife is a GP who came to the UK ahead of him to get a start on setting up her practice. He's not talking about past tense here, the language he uses implies this is an ongoing thing and his wife is alive and well.

Final episode, he bluntly replies that his wife is dead, and there is no inference this is a recent development.

Aside from all the other glaring holes other posters have highlighted, this is why I said in the main thread there were just far too many instances of having to suspend disbelief for me to be able to enjoy this.

Then there is the whole Akram supposedly being an asylum seeker, yet just randomly walking into a CID department looking for a job, being offered one despite it being illegal for asylum seekers to work in the UK prior to being processed, and also when there is no DBS history etc. It's just so totally implausible as to be ridiculous.

how were Akram and Morck able to just walk into that hugely pressurised chamber at the end, without any of the protective equipment Lyle wore when he went in?

The chamber had been depressurised, we saw Morck move the lever just after they shot Lyle.

• the fact that Lyle and Elsa could have achieved their goal just by locking Merritt in a cellar, in time-honoured fashion, rather than an elaborate hyperbaric chamber leading to all sorts of pressure -related plot twists

Becaus didn't have a cellar in their static caravan but they did have a hyperbaric chamber because that used to be part of their business.

If everyone behaved exactly as they should in a drama there would be very little actual drama. You have to suspend disbelief.

1st episode, Akram claims his wife made the pastries he's handing out to the officers. Did he say that or did he say it was his wife's recipe? Genuine question, I can't remember.

He didn't say she had a job as a GP he said they moved there because doctors were needed. Morck assumed she was a doctor but it was because had wanted their daughter to become a doctor (as opposed to a tiktok influencer 😉).

Akram is the master of not giving anything away with his terse, ambiguous statements.

Then there is the whole Akram supposedly being an asylum seeker, yet just randomly walking into a CID department looking for a job, being offered one despite it being illegal for asylum seekers to work in the UK prior to being processed, and also when there is no DBS history etc. It's just so totally implausible as to be ridiculous. Do we know he is still an asylum seekers or does he now have settled status? We know very little about Akram or what he did previously in Syria.

Also it's unlikely a priest would help a detective solve crimes but it happens in Granchester snd Father Brown. It's a literary device.

Why did "Sam Haig" who wasn't Sam Haig undermine Merrit's case against Finch by letting the defence know about the witness Kirsty?? (I think that was her name). Was it just to have a pop at her? Wasn't that a bit redundant given that he was going to kidnap her and torture her in a hypobaric(??) chamber?

I quite enjoyed the series but you really have to suspend disbelief from a rope much higher than the crag that Sam was pushed off. There are so many absurdities.

The main weakness was that Morck was just so over-the-top supercilious and vile, much much more than was needed for the character. Hard to find him relatable or to believe that all his kookie and stylish colleagues didn't just tell him to fuck off and stop mansplaining.

And the flirtatious relationship with the therapist was toe-curlingly cringy and implausible. Why did she warm to him in such a severely unprofessional way when all he did was fire sexist contempt and atrophied self-awareness at her? (The sexism included disparaging her absent colleague just for being an older woman, which the therapist just joined in with).
By the end he was full-on stalking the therapist and she just smiled indulgently.

I didn’t get this either. Can someone explain this please? It’s really bugging me! 😁

Also it's unlikely a priest would help a detective solve crimes but it happens in Granchester snd Father Brown. It's a literary device

This is the thing about suspension of disbelief I mentioned though. Everyone has a different degree to which they are able to do it. My threshold isn't particularly high, and it's why, by and large, I have next to no interest in fictional writing or storytelling. My partner decided to binge this, and since I was there for the evening I sat down to watch it with them, but it's not the sort of thing I'd ordinarily choose to watch because the discrepancies are always incongruent to me and I tend to just sit there rolling my eyes at events which aren't really credible, e.g. Syrians with no verifiable background working hand-in-hand with Scottish cops, a serving police officer nearly kicking someone to death in front of witnesses and the only repercussion being a mild ticking off from his boss. Although I've no knowledge of either Grantchester or Father Brown, they don't sound like the sort of thing I'd enjoy either for the very reason you highlight.

Part of the reason I don't really enjoy fiction is because much of it stretches credulity, and if you want wild and outlandish, then there is already plenty of it happens in real, factual events and stories without having to resort to writers making up all sorts of implausible nonsense.

Yes, I'm the sort of viewer who watches Silent Witness and asks aloud if forensic experts with years of experience really gather at a scene and then narrate aloud their insight into fairly mundane conclusions for the benefit of nobody in particular, because that's precisely what they do on SW and nobody ever turns around to a colleague and says "well....duh...".

You might enjoy Black Forest Murders from BBC4 on iplayer - pure German efficiency with little drama. I am prepared to suspend disbelief to quite an extent but can't watch anything set in a school as it stretches credulity too far. My husband can't watch anything set in a hospital for similar reasons.

That's interesting, thanks. I do feel for the scriptwriters, as they had a very difficult brief. They had to make it seem as though the Peter Finch case was linked to Merritt's disappearance, even though it wasn't and it took place in a completely different timeline; leave the original killing of informant and shooting of the officers unsolved enough to fuel future series, but solved enough to be satisfying for this one; and follow the plot of a novel that sounds like complete hokum (I've not read it though).

They made a fatal mistake in having Rose go up to visit Elsa in her home on a site full of rusting deep-sea equipment, since from that moment (about halfway through the series?) it was obvious where Merritt was, who'd taken her and why.