Reviews

Some of the reviews of this episode did not recognize the theme of the subplot that framed the main story. Victor, the drone pilot, is very good at his job. But it is a bad job: killing people remotely. Every time he makes a successful killshot his partner gives him a dollar. He's been saving them and numbering them but one night, seeing all 108 dollars or kills, he decides to get rid of them. He tries to lose them at the roulette table but is uncommonly lucky and leaves with more money and an odd couple, calling themselves Stanley Kowalski and Blanche Du Bois. Obviously Victor has never heard of "A Streetcar Named Desire." They go to his apartment where again he gets lucky with Blanche while Stanley hate-watches them. Then Stanley beats Victor, which appears to be part of his and Blanche's kinky relationship. Victor begs him to take his winnings but Stanley refuses. "You earned it." The next time we see Victor he is spying on and brooding about the kid whose grandfather Victor killed at the beginning of the episode. He sees the situation unfolding with Suleiman's wife and daughters. He disobeys orders and takes out a man he sees is a murderer and rapist. It looks like he will lose his job but his superior officer does not reprimand him and tells him that he is lucky. Victor feels good about what he did...till his partner gives him a buck as is their ritual. Victor's mood sours. More blood money. He has killed another human being. He is still very good at a very bad job. The framing story has the feel of a very dark O'Henry story.

I fell in love with the incredible landscapes and the intriguing mystery in the first episode. I thought this was another "Broadchurch." But by the second episode I was suspecting, and by episode 3 it was confirmed that this show has what Roger Ebert called an "idiot plot," one that could be resolved faster if people bothered to communicate vital information to one another and used common sense. People consider their secrets more important than helping the police catch a serial killer hunting in a very tiny village, or at least clearing their own name. It doesn't help that the most egregious offender in this regard is the teenage daughter of the protagonist, one of the cops. Most of episode 4 is filler, focusing on a character who comes out nowhere, has no arc and is irrelevant to the main story. On the positive side, the solution has to win some kind of prize for least likely suspect.

Today every hero must have an origin story, especially if not provided by the original author. Sherlock Holmes got a Spielbergian one. The Shadow got a stylish 1930s one. Now Perry Mason gets a gritty reboot, where he starts out as a down-at-the-heels gumshoe, a knight errant in a grim noir Los Angeles filled with dirty cops, politicians and church officials. Eventually he becomes an attorney, fiercely dedicated to saving his client, though, the series makes clear, not in the manner of the previous books, TV shows or movies. The mystery is twisty and the ending a bit cynical,as befits a film noir, as well as more plausible than the traditional tying up of all loose ends. The cast is uniformly excellent, with Matthew Rhys creating a compelling alternative version of the character previously immortalized by Raymond Burr. Special plaudits must go to Tatiana Maslany, whose take on her "Sister Aimee Semple McPherson" analog is refreshingly different from the usual cardboard caricature. Her Sister Alice is complex: part theatrical huckster, part real believer, part survivor who understands and makes a real connection with Perry's client. As long as you understand that this is not your grandma's Perry Mason and let the characters tell their own story, this is a good tale, well told.

This is a fun variation on "The Fugitive", provided you don't think too hard about the mounting implausibilities in the plot. And it really helps if you know nothing about the law, which is odd in a film based on a (faulty interpretation of a) principle of law. By the end enough additional crimes are committed by the protagonist to put her away for a long time, even without murder. Pop some corn, sit back, and just enjoy the actors and the wild ride.

Considering the grisly end of Madalyn Murray O'Hair's life, it's hard to see how a biopic about her could have been done much differently, without the tone changing drastically. Indeed the ending, though well known, is hard to watch. This is neither a great film nor a bad one. In fact, considering the nearly universally acknowledged unlikeability of Madalyn, there is a surprising amount of effort to humanize her, especially during scenes where there were no living witnesses to report the interactions. From all that I have read and all of O'Hair's TV appearances I saw during her life, this is a pretty accurate portrait of the woman.

What? They are bringing back a character who was dead using some technobabble! Next thing you know they'll bring back some really important dead character like Spock! Oh, wait, they did that in 1984! If you don't want resurrected characters (Spock, Superman, Gandalf, Harry Potter, the Doctor many times over) don't watch or read science fiction or fantasy. I suggest murder mysteries. The victims stay dead.

We are seeing the ever-widening ripples of Kinsey killing her fear, leading to her almost repeating the infamous incident involving her father's friends. Meanwhile Tyler is suffering the toll of trying to protect his family from the temptations of the keys. The keys are rather like the rings in the Lord of the Rings: powerful and dangerous to the souls of those who have them.

After you get through the brutal but necessary first episode, this is engrossing both as an above average police procedural and an exploration of what rape does to the victims, and how the damage is compounded when they are not believed. I especially appreciated how it avoided theatricality, never forgetting that this is real life, where people are flawed, and mundane life continues even as you are trying to process tragedy and injustice. The detectives, portrayed by Merrit Wever and the always wonderful Toni Collette, were depicted as normal people, without tragic backstories. And I also appreciated the work of Eric Lange, in the difficult role of a detective who thinks he's a decent cop suddenly realizing he did an incredibly crappy thing to a young woman. Emmys all around and I hope people come out of this with a better understanding of this horrific crime.

Compulsively watchable, just don't think about it too hard afterwards. Everything is tied up, though not all of it makes sense. How is it that a doctor and a lawyer can take off from their jobs so frequently and so easily? If you had a friend who was a detective why would you resort to so much undercover work yourself? Why not just pass on information you get and let him investigate the leads? And how is it Slade knows so much about murder, getting rid of a body and a gun (the latter not an easy item to get ahold of legally in the UK), breaking and entering, etc? And why plant Jesse's DNA at a second crime scene and keep the mystery going? Why did Jesse run when his friends recognize him? But at least everything introduced was a Chekhov's gun and did come into play eventually. So less loose ends than "Lost."