Mr. Tea
Let's Talk About Ceps
Who's the cartoon guy in this image?
Detectives - the dominant characters of the 20th Century Discuss
- Thread starter IdleRich
- Start date
Who's the cartoon guy in this image?
IdleRich
IdleRich
I've been doing a LOT of research, watching the Mystery Channel.which has the following on heavy (and I mean HEAVY, I swear CSI is literally on fifteen times or so a day) rotation at the moment; Midsomer Murders, Brokenwood Mysteries (which really is MM reimagined in rural NZ), Serious Crimes, CSI NY (and other cities), Murder She Wrote, Law & Order, Father Brown, Professor T, Van der Valk, Vera, Death in Paradise (incidentally this must be THE most racist telly programme they still make - the format is; white detective from England goes to some Caribbean island and runs the police department which consists of loads of hapless black locals, one of whom is a super fit girl. Over time the backing cast changes bit by bit, and every few series the main detective goes back to UK and is replaced by another uptight white guy - but the dynamic in which the clever English white guy bosses around the much stupider black ones (one of whom is always hot) and solves the case which bamboozles the clueless blacks never changes. It is literally based on the idea that it doesn't matter which white guy you pick he will be cleverer than any black man or woman and must naturally be the leader, it's unbelievable),
Shakespeare & Hathaway (the lamest ever pretext - two private detectives based in Stratford on Avon who have the above names) and probably some others too, which I can't recall off the top of my head.
I've started to notice how often plots are recycled. Death in Paradise gets a special mention in that - as well as being staggeringly racist - it's always a disguised locked room mystery with the suspects arbitrarily limited to five or so - which doesn't make sense cos it's normally impossible for any of them to have done it, yet he doesn't rule them out. The whole set up is really fake.
Shakespeare & Hathaway (the lamest ever pretext - two private detectives based in Stratford on Avon who have the above names) and probably some others too, which I can't recall off the top of my head.
I've started to notice how often plots are recycled. Death in Paradise gets a special mention in that - as well as being staggeringly racist - it's always a disguised locked room mystery with the suspects arbitrarily limited to five or so - which doesn't make sense cos it's normally impossible for any of them to have done it, yet he doesn't rule them out. The whole set up is really fake.
IdleRich
IdleRich
Also, who knows what a tontine is? I do roughly, I learned about it years ago when it was the driver of a murder mystery plot.
For those who don't know, a tontine was normally an investment between a few, say five, people. The investors put their money together into a lump sum and then that is invested in, say, shares for a fixed period, for example twenty-five years. Any profits such as dividends are paid out and split between the five. After it expires, the shares are sold and the lump sum is split into five and paid back to the original guys.
In fiction - though I believe in reality it's not always like this, or not exactly - there is normally an extra twist in that if anyone dies then the profits and the invested sum are shared between those still living. It's not hard to see that this would create an incentive for the investors to kill each other off and end up as the only survivor - which is probably a good reason to avoid this set-up.
Anyway, I think tontines fell out of favour as an investment strategy around two hundred years ago - except in murder mystery land as in Brokenwood last week when a dead man willed shares of his lucrative farm via a tontine to ten descendants, relatives and acquaintances who - guess what! - started murdering each other. As did the five stakeholders in the tontine that cropped up in Stratford a day or two later, requiring Shakespeare and Hathaway to get involved.
In Brokenwood the week before that the first victim was found in a field nailed to a pole disguised as a scarecrow.
Great minds think alike across the world it seems cos just outside Amsterdam Van der Valk was dealing with a similar scarecrow/body... despite the similarities it wasn't the same killer.rs.
I'm collecting plots and I'm going to try and tick off every one in every single series.
For those who don't know, a tontine was normally an investment between a few, say five, people. The investors put their money together into a lump sum and then that is invested in, say, shares for a fixed period, for example twenty-five years. Any profits such as dividends are paid out and split between the five. After it expires, the shares are sold and the lump sum is split into five and paid back to the original guys.
In fiction - though I believe in reality it's not always like this, or not exactly - there is normally an extra twist in that if anyone dies then the profits and the invested sum are shared between those still living. It's not hard to see that this would create an incentive for the investors to kill each other off and end up as the only survivor - which is probably a good reason to avoid this set-up.
Anyway, I think tontines fell out of favour as an investment strategy around two hundred years ago - except in murder mystery land as in Brokenwood last week when a dead man willed shares of his lucrative farm via a tontine to ten descendants, relatives and acquaintances who - guess what! - started murdering each other. As did the five stakeholders in the tontine that cropped up in Stratford a day or two later, requiring Shakespeare and Hathaway to get involved.
In Brokenwood the week before that the first victim was found in a field nailed to a pole disguised as a scarecrow.
Great minds think alike across the world it seems cos just outside Amsterdam Van der Valk was dealing with a similar scarecrow/body... despite the similarities it wasn't the same killer.rs.
I'm collecting plots and I'm going to try and tick off every one in every single series.
william_kent
Well-known member
I was unfortunate enough to watch one or two episodes of that series while visiting my mother years ago - you're 100% spot on with your analysis
I would have thought that the post-colonial studies academics must have written a multitude of papers on that crap but jstor turns up nought *
edit: I'd totally erased the memory of this series from my mind but your post brought it all flooding back, I'm not sure this series could get past the "pitch" nowadays
* free PhD on offer! or at least a paper....just expand on what @IdleRich wrote and you're guaranteed a "publication"
william_kent
Well-known member
i might have hastily deleted a post because I'm out of it, but for posterity I may have asked if they are still actually making this series because EDI ( "Equality, Diversity, Inclusion") directorates are big in the UK at the moment and they wouldn't let this shit fly
IdleRich
IdleRich
CSI NY was just starting or finishing and I caught part of the theme tune, which is by the same band that did the CSI Miami one - The Who, or should it perhaps be The Who?? (Edit: I'm asking the question if the band should be written as The Who? and cos it's a question there is a question mark at the end of the sentence, which is what created that curious double question mark structure).
And I wondered if that was a sort of joke, as in, which band would be a good choice for a mystery type programme where they often have to figure out whodunnit (same as when my gf used to work in this government housing body and the hold music if you rang em was Girl I'll House You).
I doubt it though somehow, CSI is far too dour and humourless for that kind of cheeky little in-joke, plus it's more of a police procedural than a Christie-style mystery in which the whole thing really does boil down to - who? Although of course The Who would be totally wrong for other reasons for the genteel drawing rooms and country houses that make up Poirot's habitat.
Anyway I wondered if there is anything to be said about detective theme tunes in general, but I guess that there isn't much more to it than that - as with most telly - the gritty ones have tougher music and so on.
I've not really seen Johnathan Creek but Saint-Saens Danse Macabre seems a nice mysterious and pleasantly creepy choice as theme for one of those polite, friendly UK ones in which the unpleasant and unavoidable business of murder is wrapped up in beautiful sets and countryside, moments of very gentle comedy and reassuringly polite Englishness.
Which is probably why they created something so similar for MM
Poirot's theme wasn't a million miles away either
And I wondered if that was a sort of joke, as in, which band would be a good choice for a mystery type programme where they often have to figure out whodunnit (same as when my gf used to work in this government housing body and the hold music if you rang em was Girl I'll House You).
I doubt it though somehow, CSI is far too dour and humourless for that kind of cheeky little in-joke, plus it's more of a police procedural than a Christie-style mystery in which the whole thing really does boil down to - who? Although of course The Who would be totally wrong for other reasons for the genteel drawing rooms and country houses that make up Poirot's habitat.
Anyway I wondered if there is anything to be said about detective theme tunes in general, but I guess that there isn't much more to it than that - as with most telly - the gritty ones have tougher music and so on.
I've not really seen Johnathan Creek but Saint-Saens Danse Macabre seems a nice mysterious and pleasantly creepy choice as theme for one of those polite, friendly UK ones in which the unpleasant and unavoidable business of murder is wrapped up in beautiful sets and countryside, moments of very gentle comedy and reassuringly polite Englishness.
Which is probably why they created something so similar for MM
Poirot's theme wasn't a million miles away either
IdleRich
IdleRich
The Vera end credits etc tune is sort of similar but....
... as befits the show it's a bit darker and colder, little warmth on offer in these chilly and grim tales of broken Geordies doing nasty things to each other in the ugliest bits of Newcastle and Sunderland and the harshly beautiful - but mainly harsh - Tyneside scenery.
Vera seems to be a programme that is well regarded by critics but I'm not convinced, I have a feeling that reviewers sometimes mistake bleakness for depth and that as a consequence things that are "dark" or "gritty" are often given too easy a ride.
I could be wrong, not having seen it that much, but the other day there was an episode about murders on the moor near the projected site of a new quarry and which ultimately turned in the unsolved murder of a child a few years back.
I forget the details but I found the conclusion unsatisfactory, in fact the first thoughts that came to my mind were things such as "stupid" and "ridiculous" - and thinking about it afterwards I found myself getting annoyed about the way that the subject matter had been used to add an unearned gravitas to an otherwise unremarkable show.
... as befits the show it's a bit darker and colder, little warmth on offer in these chilly and grim tales of broken Geordies doing nasty things to each other in the ugliest bits of Newcastle and Sunderland and the harshly beautiful - but mainly harsh - Tyneside scenery.
Vera seems to be a programme that is well regarded by critics but I'm not convinced, I have a feeling that reviewers sometimes mistake bleakness for depth and that as a consequence things that are "dark" or "gritty" are often given too easy a ride.
I could be wrong, not having seen it that much, but the other day there was an episode about murders on the moor near the projected site of a new quarry and which ultimately turned in the unsolved murder of a child a few years back.
I forget the details but I found the conclusion unsatisfactory, in fact the first thoughts that came to my mind were things such as "stupid" and "ridiculous" - and thinking about it afterwards I found myself getting annoyed about the way that the subject matter had been used to add an unearned gravitas to an otherwise unremarkable show.
IdleRich
IdleRich
And from Vera I started thinking about a wider point. I don't really think that topics should be off limits or anything like that, but... and maybe I'm old-fashioned here, I expect some things to be treated seriously or handled in a certain way.
I need to digress a little here, just to define terms or something. I reckon most are familiar with the term McGuffin which Hitchcock either invented or popularised, but just in case; a McGuffin is the name for something which is one sense central to the plot, but in another sense is complete arbitrary and could be switched for some other item without needing to significantly change anything else.
A classic example of a McGuffin is the Maltese Falcon which they are all chasing and which is so important it gives the film its name - but which on the other hand could very easily be replaced by The Chinese Ostrich or The Cornish Potato without necessitating any significant plot change.
I'm not really versed in any film history or theory of this sort so I'm never sure how far this concept extends and whether this idea works for things other than objects. For example one of Agatha Christie's most famous stories is The Murder of Roger Ackroyd - now obviously it could have been The Murder of Shaka Kent or any other name, although I suppose that the victim did have to be a rich industrialist, it wasn't totally arbitrary in that it couldn't have been a schoolgirl calked Whilhelmina Hislop or similar - but I feel in several films there are big lumps that are totally arbitrary and which could be lifted out and replaced with another lump without any major change, especially subplots and the like, and it also feels to me that in Vera whenever there is something like that - what ultimately boils down to a choice to be made - they always go "let's make the victim a malnourished child prostitute who was on the streets because his alcoholic father beat him brutally from the age of three".
And it's difficult to really identify what I'm criticising here, cos of course this background stuff could equally be seen as scene-setting or atmosphere-building, in fact I suppose that's what it is in a lot of things. But in Vera I get the sense that the choices are lazy and that someone is sitting there saying "throw in a dead child and a heroin addicted prostitute, that will go down well with the reviewers" and there is no real consideration of how to deal with those characters and how to integrate them.
Ultimately I suppose I'm just saying that good art justifies itself and bad art doesn't. But of course I realise that this is dodgy ground cos, even suppose that this were an accepted guideline, who says what is good? And how are you supposed to know if your work will end up being good while you are making it and decide what you can include on that basis?
You can't I guess, so after all that, all I'm left with is that some episodes of Vera leave a nasty taste cos the pleasure on offer from seeing an interesting story develop and finally be solved, is less than the unpleasantness you experience on the way. And I suppose that some moments intended to make it seem like a deeper and more serious work, are so crassly handled they act to decrease enjoyment.
Also Vera herself is intended to come across as an irascible and at times bad tempered leader whose prickly exterior hides a heart of gold. But such characters are hard to get right, I think they are such a standard type that we just sort of assume someone fits into it and do the writer's work for them - but really if we actually looked at Vera's behavior and assessed her properly, in all honesty she's a shrill, spiteful bully.
Anyhow, I've written far more than I intended on the subject of Vera, now let us never mention her again...
I need to digress a little here, just to define terms or something. I reckon most are familiar with the term McGuffin which Hitchcock either invented or popularised, but just in case; a McGuffin is the name for something which is one sense central to the plot, but in another sense is complete arbitrary and could be switched for some other item without needing to significantly change anything else.
A classic example of a McGuffin is the Maltese Falcon which they are all chasing and which is so important it gives the film its name - but which on the other hand could very easily be replaced by The Chinese Ostrich or The Cornish Potato without necessitating any significant plot change.
I'm not really versed in any film history or theory of this sort so I'm never sure how far this concept extends and whether this idea works for things other than objects. For example one of Agatha Christie's most famous stories is The Murder of Roger Ackroyd - now obviously it could have been The Murder of Shaka Kent or any other name, although I suppose that the victim did have to be a rich industrialist, it wasn't totally arbitrary in that it couldn't have been a schoolgirl calked Whilhelmina Hislop or similar - but I feel in several films there are big lumps that are totally arbitrary and which could be lifted out and replaced with another lump without any major change, especially subplots and the like, and it also feels to me that in Vera whenever there is something like that - what ultimately boils down to a choice to be made - they always go "let's make the victim a malnourished child prostitute who was on the streets because his alcoholic father beat him brutally from the age of three".
And it's difficult to really identify what I'm criticising here, cos of course this background stuff could equally be seen as scene-setting or atmosphere-building, in fact I suppose that's what it is in a lot of things. But in Vera I get the sense that the choices are lazy and that someone is sitting there saying "throw in a dead child and a heroin addicted prostitute, that will go down well with the reviewers" and there is no real consideration of how to deal with those characters and how to integrate them.
Ultimately I suppose I'm just saying that good art justifies itself and bad art doesn't. But of course I realise that this is dodgy ground cos, even suppose that this were an accepted guideline, who says what is good? And how are you supposed to know if your work will end up being good while you are making it and decide what you can include on that basis?
You can't I guess, so after all that, all I'm left with is that some episodes of Vera leave a nasty taste cos the pleasure on offer from seeing an interesting story develop and finally be solved, is less than the unpleasantness you experience on the way. And I suppose that some moments intended to make it seem like a deeper and more serious work, are so crassly handled they act to decrease enjoyment.
Also Vera herself is intended to come across as an irascible and at times bad tempered leader whose prickly exterior hides a heart of gold. But such characters are hard to get right, I think they are such a standard type that we just sort of assume someone fits into it and do the writer's work for them - but really if we actually looked at Vera's behavior and assessed her properly, in all honesty she's a shrill, spiteful bully.
Anyhow, I've written far more than I intended on the subject of Vera, now let us never mention her again...
IdleRich
IdleRich
These endless detective programmes with their countless detectives need an inexhaustible supply of crimes to solve, and to keep them interesting they need new scenarios in which these murders can occur. And it's at this point where they tend to throw realism to the winds - that's why the sleepy village of Kembleford where Father Brown lives between the wars has a holiday park called Chummy's, a film studio, a cabaret drag club, a new age cult, a secret military base and various drug dealers - and that's before you add in the things that pass through such as a circus (every single programme has a murder in a circus AND a fair at some point), an escaped bank robber, an African freedom fighter and, in one memorable episode, a UFO.
My favourite programme at the moment is Brokenwood Mysteries - that's because I love Midsomar Murders, but sadly I've seen virtually every episode. Luckily BM is basically MM but moved to NZ, it's set in sleepy but beautiful countryside and in every episode a scenario (eg a circus) is set up and then a murder occurs, then the irascible Kiwi Barnaby and his sidekicks interview everyone involved again and again slowly closing in on the murderer with a few moments of gentle humour until, the "wait a minute, that's it!" moment when breakthrough occurs and they go and arrest the guilty party, often with some kind of low speed chase involved or possibly the villain threatening to throw themselves or someone else from a high point until our hero talks them down. Those are my least favourite bits in fact, when the mystery has been solved but they seem to feel they have to half-heartedly put in some underwhelming action scenes before the credits, at least to the credit of whoever makes MM* they stopped doing this regularly at some point, I guess someone realised how shit those segments were, you watch these things to get a ridiculous puzzle satisfyingly solved, you don't want to see an overweight, overage Bergerac - who clearly needed a stunt-double to climb a few rungs of a stepladder in one episode - chasing down and disarming a gunman, no amount of creative editing will make it look good.
*presumably the producer Brian True-May, that name always sticks out to me, I like to think that he has no living relatives and he is the one True-May, but I digress
My favourite programme at the moment is Brokenwood Mysteries - that's because I love Midsomar Murders, but sadly I've seen virtually every episode. Luckily BM is basically MM but moved to NZ, it's set in sleepy but beautiful countryside and in every episode a scenario (eg a circus) is set up and then a murder occurs, then the irascible Kiwi Barnaby and his sidekicks interview everyone involved again and again slowly closing in on the murderer with a few moments of gentle humour until, the "wait a minute, that's it!" moment when breakthrough occurs and they go and arrest the guilty party, often with some kind of low speed chase involved or possibly the villain threatening to throw themselves or someone else from a high point until our hero talks them down. Those are my least favourite bits in fact, when the mystery has been solved but they seem to feel they have to half-heartedly put in some underwhelming action scenes before the credits, at least to the credit of whoever makes MM* they stopped doing this regularly at some point, I guess someone realised how shit those segments were, you watch these things to get a ridiculous puzzle satisfyingly solved, you don't want to see an overweight, overage Bergerac - who clearly needed a stunt-double to climb a few rungs of a stepladder in one episode - chasing down and disarming a gunman, no amount of creative editing will make it look good.
*presumably the producer Brian True-May, that name always sticks out to me, I like to think that he has no living relatives and he is the one True-May, but I digress
IdleRich
IdleRich
I just watched Brokenwood Mysteries and was struck by their attempts to stay up to date. The murder occurred at a steampunk convention in Brokenwood (a band performed a song called Steampunk the Funk). The punks were all nerds (obviously) but one in particular was a real mummy's boy with loads of fake ailments he took medicine for. Anyway, this old punk guy was killed, but the breakthrough came when they realised that he was wearing this hot girl's hat. It turned out that she had been the actual target, the mummy's boy frequented an incel chat room and was out for revenge after she knocked him back, he gave her one of his medicines which was supposed to make her need a pee, and then he filled the cubicle up with gas from one of the steampunk balloons and blew it up when he saw her hat entering... genius.
sufi
lala
Midsomer Murders was famously racist innit - all white for the first 10 years and then that producer got cancelled because he said that was what English village life is all about
and since then they have like a quota of non-white persons, undoubtedly calculated precisely by a committee
which seems to be a lot like how a lot of these shows are run - not just formulaic in the plots, but also in the way they have a set amount of sex and violence, carefully calibrated to the timeslot and the expected audience, and the story is wrapped around those money shots
sufi
lala
Another thing about detectives come to think of it is that its often a sort of retirement option (in addition to the vets mentioned earlier) - miss marple and poirot and so on
that goes for the actors too - they do gritty cops shows or whatever when they are young and spunky then end up put out to grass as a detective
james garner
dennis waterman
bergerac guy
plenty more i'm sure...
that goes for the actors too - they do gritty cops shows or whatever when they are young and spunky then end up put out to grass as a detective
james garner
dennis waterman
bergerac guy
plenty more i'm sure...
william_kent
Well-known member
Inspector Morse - goes to a rave!
"Stop it Lewis! Play that bit again.."
edit: AKA REWIND! HAUL IT BACK SELECTA!
"Thats the Hallelujah Chorus! Conducted by Sir Adrian Bolt!"
edited highlights from the best EVER Morse episode ( Cherubim and Seraphim , 1992 )
"Kevin, if you're listening, don't worry about it mate, it's sorted"
"garden of eden, it's gonna be good one folks"
IdleRich
IdleRich
Oh I didn't know about that. Although it makes sense. It's not racist like Death In Paradise which has genius whites bossing around sub-normal blacks - it's a different kind of racism which totally denies - or maybe forgets - the existence of non-whites altogether. I dunno which is worse... though I will say I grew up in a Midsomer style village and there was nobody who wasn't white living there or for miles around. The guys who owned the Indian restaurant in Shrivenham were the nearest I guess.
IdleRich
IdleRich
Oh yeah David Jason did one didn't he? Also Blackadder.