Hottoceame The Age of Commercialism

Usamah Harvey The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

Jonah Abbott There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

Scarlet The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

susankarl written by Elizabeth George, you will surely find these lacking. Characters missing, character changes. Generally these series out of the U.K. are well acted and the scenery, of course, is lovely. But if you are a fan of the novels, you will not see the wonderful twisted plots Ms. George weaves.

rosalindteam I saw my first episode a couple of months ago. I loved it ... until the last ten minutes. The end was plain disappointing. You were left with a strange feeling of hopelessness, rather than anything being (properly) ended.Then last night we happened to come across another episode as we were flicking channels, looking for something to watch. It looked promising, I thought. (I had forgotten about my previous experience with this series.) It was going so well. The acting was great. The plot was beautifully crafted, I thought. I would have given it a 9 out of 10 - but for the ending. (Here's the spoiler, sorry.) One of the main characters died. I can understand that happening in a series when it is the last episode of the season & the producers need to write out a character who'll be unavailable for the next season - but that wasn't the case in this episode. It was more as if, the viewers *have to* be given something miserable and pointless - yet again.I don't know who the writer is, but I can only guess that when he/she went to film-writing school, the class on How to Write a Good Ending was at 8 am or similar - that is, far too early, so this writer slept in and missed that class every time.It has great acting & a good beginning and middle - but that cannot make up for miserable endings which leave a nasty taste in one's mouth.I give it only 2 out of 10.

tedg I have now rewatched several of these, and have refined my appreciation. The usual models for these sorts of projects is to distribute the episodes among different directors and screenwriters, assuming that the continuing characters are what matters. This series is different. The producers kept a firm hand on the way the episodes are framed; there is a consistent framework carried from one to the other that understand George's structure perhaps better than she does herself.There is a murder or two. The dynamics of this murder happen in their own word, a world of madness or unraveled anger. The sense behind this is fantastically abstract, and is framed by a sort of soap opera centered on the events and characters that are suspects.A more human, immediate layer — an entire third world — is the soap opera of a quite different nature in the lives of the continuing characters: Lynley and Havers. He is derived from Peter Wimsey, a second order aristocrat engaged in justice for his own reason. He has friends and lovers. Havers is an abrasive young lower class woman, struggling with family issues. This world is layered as well between Lynley and Havers.One can easily imagine George seeing herself as Havers, watching and commenting on Lynley as he tries to understand the dynamics of the world he has entered to solve the crime, and find the embedded "world of motive." This layered narrative format is understood by the producers of the series. Significant attention is paid to camera distance to register intimacy or lack of it. In particular, Havers is always the omphalos of the thing. Sharon Small is the actress who has taken on this central role and she is simply magnificent in it. She has the job of being a person in the thing, but that is an ordinary chore for an actor. She also has to be the observer and observer of the observer as the writer's surrogate. We never lose sight of the fact that this is a novelist's construction and she has included herself in the world as its origin.Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.

TheLittleSongbird I do admit it is not my absolute favourite of all detective shows, Inspector Morse gets that honour, but The Inspector Lynley Mysteries is a very underestimated and compelling one, made possible by the superb performances of Nathaniel Parker and Sharon Small, who play two somewhat mismatched detectives Tom Lynley and Barbara Havers. Their chemistry was very believable and grew in the show's run. All the episodes were very well shot, and the locations were beautiful. The story lines were interesting, some are slower moving than others, and there were one or two disappointing final solutions, but other than those two minor problems the stories are fine. The dialogue is well written and delivered, the banter between Lynley and Havers always working a treat, and the direction of each episode is convincing enough. Overall, a very good detective show, not the best, but the worst? No. 9/10 Bethany Cox