altNothing is so likely to lure me to the television set as a good, short mystery.  Fortunately or unfortunately, Netflix has a goodly assortment of the same.  Lately, our queue has been filled with an offering from Canadian TV, Murdoch Mysteries.  The still-running show is based on the books of Maureen Jennings; I've placed a hold at our library for the first of her tales of Detective William Murdoch, hoping to find them an improvement over the filmed version.

Not that the shows aren't enjoyable—if they weren't, we wouldn't be into the third season now.  The premise is interesting:  Murdoch is a police detective in 1890's Toronto who solves his cases using scientific methods and equipment that are unknown, little used, or even not quite invented yet.  Think CSI: Victorian Toronto.

What causes the fingernails-on-the-blackboard feeling is that, while slightly advancing scientific knowledge for the time period, the show greatly advances the main characters' social attitudes.  Be it feminism, abortion, homosexuality, birth control, dating behavior, the church, business practices, or government agents, the setting may be the late 19th century, but the attitudes of the main characters are pure 21st century Hollywood.

You can only push the audience's credulity so far.  If you ask them to accept one unrealistic premise, the rest of your story should be believable.  J. R. R. Tolkien peopled his created world with fantastic creatures—but they thought, spoke, and acted in familiar ways that we could understand.  (That's one of the quarrels I have with the movies—I find them less believable than the books—but that's another post.)  J. K. Rowling had no difficulty getting us to accept a world of magic because Hogwarts was otherwise (I assume) a typical British boarding school.  (Where it wasn't, the discontinuity was glaring.  I still haven't gotten over a British boy describing something as "the size of a baseball bat.")

I'll accept a Toronto police detective using x-ray photography, but I can't swallow a supposedly devout Victorian-era Catholic seriously pursuing a romantic relationship with a non-Catholic, and one with strident anti-Catholic attitudes at that.  And I choke every time a character says to a victim's loved one, "I'm sorry for your loss."  I don't know exactly when that expression became commonplace, but it was within my lifetime.  We've learned to live with the frequent anachronisms, but they diminish the show's credibility.

My favorite character is Constable George Crabtree (played by Jonny Harris), supposedly naive and somewhat dim-witted, but often smarter, and certainly more likeable, than the rest.

The mysteries themselves are inconsistent:  some so ridiculous we're certain they cut out important scenes to save time, some very clever with more unexpected twists than an Olympic gymnast.

But what I really like is the music, especially the theme song, and the opening credits.  Composer Robert Carli has made the most creative use of percussion (think percussion toys and "bells" in all forms) and percussion-like instrumentation (e.g. pizzicato strings) that I can remember.  There's also an artistic flair to the colors and the lettering of the credits that appeals to me.  You can get a taste of it here.  But only a taste, because for some reason the action of the video seems sped up, which takes away from its elegance.

Posted by sursumcorda on Tuesday, September 4, 2012 at 9:28 pm | Edit
Permalink | Read 5157 times
Category Reviews: [first] [previous] [next] [newest]
Comments

I'll have to give it a try. Sarah



Posted by dstb on Wednesday, September 05, 2012 at 6:48 am

Finally a post pointing out the painfully obvious inaccuracies in this ridiculous series! I too feel they've tried to insert the 21st century into the 19th. Why???? Undoubtedly to appeal to a wider viewing audience. If I wanted 21st century crime, I'd tune in to the carnage of 'Criminal Minds'. I love this era and truly wish someone would have the courage to portray it accurately. I think the Granada Sherlock Holmes series was a good example of this.

What do you think of the 'James Gillies' story line? Appallingly stupid, from the 'buried alive' (remember CSI?) to her near hanging (note the discrepancy in the hanging scene with the "Hangman" episode, more reminiscent of Anne Boleyn's beheading). The latest episode was really the last straw; him jumping off a bridge and Murdoch in pursuit raised the show to a comic book level quality. I really think I've had all I can take. Yannick Bisson's abysmal acting ability also seems to run in the family; his wife and daughter are equally painful to watch.



Posted by Joanne on Wednesday, December 04, 2013 at 9:29 pm

I apologize for the delayed approval of your comment, Joanne. I can't comment on the episodes you mention, because I'm still waiting for Netflix to release Season 6 in DVD. But a quick search online about subsequent episodes leads me to believe that I will agree with you.

It's a shame, really. Whatever happened to "If you want to send a message, use Western Union"? Preaching through movies is only effective if it's subtle; otherwise it's just embarrassing.



Posted by SursumCorda on Sunday, December 08, 2013 at 7:35 am
Trackbacks
Murdoch Mysteries Revisited
Excerpt: We're now into the fourth season of Murdoch Mysteries, and I'm sorry that will be our last season for a while, unless we move to Costa Rica, Papua New Guinea, or some other place in DVD Region Code Four.  (I've been an anti-fan of region codes sin...
Weblog: Lift Up Your Hearts!
Date: October 11, 2012, 6:19 pm
Except the Dying
Excerpt: Except the Dying by Maureen Jennings (St. Martin's Press, 1997) I had been looking forward to reading the first of Jennings' detective stories, the inspiration for the Murdoch Mysteries television series; as I stated in my review of the shows, I'd hop...
Weblog: Lift Up Your Hearts!
Date: September 28, 2012, 8:53 am