Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I'm quite enjoying this, it's a bit better than the previous series. Thank gawd no Saskia Reeves* this time.


Enjoyable tosh, just like Spooks, which it's not surprising to learn is done by the same folks.


*I'm actually quite partial to our Saskia, but she was just awful in Luther.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/17998-luther/#findComment-447597
Share on other sites

Two out of four so far Otto.


Anyway.....Some of the writing's a bit, well you know.. improbable. How come Luther can just stare at crime scene photographs and deduce that the killer's work is all about silence and emptiness? Hmmm? Well, is he clairvoyant or an I missing something?


Also, having a six inch nail hammered through his hand how come he didn't rush off to the nearest hospital without bleeding half to death and then in the next scene he's wearing a bandage on it?


Still, it's enjoyable enough and the ladies have got a bit of eye candy to watch on an otherwise dull Tuesday night.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/17998-luther/#findComment-447628
Share on other sites

Plot holes, improbable insights, inexplicable story progression, paper thin characters, bizarre motives, ludicrous plot devices. Yep it's Spoother.


Great fun though.


*uncovers sheet over barrles* "There's enough spopholdahyde to dissolve three thousand children, he was shipping them to India, they'd have dissappeared without a trace"

*characters look at each other questioningly, shrug and down a quart of moonshine*

"Makes sense to me boss"

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/17998-luther/#findComment-447640
Share on other sites

What was that Janet Jackson / Luther Vandross song where they "improvise" a bit towards the end and she says, "Oooh, Luther"? Spot on Janet, Idris Elba is delicious.


And I think I've said this before on here somewhere (in many respects, this place is like the morning room in an old people's home, all telling each other the same stories over and over and occasionally soiling ourselves), but Cracker was just as improbable in his powers of deduction: what's that, he used the possessive with the gerund but has the hands of a labourer? He must be a monk. I blame Conan Doyle.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/17998-luther/#findComment-447984
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...