Tunnel, Bridge, Ferry, or Canoe: Compare and Contrast

[photo fox]

So, apparently there are previous versions of this?  Or something like it?

Anyway, debate 'em all in here.

[meisje]

I saw The Bridge first and was mesmerized by season 1, but wasn't as convinced by season 2 with the exception of a handful of the characters. Overall, that arc and Franka Potente's character felt like weak spots. I'm probably one of the few who really missed it not returning this summer! The combination of Diane Kruger, Demián Bichir, Matthew Lillard and Emily Rios felt surprisingly believable and interesting. Season 2 was sort of stuffed with guest stars or people finishing up other projects with some free time, sort of like they tried to apply a Justified-type approach in fanning out the cast, but it just didn't work for me on The Bridge.

Maybe around January or February I found Bron/Broen and became addicted quickly. And there are 3 seasons, so that's a bonus. In a way, the odd characters that are featured in all 3 versions might be the weak spot in the US version, since in all other versions they are believable to me since the culture itself is a character and unfamiliar to some extent. It was surprising that s3 went ahead with such huge changes, but it felt like a very strong season on its own, which was more than I was expecting.

I was really looking forward to The Tunnel and find it less engaging than I'd expected. It's possible I might need to binge it to get the full effect, hmm? While I find myself slightly obsessed with Clémence Poésy's hair, too often she just looks like a model doing "police work" while working a runway-somber face. I'm not really feeling Stephen Dillane too much here either. There isn't a believable intimacy between them that I saw in the other 2 versions, but it's also possible I finally just have The Bride/Bron/Broen/The Tunnel exhaustion, or have too many ideas already planted about how that relationship looks. I again like the reporter in this version, and perhaps this version of the billionaire's wife is the most enjoyable. Unfortunately due to Shia's antics and their DV history, Mia Goth pulls me out of anything I see her in... her character's storyline is so painful in both versions...

Edited July 12, 2016 by meisje
repetitive and redundant!

[atomationage]

Our library has the dvds for the first season. I was just watching the extras.  There isn't much there.  I liked Clemence Posey's interview best.  She says they stayed away from making her character autistic.  

[meisje]

Quote

She says they stayed away from making her character autistic.  

I think PBS is airing the dvd extras after each episode because I saw that interview too. It was a smart move to shift away from autism, imho, since the label has different connotations now than it did when the original was first conceived. For whatever reason, calling it autism or aspergers seems to allow pretty much everyone to have a certain amount of disdain for the character (in the show or as a viewer). And it presents a challenge with either naming it or setting up a checklist of situations to get the message across in a way that feels like overkill. There's already enough scene-to-scene replication: I winced when Elise changed her shirt in the middle of the office, since it was the same exact scene from both other versions, like so very many of the scenes, and it's feeling more like unwelcome déjà vu as it continues.

It's interesting that so many of the great male characters of books and series have so much crossover with these personality characteristics, but are instead lauded for their brilliance, semi-sociopathy, inability to commit, and single-mindedness in pursuit of their interests. I'm not sure so many of them would be hailed or beloved if each story began with letting us know they were neuro-atypical (in the form of a loaded label). I'm not sure if there is a bit of sexism in play naming Saga, etc. as autistic but not naming Martin something from the DSM-5 to describe his philandering, lack of connection to his children and in primary relationships, etc., or possibly it was to help the audience to sympathize with the Saga character...? It just feels like something to explain why this detective functions more like a stereotypical male in her job, which seems dated or unnecessary. 

The change appears to liberate the actress playing the role somewhat too, which is nice.

Edited July 25, 2016 by meisje

[meisje]

I actually loved this last episode, partly for the deviations and then for the beautiful explosion scene that was just galling. But...

Spoiler

... James Frain!? That guy is always the villain, always! It's the most spoiler-ific job of casting possible. I don't mind since I'm not expecting too many surprises, but that would have been the end of the mystery for me if I was totally unfamiliar with the series. He's probably my favorite actor cast in that role, but he had the same resume in 2012 and his typecasting spans the TV globe. Such mixed feelings about this turn!

Edited August 2, 2016 by meisje

[fauntleroy]

Among UK dramas that reach the US, I like Midsomer Murders in spite of its squareness, because it tosses the cliché of the tormented genius detective onto its head. Barnaby is a happily-married normal guy, not a genius, who just goes about his business in a methodical way. It's so refreshing! The old Law and Order was like that too.

All these other shows - the main characters have these various quirks, which mostly seem too 'written', too obviously tacked on for the sake of easy drama. Like someone who starts wearing a beret because they think it will make them more interesting. Seems to me you could subtract these quirks from both detectives in The Tunnel and the story would be just as compelling.

Edited August 3, 2016 by fauntleroy

[meisje]

Quote

All these other shows - the main characters have these various quirks, which mostly seem too 'written', too obviously tacked on for the sake of easy drama. Like someone who starts wearing a beret because they think it will make them more interesting. Seems to me you could subtract these quirks from both detectives in The Tunnel and the story would be just as compelling.

River and Marcella are two that come to mind with slightly-different issues, but it's always the haunted detective, for one reason or another. I've been basically watching anything Danish or Swedish and there are some differences there, but they don't always make complete sense. You might like The Sandhamn Murders, as I've heard it compared to Midsomer. I found it entertaining and the only real puzzle is how certain people go on, year after year, witnessing or running into active murders and murder scenes without any concern about it or other people intervening to ask, "so what's with you and murders?!" I'm watching Beck now and wondering how much longer the overt sexist dialogue and situations can possibly continue, and the main detective is basically a total asshole most of the time, with no particular redeeming qualities. The police work is also insanely bad, at least among the secondary cops, to the point where they just stand there staring shrugging as criminals (right in front of them) participate in drive-by shootings, murders, etc. It's tough to find a middle ground sometimes. Borgen is a shining star among fantastic storytelling and little-or-no murdering. It's just extremely compelling in its humanity. But I'm so grateful for the variety, and that even what has become a bunch of overused cliches in the US is still told and shown differently elsewhere with at least a new background. There are also characters and series where there is a notable past, but the storytelling transcends the start point, which are the best imho, since authors have to create these characters from a place that resonates with or interests them.  

I laughed so hard at the beret bit because it's dead on, and there is no shortage of show runners doing very mediocre jobs with mediocre shows who throw the 'beret' of story lines or topical issues in and then want to talk about their depth and vision, blaaahhhh.

Edited August 4, 2016 by meisje