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
  • Latest Discussions

    • I edited my post because I couldn't be sure we were talking about politicians and I couldn't be bothered to read it all back. But it was off the back of a thread discussing labour councillors, so it went without saying really and I should have left it.  What I said was 'There's something very aggressive about language like that - it's not big and it's not clever. Some of the angry energy that comes from the far left is pretty self-defeating.' (In relation to a labour councillor rather immaturely, in my view, wearing a jumper that read 'fuck the Tories').  But I don't recall saying that "violent rhetoric" is exclusively the domain of the left wing. So I do think you're taking a bit of a bit of leap here. 
    • You literally just edited your earlier reply to remove the point you made about it being “politicians”.  Then you call me pathetic.    I’m  not trying to say you approve any of the ugly right wing nonsense.  But I AM Saying your earlier post suggesting  violent rhetoric being “left wing” was one-sided and incorrect 
    • I never said that. Saying I don’t like some of the rhetoric coming from the left doesn’t mean I approve of Farage et al saying that Afghans being brought here to protect their lives and thank them for their service means there is an incalculable threat to women.    Anything to score a cheap point. It’s pretty pathetic. 
    • To be fair we are as hosed as the majority of other countries post-Covid. The problem is Labour promised way too much and leant in on the we need change and we will deliver it and it was clear to anyone with a modicum of sense that no change was going to happen quickly and actually taking the reigns may have been a massive poison- chalice. As Labour are finding to their cost - there are no easy answers.  A wealth tax seems straightforward but look how Labour have U-turned on elements of non-dom - why? Because the super rich started leaving the country in their droves and whilst we all may want them to pay more tax they already pay a big chunk already and the government saw there was a problem.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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