Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Brilliant no - contrived yes. I was very disappointed that plot relied on (a) the owner of the charity shop who kept a detailed inventory of every item that that been brought in when and by whom and (b) that the police just happened to find a photo with of the scarf wearers car driver with the license plate clearly visible.
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/50811-the-missing/#findComment-794222
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Ah you are still watching it EP.


The biggest plot hole was when he read the messages on the guys phone, got the proof of the connection to the other paedophile and beat him up only to leave the phone on the ground within reach of the beaten up chap so he could pick up said phone and call Garrett to warn him Nesbitt was coming.


That was a bit of a plot hole but EP if you spend your time focussing on plot holes when you should be enjoying something then maybe you are actuary an auditor and better off sticking with the day job.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/50811-the-missing/#findComment-802368
Share on other sites

I dunno, he's hardly a hardened criminal, so that's all vaguely plausible, and it was his number he found, again, can't see why not.


The guilt is like a cancer story retold was a bit contrived I'll grant you.


I guess the aritst pick up was there to paint the french as a bunch with loose morals and gitanes permanently stuck to lower lip. I jest, probably something about how his life is unhinged, he walks away from a young beautiful woman or something....


We're still very much enjoying it though, am liking the pace and the drip feed, even the slightly daft twist at the end of the episode, but only because i'd worked it out after the 'regrets' comment and got to feel all smug ;)

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/50811-the-missing/#findComment-802413
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

    • OP is wrapped in such hyperbole that it takes a couple of reads to extract the key point, which is exactly what you say it is. Obviously if the tickets were issued before the signs went up then they should be reversed. If OP is really concerned about it then they should also email the parking enforcement team to ask them to cancel those tickets themselves instead of waiting for the drivers to challenge them.
    • They're obviously not competent to witness the documents in the OP's case.  The list of required qualifications looks to me similar to the Land Registry's requirement connected with a TR1. Vladi, from my own experience I'd not rely on email inquiries of potentials.   The response I got an email to the solicitors in Melbourne Grove was from another of their branches and was inconsequential.  From William Bailey, addressed to their published  reception or info mailbox and saying I could drop in at very short notice, I'm afraid I got no response  at all, even after also mentioning that  I'd be looking for assistance with a will in the near future and expected to be asking them.  From an online search i did note quite a few in the Camberwell area.  In the end though I was able to rely on an online verification, arranged by one of the other parties.
    • Hard to get evidence for what has happened, but going forward, get cctv evidence of trespass and any interference, ask you other neighbours to as well. Contact solicitor and report to police and council. get more plants to replace those destroyed
    • Thank you, finding out they'd done the same to three of my neighbor’s trees made it a bit easier to accept — it wasn’t just me they were targeting; they’re just toxic people in general.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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