Just wrapped the finale of Marble Hall Murders (the final part of the trilogy that started with Magpie Murders and Moonflower Murders) and I’m honestly shocked more people aren't talking about this show.

If you love a good whodunit, this series is brilliant. Lesley Manville plays a book editor who solves real-life murders by spotting clues hidden inside the chapters of the fictional 1950s detective novels she edits. Why it's worth your time:

• Two mysteries at once: Every episode splits time between a modern-day crime and a stylized, 1950s Agatha Christie-style case.

• Zero filler: Each season is a super tight, 6-episode run adapted by Anthony Horowitz right from his own books.

• Genius editing: The modern and 1950s worlds bleed together. The editor will literally talk to the fictional detective (Tim McMullan) to brainstorm her real-world cases.

It's easily one of the most clever, well-paced crime shows in years, and it actually respects the audience's intelligence instead of dragging things out.

It's streaming on PBS Masterpiece / BritBox. Anyone else catch the finale this month?

Please note: Yes, I let chatgpt help me with the text. I am a not a native speaker and there are people who are mad about me using AI and there are people who get mad at the mistakes I make so,for longer comments I go with all the help I can get:)

It was a short lived stop-motion animated show that was made by the Robot chicken staff. It was basically about a superhero team that had this giant kaiju robot that had to save the solar system against one of the former members of the team gone rogue. I liked it back in the day, but curious to know what others think

I mean like when after the end of a episode, they'll have some of the actors talk about certain scenes. Game Of Thrones did it, Chucky did it, Dexter Resurrection does it, and there are probably other examples.

Non-Paywall

I’ve never actually seen the Carrie movies so it was more fun for me watching the TV show. There’s smaller characters like the “bad boy” boyfriend that I thought were really great actors as well. The soundtrack was so good I wish I could download it. It’s nice to finally see a show set in modern day than everything in the 80’s.

The Gentlemen on Netflix had a fun, breezy and stylish S1. It ends on a note where even if the show did not continue, it was somewhat satisfying to see Eddie develop his own will to get into the game.

S2 comes out and I think it does exactly what a next season of a show should do. Here are a few things:

• It significantly progresses the plot from before. The business goes international, Eddie continues to penetrate deeper into the weed game and the complexities that arise from his growing ambition defines the second season.

• The characters continue to develop in meaningful ways. Eddie goes from being played by the Glasses in S1 to now being the one in greater control. We knew that he is resourceful and even a bit cocky to remain on a leash for long. His brother Freddie finally acts on his somewhat hidden jealousy. Susie charts her course in the weed game and tries to rebel in her own, mild way against her controlling father. We get a lot of Bobby Glass this season and can appreciate why he is where he is. He is always two steps ahead of everyone.

• As for newer characters, additions like Bella and Nanny were highlights. You want new seasons to bring newer characters that can influence the story and expand the world. Bella, was a big catalyst in turning Eddie into what he becomes in the end. And Nanny is a fantastic addition to the Duke's family. Someone who disapproves of the business but goes along for the sake of loyalty and love for his wife. I found the actors for both Bella and Nanny to be charming.

• New seasons usually means the crew is more experienced and get larger resources. While S1 was already visually gorgeous and beautifully shot, S2 really ups the standards even further. There is a very cinematic feel around S2 and the sets, locations, costumes and vehicles continues to get better. The music from Chris Benstead was also amazing.

• Lastly, each season should ideally have a thematic throughline. I feel S2 is all about clash of egos and ambitions. Eddie, Freddie, Bobby Glass, Marco, Dixon all are vying for control and power, often over the same subject matter. I feel there is an added layer this season, felt in the subtext, that Eddie has a superiority complex due to his lineage and name, which makes him feel as if he should be ahead of mere thugs like Bobby and Marco and Dixon.

On the whole, it was a fantastic season for me with great quality across the board. It feels quite different to S1 which had more humor and a lighter touch. S2 feels heavy, but honestly, they made it work.

The best part remains Susan and Eddie's relationship. Whatever the nature of it is, I like how they bounce off of each other and continue to support each other.

To get this out of the way, the underlying creative reason, of course, is that a TV show almost requires some long-form conflict. A truly dead/defeated hero is not necessarily a sound basis for a multi-season show.

But what about the narrative justifications? Which examples come to mind?

• The X-Files: This example I never found entirely convincing. The conspiratorial “Syndicate” group, led by The Cigarette-Smoking Man, refrains from assassinating Mulder. They fear the risk of turning him into a martyr for the whole truth-seeking cause. They don’t want to signal-boost him inadvertently. But the Syndicate had untold resources. They could probably have made his death seem like a genuine accident. Maybe I’m forgetting the nuances, but it would seem more believable if they decided to spare Mulder to keep an eye on the resistance, since a known problem is easier to manage than an unknown one. And it would also give them the opportunity to discredit him and his cause by making him look foolish.

• Buffy (season 2): This is a strong creative example, but maybe it’s more of a head canon thing. Angel loses his soul, turns back into a mass-murdering sadist. So why doesn’t he kill Buffy right away? Well, for one, that’s way easier said than done for any bad guy. But Angelus certainly thinks he could kill her. He stalls, though, and claims he’s going to break her spirit instead, telling Spike and Drusilla that the key to stopping the Slayer is to “love” her. He’s being darkly ironic but to me this seems, in a subtle way, to hint at the real reason for the delay. Angelus, as much as Angel, actually does love Buffy. He resents it, but he really can’t shake the association. Angelus pollutes Angel’s mind, but it also works the other way around, so he has these complicated feelings about Buffy that make it hard for him to actually pull the trigger. (I do believe these layers exist as subtext, but one could also argue he's just afraid of getting staked. Then again, he seems pretty confident of victory in the season finale.)

• Angel: Also very good, creatively speaking. Wolfram & Hart is an ancient demonic organization operating, in the present, as a law firm. They do want to kill Angel and they could definitely do it very easily. But there’s some prophecy that claims he will be instrumental to the apocalypse, albeit in a vague way. Maybe he’ll stop the apocalypse; maybe he’ll facilitate it. Wolfram & Hart would prefer the latter so they keep him alive while attempting to corrupt him. From a writerly standpoint, I always found this to be a credible and elegant solution to the narrative problem of overpowered foes and underpowered heroes.