Everything about Murdoch Mysteries, eh?

Featured, Murdoch Mysteries, X Company

Comments and queries for the week of February 26

3 Comments

Murdoch Mysteries showrunner explains heartbreaking episode

I don’t agree with Peter Mitchell that “the mystery of where [Roland] came from was ultimately solved.” Detective Freddie Pink’s research was fuzzy on details that just did not add up. Example: there was an official record of the mother going into labour and a midwife attending, so how could the record also say, without raising eyebrows, that no baby was born? The record said that the mother went into labour “before her time,” but it must have been close to full term because Roland was a fully developed, healthy, energetic baby at nine months. (Julia made a point of saying he was physically “perfect”.)

Maybe the midwife, Joanne Braxton, pretended that the mother went into labour before the baby was developed and so it was a miscarriage, not a birth? OK, the birth took place on an “out-of-town” homestead, but it wasn’t all that isolated because a midwife was summoned from Brantford. Wouldn’t there be at least one person (a sister, mother, neighbour, friend, her husband) who knew the mother and would know how far along she was? Even if a baby is stillborn, it would have to be recorded as such and buried in a legal manner. With so many details not known, could it be that the mother did not have a complicated pregnancy after all, but Joanne Braxton, as midwife, murdered her in order to steal her baby? Murdoch should order the mother’s body exhumed. If the midwife’s report was correct, an autopsy would find the body of an unborn fetus in the mother’s womb. That would confirm that Roland was not Harold Connor’s child. An autopsy could also determine if a live birth took place, but not that the baby was Roland. The Braxtons were professional thieves and could have stolen baby Roland from any one of many couples, or from a hospital, orphanage, or even just bought him from a poor mother. —Patricia

X Company shines in Season 2

I said on Twitter a few weeks ago that it is not just good Canadian TV, it is just good TV.

I do wish people spoke their native tongues all of the time. But, I imagine that would require the main cast to speak German and French which might be difficult. I think audiences are no longer afraid of subtitles (if they ever were).

Seek out Heavy Water War (a Norwegian show about the German nuke program) and Generation War (a German show about WW2, amazing), they are both excellent. —Dave

Why are there subtitles for the German speakers when they are, at times, not on the screen long enough to read? Of course the Germans speak German. I get that! The French speakers speak English! It seems an unnecessary frill that does not add to the story and, in fact, takes away the obvious struggle of emotions that the German officer and his wife are dealing with. And, to top it off, “The Corporation” will slap a banner ad across the bottom of the screen at the most inopportune times: when there is a subtitle being displayed. Otherwise, we both love the series. It was an amazing period of history when ordinary people became extraordinary and made huge differences to the outcome of the war. We have been aware of the Camp X/Oshawa/ Whitby/Bowmanville contribution to the war for years. Thanks for letting me gripe about the language thing. —DB

Wolverine documentary: A CBC-TV first

I always record The Nature of Things and in particular I like the wildlife docs. I’ve only seen a wolverine once in the wild, while at a place called Wolverine Lake, B.C. (maybe three hours north of Prince George) and it was swimming. It took me a while to figure out what it was because it was all wet and I was looking through binoculars but after it went on land it dawned on me. I also saw a caribou swimming in the lake as well later the next day. Having spent a lot of time up in the northern forests of western Canada, I’ve seen plenty of wildlife but that remains my only wolverine sighting and it was incredibly exciting. —Alicia

 

Got a comment or question about Canadian TV? greg@tv-eh.com or @tv_eh.

Facebooktwitterredditlinkedinmail
Featured, Murdoch Mysteries

Murdoch Mysteries’ showrunner explains heartbreaking episode

13 Comments

**SPOILER ALERT: This story contains key plot points about Monday’s newest episode of Murdoch Mysteries, “Wild Child.”**

And just like that, William and Julia no longer have a child. Monday’s latest episode was a heartbreaker for fans who loved seeing the series’ lead characters as parents. By the conclusion of “Wild Child,” Freddie Pink had learned the Braxton’s weren’t Roland’s parents after all. Turns out his real father was Harold Connor, a carpenter. By episode’s end William and Julia had done the right—if painful—thing by presenting Harold with the son he never knew he had.

Fans who’d grown attached to the little sprite—me included—were quick to take to social media, asking why Roland was brought onto the show, only to be taken away weeks later.

We contacted Peter Mitchell, Murdoch Mysteries‘ showrunner, to explain the situation. Here’s his answer:

“Hard question to answer. I guess that it was just a chapter in the ongoing story of ‘William and Julia.’ There are many more chapters to play out and we don’t really know where it is going to end.

We thought it would be interesting to see another side of both Murdoch and Ogden, and giving them a child was a way to examine their paternal instincts and give us opportunity to play them as both husband and wife and mother and father. I think we were also aware that as this show is a procedural-based drama as opposed to a domestic drama and that the situation could not last. We wanted to keep the baby around long enough that the decision to return him to his father was of consequence (as well as allowing for some humour—William becomes a dad and immediately takes up golf). It was also important that this decision to give up the child was not thrust upon them. Instead, the appearance of the natural father was a result of one of our characters doing “the right thing.” In doing so the surrendering of Roland illuminated the strong character of both our leads.

Murdoch_Mysteries

Pragmatically, we wanted this to play out over part of the season as opposed to dropping a baby on them in the finale. Much like with their wedding, we didn’t want what, on the surface, is usually considered the “big event” of a TV season to be our “big event.” I think this forces us to work harder to come up with engaging stories. On a practical level, it leaves open the possibility that ANYTHING could happen in the last four episodes if THEY have already done that to US.

It is also true that one of the reasons for the success of Murdoch is that the engine under the surface of the engaging characters, amusing lines and nice hats always has to be driving forward. Murdoch is one of those shows that gives me little leeway in the editing room. The scenes feed into each other in a way a multi character ensemble drama doesn’t. The narrative drive can occasionally be interrupted by domestic moments but the show would not ‘click’ if we have too many of them. As Paul Aitken, one of our writers, constantly reminds all of us when we are coming up with stories, ‘where’s the mystery?’ is the one question we always have to address. In the Roland arc the mystery was there from the beginning—who is this kid? Many of the fans doubted the people who were purported to be his parents actually were and in the end, the mystery of where he came from was ultimately solved. For some, the result was heartbreaking. For others, Murdoch and Ogden once again demonstrated why they are heroes.

But the kid(s) who played Roland were cute as a button. And much like real life the biggest fight we had in the room was not how long to keep the kid around but what the heck we should name him.

Some are still divided on it….”

—Peter Mitchell

 

What do you think, Murdoch fans? Sound off below in the Comments section.

Murdoch Mysteries airs Mondays at 8 p.m. on CBC.

Facebooktwitterredditlinkedinmail
Murdoch Mysteries

Link: How Yannick Bisson arrived at his starring role on Murdoch Mysteries

From Luaine Lee of the Toronto Star:

How Yannick Bisson arrived at his starring role on Murdoch Mysteries
“It was getting to the point where you sort of have to cut your losses a little bit. You have to be responsible and I had opportunities. I was starting to do well at building homes and things like that. That interested me a lot as well. So I was debating whether to go do that full time or not. And I was looking for a sign, really.” Continue reading. 

Facebooktwitterredditlinkedinmail
Featured, Murdoch Mysteries

Murdoch Mysteries tackles racism in Toronto

1 Comment

Canada may have been the end of the line for the Underground Railroad and a haven for slaves escaping from the United States, but African Americans suffered from racism here too.

That point was driven home during “Colour Blinded,” which was as much about the struggle of African Americans at the time as it was about murder. Mary Pedersen’s script—directed by one of last week’s guest stars, Leslie Hope—shed light on a not-so-wonderful truth about Toronto the Good through the eyes of Rebecca James. Rebecca is one of the lucky few treated with respect, but she’s certainly not the norm. Most African Americans worked as low-paid drivers, gardeners and labourers, and were viewed with distaste.

Chief Constable Jeffrey Davis was a summation of that, eager to make an arrest in the murder of a white man in an African American church and fingering a parishioner simply because he had a cut on his hand. His directive that every church member have their fingermarks taken because it’ll save time when they commit crimes in the future was awful to hear, but was likely commonplace at the time.

Yes, Crabtree was there to offer some levity regarding raccoons (“I don’t trust anything that has hands for feet!”), but for the most part “Colour Blinded” was an education, including featuring real-life Toronto alderman William Hubbard, who was the city’s first black councillor. Though Hubbard only appeared in a few minutes of Monday’s instalment, he left a large footprint in Toronto’s history. As outlined in Mark Maloney’s 2011 piece in the Toronto Star, Hubbard’s parents escaped to Canada from Virginia. Born in 1842 near Bloor and Bathurst streets, he became a baker, created a commercial oven and was working for his uncle’s livery service when fate stepped in.

Hubbard saved George Brown—newspaper editor and father of Confederation—from drowning in the Don River. Brown hired Hubbard as his driver and the two became friends. Eventually, Hubbard entered politics, eventually winning a council seat in Ward 4. By the time Murdoch Mysteries catches up with Hubbard in 1903, he’s on the verge of becoming Toronto’s first controller, pushing forward plans to improve waterworks, road upgrades and having the authority to enact local improvement bylaws.

Murdoch Mysteries is, at its core, a TV whodunnit. But by addressing actual events—and people—from history, it’s one heck of an entertaining and important lesson about Toronto, this country and the people living in it.

Murdoch Mysteries airs Mondays at 8 p.m. on CBC.

Facebooktwitterredditlinkedinmail
Featured, Murdoch Mysteries

Lucy Maud Montgomery drops by Murdoch Mysteries

1 Comment

If George Crabtree had had his way, Lucy Maud Montgomery’s beloved novel would have been called Dan of Green Gables.

Monday’s rollicking MM episode, “Unlucky in Love,” had a lot going on in it, what with a murdered husband, his bride among those accused in his death and Roland the cutest baby in primetime TV. Add to that a visit by Lucy Maud Montgomery and Lori Spring’s script was totally packed. In some ways that’s too bad, as seasoned actors like Leslie Hope and Mag Ruffman had to make due with limited screen time because of the massive LMM-George Crabtree B-story. An embarrassment of riches, I guess.

The latest real-life character to make their way into the lives of Murdoch Mysteries was none other than Lucy Maud Montgomery (Alison Louder), who signed up for George’s creative writing class because she’d just begun putting pen to paper on the life of a red-haired, freckle-faced girl. Trouble was, George didn’t think her story was exciting enough—or that it should even be a girl in the lead role. His suggestion that she make it Dan of Green Gables—and amp up the drama by inserting ghosts into the story—was enjoyable enough, but alleging LMM reworked the character to reflect George’s foundling background and “flights of fancy” imagination was just too good. (Did anyone else cheer when George got his smooch on with her?) It was, therefore, a wise decision by the producers to include a disclaimer the storyline was all in good fun and George didn’t really influence Maud’s tale because, well, he’s not a real guy. (As an aside, Anne of Green Gables is top of mind lately, what with YTV’s upcoming TV movie and CBC’s own Anne project in the works.)

Alas, despite Arwen Humphreys fans tweeting #MargaretMonday over the weekend, we were left with a bare few minutes of Toronto’s newest wedding planner. It’s always great to see Brackenreid’s spunky better half verbally sparring, but it all came to an end far too quickly. The lineup of potential suspects in the groom’s murder—the driver, the florist or the electrician—and eventual mastermind of the whole thing quickly pushed Margaret to the wayside. Fingers crossed she’s got more scenes coming before the end of the season.

Murdoch Mysteries airs Mondays at 8 p.m. on CBC.

Facebooktwitterredditlinkedinmail