User Reviews

The Suspicions Of Mr Whicher is based on Kate Summerscale's book of the same name. This book is not a novel: rather it is a factual (and, if truth be told, rather dry) recounting of the facts of the case and everything relating to it (including the individuals involved) based on the original documentary evidence.

The film concentrates on the case and doesn't tell us very much about the backgrounds of Mr Whicher, the Kent family, detection within the English police force and how it was viewed by the public, and so on. As such it, too, is a little dry, although the drama inherent in the story is augmented by performance drama.

The film may disappoint because the conclusion is somewhat perfunctory and the "what happened afterwards", delivered at length on the course of a couple of lengthy chapters in the book, is here given over the space of three or four title cards.

THE SUSPICIONS OF MR WHICHER is about one of the first British detectives, who is called to investigate the murder of a child in Victorian Wiltshire, only to discover the case is more complex than previously thought.

Part of ITV's recent spending spree on quality drama to counter-act it's image as the channel of THE X FACTOR and BRITAIN'S GOT TALENT, this is a rather thin drama that is a good half-hour too long. The drama is based on a historical case and whilst this adds authenticity it also interferes with the quality of the narrative. Real life is complex and odd and therefore more difficult to turn into compelling TV than fictional crime, which can be made to fit the narrative perfectly.

The acting, camera-work, editing and production values are all good but the screenplay suffers by trying to fit reality to a fictional template. Following Inspector Whicher's investigation as a whodunnit simply doesn't work. Partly because of the lack of twists and turns to maintain tension. Partly because Whicher is unable to prove whodunnit and therefore the denouement is thoroughly unsatisfying.

Ultimately it turns out that fiction is often more compelling than reality. This isn't bad TV, just thin material stretched too far.

Based on the best-selling novel, which I've not read, this was high-end costume-drama based on a true-life child murder in the mid-Victorian era. Thus we get expensive production values in casting, sets and costumes so that the piece doesn't lack in atmosphere.

What it did lack though was suspense as the to all intents forced-looking circumstantial suspicions of crack Metropolitan detective Whicher somehow turn out some five years after their initial dismissal (leading to the end of his career and descent into penury) to be true after all. This is probably why so much prominence was given to the examination of Whicher's character as he is beset by the obstructive local count police force, an unsympathetic local public, jeering local press and yet urged to "get a result" by a combination of parliamentary pressure, the local judiciary (at least initially) and his own over-confidence. Given that miscarriages of justice still occur today, often for some if not all of the same reasons as stated above, the plot has some relevance to today but is weakened by the act that Whicher's hunches largely come true.

The acting was largely acceptable for TV drama if not exceptional. Somehow though, Addy Considine didn't convince me that he was as driven as his character's actions would indicate and similarly Peter Capaldi failed to bring passion to his part as the philandering father figure who recoils from the unpleasant home-truths he's forced to face.

For me it was crying out for either a dramatic courtroom finale or major plot-twist and delivered neither. If that's because that's how this true-life adaptation actually played out, then fair enough, but as latter-day TV drama, I felt it missed its mark.

When a three-year old child is abducted from his cot and murdered in 1860 suspicion initially falls on the boy's nanny as he was in her room at the time; she however is adamant that she is innocent. When Inspector Whicher is dispatched from London to Wiltshire to take over the investigation he is inclined to believe her. His suspicion soon falls on the boy's sister Constance; the problem is he cannot find the evidence he needs and the local constabulary are less than helpful. As the case progresses Whicher becomes more and more convinced that she is guilty but the evidence that would send her to the gallows continues to elude him and on the day of the hearing to determine if Constance should stand trial it is clear that the villages are all sure of her innocence.

In this day and age we are used to murder mysteries where the detectives will examine a scene and find DNA, fingerprints and tiny traces of hair before analysing them with high-tech equipment; refreshingly there is none of that here; Whicher must build a case on largely circumstantial evidence or extract a confession if he is to see the killer punished… this did lead to a rather sudden ending but as the story was based on a real case one can't really complain about its resolution. Paddy Considine put in a fine performance as Inspector Whicher and Alexandra Roach was good as his chief suspect; the sixteen-year old Constance.