Under the Bridge

I hadn't heard about this horrific incident before watching the series and I haven't read the book (nor will I if the series is anything to go off). The overall filming and performances in this series are really good and I think it's important to raise awareness of stories like this in memory of those lost, in this case Reena.

The pacing is okay - it dragged out for more episodes than necessary. My biggest annoyance with this series, is Rebecca. I've read that for a start she wasn't actually involved with the police, so this fictionalised aspect seems like an unnecessary perspective. Especially when her involvement isn't really there to serve justice for the victim but rather to stick up for and protect a perpetrator. Her character is extremely annoying and acts like a child. Why is she hanging out with kids, it's just strange and gross under the circumstances. Like I say, I haven't read the book so I don't know if she portrays herself in this way but she isn't alive now to ensure she doesn't look like a creep and in my opinion she looks like one in this series.

As a "who did it" series it is decent and worth a watch, but because it is based on something tragic that really happened I just think the inaccuracy seems disrespectful and it would have been better if it was more Reena focused than Rebecca focused.

I knew nothing about the case or this adaptation of the story prior to watching it. I was skeptical if I would even make it past the first episode because this type of drama isn't really my preference. Surprisingly, as the multi-generational back stories were told I really enjoyed learning about the many characters. The acting was average for a cast most of whom I have never see before.

The story itself was tragic and full of betrayal at every turn leading to the murder. Once the law closes in and arrests made it was all downhill for me. The mystery is solved by the very unspectacular truths. The rest of the episodes have to rely on dull drama and acting which bored me to tears.

There were many unexplained "evidence" items or material references that just fell off the map. If it was important enough to put onscreen and discussed then why leave them out at the end?

I gave the series a 5 because its definitely worth watching the first half of the season although there is a serious drop off in the second half.

Just two episodes in and I'm completely hooked. The acting is very good so far. Chloe Guidry is doing a great job. Can't stop watching her, at the same time hating her. Lily Gladstone gives an amazing performance as well. The story line is great. Sad that it is a true story of this young girls murder. Complex issues all around with each character. I'm definitely all in.

The cinematography is beautiful.

I have not read this book so pardon me if I insult anybody that has, and if this TV series by any chance deviates too far from the book. I hate when that happens. Like with "All the Light We Cannot See"

When I heard about this show I was very intrigued. I was the same age as Reena and growing up in Victoria at the same time. I have connections to this story that I don't want to make public but to say the least I was very interest in how this story would come to be on the screen. It's that time honored tradition of be careful when something is "based" on a true story.

Fair warning I couldn't finish the second episode because everything around the murder is heighted for television drama. When your main character is the author of a book about the crime written after the fact but somehow the show puts her there as the murder is going on is beyond me. All this does it take the focus of the real victim Reena Virk.

Not to mention in the real world Victoria is the 12th largest city in Canada and not some rural run town poor town like in the show. I had to laugh because the real Craigflower bridge is right by the Old Island Highway and one of the busiest intersections in the city and not surrounded by nothing like the show. When in reality this all went down in such a high traffic area is more shocking than this show where the population of 200 live miles from everyone and everywhere.

We owe it to the memory of Reena Virk to remember her story and the tragic details and not some fantasy made up to celebrate a writer with a tangential connection to the murder. From what I've seen from these first two episodes the show is more interested in the murders (truly awful people that got away way to lightly if you read the truth and not watch this show) than the victim herself. More interested in creating false narratives that work for TV but have nothing to do with real life.

Victoria and the family of Reena Virk deserve better, the scum involved in the actual crime deserve worse.

The show should have been predominantly about Reena. Sometimes it felt like she was an afterthought and that it was "the Rebecca Godfrey show". Like it was more about Rebecca's trauma than the Virks's. As a resident of Victoria for over 35 years, this crime has stuck with me, so my one criticism is that it didn't focus on Reens enough.

That said, the acting is superb and the portrayals of Warren and Kelly are spot on, Kelly in particular. There has never been any warmth behind the eyes of Ellard. She is a psychopath and any native Victorian knows this. Make no mistake, that woman is a monster and has manipulated the Canadian justice system as much as possible. Read up on it if you're not in the know.

At the end of the day it captures what a senseless tragedy this truly is and should be shown to adolescents to understand the depths of racism, bullying and the need for acceptance.