Waking the Dead (TV Series) Magdalene 26: Part 1 (2009) User Reviews

It's a fine start.

[Sleepin_Dragon · 8/10 · 1 March 2021]

Why is a nude woman running from the scene of a car accident?

I really did enjoy this story, it feels very different to previous episodes. We don't just get flashbacks, we have two stories run in parallel, the current day story, with the woman in hospital, who's been subjected to all manner of crimes, and supposedly her story from the 1960's, where her DNA was found at a crime scene.

It's very good, it's as complex and gruesome as you'd expect, Boyd is shouting at everyone, and we have the complexity of Stella's situation (fabulous long hair into the bargain.)

The scenes from the 1960's look really great, terrific production values.

Chilling the way they show the nuns here, they're cruel, without compassion, and downright sadistic, there's plenty of documented evidence to say they weren't exactly kind to their charges.

Sharon Maughan is the standout thus far for me.

It's hard to fault, I think it's a grand series opener, I'm intrigued. 8/10.

An impressive scene-setter for the denoument in Part Two

[hindsonevansmike · 9/10 · 22 April 2020]

We had the luxury of watching this (and part two) n one uninterrupted broadcast on one of the Freeview channels in April 2020 during the Coronavirus lockdown (I wonder how this will look in five years' time?)

The main part of my review is lodged against Part Two. The scene-setting is well done (OK, we have to suspend disbelief in a few spots, but at the time the Catholic Church was considered to be beyond reproach and the Magdalene laundries were a wonderful place where pregnant teenagers could redeem themselves in a "supportive, caring environment" - NOT!

The story develops steadily, leading to the explosive finale in Part Two.

We are, increasingly, moving towards the decision to purchase the entire box-set of this ten-year production run.

Funniest Grace Foley line of dialogue.

[PippinInOz · 25 October 2011]

This one has it all.

Vicious nuns, convents, twins separated at birth, a handsome young Irish bloke and:

GRACE FOLEY'S FUNNIEST LINE OF DIALOGUE:

To cut a long story short (as Spandau Ballet were keen to say.....), a corpse was found in mid 1960s Soho with blood on his lips - not his. As the team ponder this forensic evidence, Grace intones sagely: 'Vampiric ritual?' Priceless!

There is more than a hint at fairy tale / folk tale motif here. Not least when Magdalene 26 escapes from the castle (the convent) climbing over the wall and jumping into a new life, while her friend sacrifices herself in order for her to break out.

The backdrop of the Magdalene 'homes' for unmarried mothers provides an unrelenting darkness and sense of cruelty which parallels the cruelties inflicted by the Turkish 'gang'. The two sisters are co-joined by this violence. Nasty and dark with a genuinely moving ending.

Did I say Gothic? Well not quite. Although that 'vampire' reference by Grace at the beginning lends itself rather nicely.

terribly disappointing episode in what is otherwise a wonderful series

[markfranh · 3/10 · 24 November 2014]

My wife and I have been slowly working out way though all the old Waking the Dead episodes since discovering the DVDs at the library a few years ago. Many are excellent. Most are very good or at least good. Some have been disappointing but this is the first episode where we concluded the plot was so full of nonsensical holes that it was just rubbish from start to finish.

Where to begin without giving away any spoilers?

Well, a few minutes into the plot, we are told that a recovered kidnapped victim's case has been turned over to Boyd's unit because her DNA matched DNA found on two murder victims in a 1967 club in Soho. WHAT? Really. Absolutely amazing considering DNA testing didn't even exist until three decades or so later.

Yes, it is possible to go back and retest old evidence from old crimes but this is only done when the evidence has been preserved AND there is reason to have done so. This is not the case here. In this case, the 1967 DNA was supposed to have been found on the bodies of the two victims (i.e. as we later discover, on the faces, not on a piece of physical evidence) and in any case the case was closed and resolved so nobody 30+ years later is going to go back and test this DNA that they wouldn't have been collected in the first place on the offchance that DNA testing was invented 30 years later!! The premise was an insult to our intelligence.

It was ridiculous. And as it was so critical to the whole plot, it really made the whole writing a total travesty.

We were tempted to give up at the point. We didn't and it only got worse.

We've all seen shows or read novels where the detective says something like "I don't believe in coincidences." Well, there are coincidences galore here and we were supposed to believe they were simply coincidences throughout.

The dead in 1967 were Turks and the DNA from 2009 also Turks. Coincidence apparently, though it had us wondering what was going on for a while..

The priest from Ireland arrives at the club in Soho to track down the girl moments after the girl flees the club after the murders running straight into the arms of the priest. Worse, we learn towards the end that another character who was connected to the girl but had absolutely no connection whatsoever to London let alone the club in Soho, just happens to be walking past at the same time and sees the girl run into the priest. A double coincidence? You bettya!

Then we have the photos of both the second kidnapping victim and the kidnappers taken moments before the kidnapping presented to a key character for confirmation of identities. Both photos were closeups. Neither could have been taken by CCTV given the angles of the photographs and the detail. So who took the photos? Nobody! It was nonsense.

Then we have the cafe in Ireland serving a "full English breakfast" based on the menu. Sorry, in Ireland then serve a "full Irish breakfast" and I can say that with some authority as I've just returned from Ireland where I was served the full Irish in every place we stayed. Ask for a "full English" and you'd likely soon be put in your place.

The knight in shining armour at the convent in Ireland who drives a laundry truck during the day apparently simultaneously worked at the club in Soho in the evenings. I've heard of holding down two jobs to make ends meet but having a day job in Ireland and a night job in London is pushing things a bit far.

And how about the character who speaks with an English accent who we only realize and learn towards the end was raised by an American couple in California. And yet not a trace of an American accent. Again, it wouldn't have mattered except it was so important to the plot that we think she is British and not realize she is American raised. Sloppy, sloppy writing.

Worst of all ... and I have to be careful here as this verges on spoiler ... we learn towards the end of episode 2 that not is all as it appeared with the body found in the first few minutes of Boyd's involvement. But given the revelation, then ask yourself what the point of the murder was then? It made exactly zero sense in the context of the motivation for the kidnapping in episode 1. None.

I could go on but I'm reluctant to waste and more of your time or mine on writing more about some of what was presented in these two episodes.

The series is wonderful, but skip this episode and focus on some of the earlier ones. This isn't worth anyone's time.