"Murdoch Mysteries" Who Killed the Electric Carriage? (TV Episode 2012) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
2 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
9/10
Murdoch is asked for marital advice...
miles-3310810 November 2016
Warning: Spoilers
A woman who keeps house for an inventor is walking along a country road in the dark, singing to herself, when suddenly a bright light appears in front of her, heading straight for her, and just as suddenly as it appeared, it disappears. Terrified, she runs to the house of her employer, and discovers him hanging.

When Detective Murdoch and Constable Crabtree arrive and start interviewing the locals, it turns out that several saw strange lights in the night, and one is convinced that the lights were due to extraterrestrials. Murdoch, having been in such conversations with Crabtree before asks if Crabtree believes this was the work of Martians, only for the Constable to triumphantly explain that it must be Venusians. Murdoch pricks Crabtree's bubble by pointing to some earthbound tyre tracks left by a carriage.

The dead inventor had been working on electric battery technology, and was working with someone the housekeeper thinks was called James.

When they return to the Police Station, Inspector Brackenreid has a delicate matter to discuss with Murdoch: the Inspector suspects his wife, who has lied to him about spending time looking after a sick friend. Murdoch suggests a private investigator, but the Inspector decides to make other arrangements.

Back on the case, Crabtree asks Murdoch for advice, because Brackenreid has put him on his wife's tail. While they are discussing this, an electric vehicle draws alongside, driven by none other than the entrepreneur James Pendrick, who, it emerges, was the James remembered by the housekeeper. He had been using the inventor's batteries in this electric prototype car.

Quickly a number of alternative suspects appear, but even though they had made peace some time ago, Murdoch is convinced that Pendrick is number one. The evidence is gathered...

Along the way we discover that Pendrick is competing with no less a figure than Henry Ford, over the future of road transport - will the power be electric or gasoline? Crabtree does find out what Mrs. Brackenreid has been doing, and his report leaves the Inspector with a dilemma about how to deal with her misdemeanour.

This amusing episode moves along at a cracking pace, and by the end, the murderer is caught, and one of the characters ends up very unhappy, while two others are much happier. We also discover that Dr Grace never settles for five words when twenty will do, as well as that while Ford would only sell his Model T in black, in 1899 he was driving a red car.
6 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Question
wjspears1 November 2020
Warning: Spoilers
This was another enjoyable episode of Murdoch Mysteries, particularly for its mixture of historical with fictional.

For instance, a young Henry Ford appears in this episode, which is historical, at least in the sense that he was alive in 1899. On the fictional side, Murdoch's sometime nemesis, James Pendrick, makes an appearance having manufactured and now testing a suspiciously modern looking electric car.

(This is not my main, spoiler-ridden question. But after getting out of the electric car, from going on a test drive, a giddily happy Murdoch exclaims, "I went 55 miles per hour!" Canada is on the metric system though--wouldn't it be kilometers per hour?)

MAJOR SPOILER ALERT My main question though has to do with the resolution of this episode. Murdoch is talking with James Pendrick, who laments that he is ruined because Alexander Wallensky has sold his father's interest in the battery to the oil company representative (Douglas Meadows?)

But Alexander Wallensky has just been discovered and charged with the murder of his father. How could he legally have sold anything that was owned by his father, if he murdered him? At the very least, wouldn't it be a matter for the courts to decide?

I live in America, and I was not around in 1899, either in America or Canada (and I am not a lawyer). But I have watched enough detective shows to find it questionable that a murderer could inherit the interests of the father he murdered, even in 1899.

I am poking fun, more than raising any serious objection. I truly did enjoy the episode.

I do wonder though if anyone else found the ending questionable.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed