Could any Canadians out thre explain this show to me:
What is it supposed to be? I saw a couple of episodes at my moher’s insistance, and I was confused. The characters are shallow clichés, the writing is basic, no historical authenticity, some weird kid prending to be Mary Pickford, William Shatner as Mark Twain, and I could go on. I seriously could not tell if the show was supposed to be serious or a comedy.
So, what is it?
That’s the mystery. 
I don’t get it either. One of those churned-out-by-the-yard shows for people who will watch anything. On behalf of all thinking Canadians, I apologize for this. And for Justin Beiber.
Comedy, definitely.
Imagine a Canadian (read: very polite) Sherlock Holmes, meeting every historical figure who ever could have possibly visited Toronto at the turn of the twentieth century, solving crimes using investigative techniques that were just being discovered around then (or, sometimes, that wouldn’t have been discovered for a few more decades), and the showrunners are clearly relating that era’s issues to the present day through a lens of twenty-first century progressive politics.
Now, add in soap-opera romantic dynamics between Murdoch and the coroner, and Murdoch Jr.Crabtree and the other coroner, and that’s basically the show.
It’s watchable, but I agree that there’s not a lot of depth to it.
I had high hopes because I enjoy the Australian interpretations of the same idea, Miss Fisher’s Murder Mysteries and The Doctor Blake Mysteries. Both of those shows lack depth too (Doctor Blake is a bit better in that regard) but make up for it with decent mysteries and engaging characters (and I enjoy the setting). I too was confused by Murdoch and I’m not sure I even made it through the first episode. I didn’t really enjoy the setting either, even though I’ve actually been to Toronto many times and I like the time period it’s set in in theory, but somehow they made it uninteresting.
I could only watch it by having eyelids forced open, Clockwork Orange style.
I made it through one Christmas episode, possibly a second one too, it’s all a blur, because I’m a good son.
It makes Diagnosis: Murder look loke Shakespeare.
There’s more historical authenticity than you might think. I’ve looked up loads of ridiculous stuff from the show, only to discover they are based on things that actually happened. There’s a lot of erased history around.
And then there are the anachronistic puns that get thrown in at least once an episode, but a lot of those might get lost on people who don’t know Toronto.
They’re based on well-loved novels; the author lives a few kilometres from me and used to give walking tours of the neighbourhood Murdoch’s station would have been in if it had existed.
I do think the earlier seasons were better than the later ones; they’re kind of squeezing it dry now.
I find it to be the kind of show I watch, while I am doing something else. It’s kind of background, not requiring too much attention. Or, if I’m having trouble falling asleep, something like this on low volume does the trick.
Plus, I enjoy the costumes, and wassisname isn’t bad to look at.
I’ve only seen short snippets, but I find his appearance distracting because nobody, then or now, could be that clean. 
Especially after riding through horse-and-carriage-era Toronto on a bicycle.
That’s one of our favorite shows to watch! It’s a mystery with a detective who is decades ahead of the time.
Is it cheesy? Yes, but it’s good fun to watch the interactions between the characters.
Yannick Bisson. He is easy on the eyes. I’m partial to Helen Joy (Dr Ogden).
I haven’t seen either of those, but CBC has recently introduced Frankie Drake Mysteries, about a woman detective in 1920s Toronto. Has anyone seen it?
Murdoch is surprisingly popular and is aired in the US, Australia, the UK, and France. The IMDb rating is 8.1, which ain’t too shabby. Actually, reading about it on Wikipedia makes me think I dismissed it too harshly, but I still doubt that I will watch it.
CBC dramas tend to cozy family fare like Heartland, while a lot of their comedy is edgier.
Although I can’t disagree with either, I was most attracted to Georgina Reilly. On the plus side, I stopped watching after Season 7, which is about when her character arc started to decay.
I’ve seen the first season! The worst episode of the lot IMHO was the very first one, so watch at least two before giving up.
Ernest Hemingway is a character for most of the first season. It sounds like they got all their info from the radio play Ernest Hemingway at the Toronto Star. I’ve read his collected articles from the Star, which gave some context. Not sure his presence worked for me. It’s difficult, because he hadn’t developed his persona yet.
Having got that out of the way, the rest of the characters are fun. And one of the Murdoch regulars does show up (and in one scene nearly broke my heart – lots of personal history implied but not shown. And they’re not even my favourite character from Murdoch.).
Why is Ernest Hemingway a recurring character in a Canadian drama?
Serious question!
I see.
Like a frog in boiling water.
You underestimate the intelligence of the typical frog, who would have stopped watching that show by now. 
Because Hemingway did live and work in Toronto during the time period the drama is set in.
He was stuck with the society beat – the articles collected in the book I read of his journalism are hilariously dripping with sarcasm and contempt for the Toronto bourgeoisie. And this is the stuff his Toronto Star editors didn’t throw straight in the trash.
He did keep trying to break into the crime/international affairs beats while he was here (and kept getting turned down because he was doing it without his editor’s permission). It is not so implausible he would have hung out with private investigators while looking for leads.
And here I thought I’d read everything he’d ever written (don’t judge…I’m from a different era).
Thanks for teaching me something new today!
I got the collection as a gift for someone else (and read it before I gave it, because then they had someone to talk to about it 
) around 2000. Although it’s all his writing, it’s not exactly canon. It’s very much Hemingway before Hemingway, so a great read for fans.
You can do worse than Hemmingway. Not a great person, but The Snows Of Kilimanjaro shows he was at least self-aware.