Latest news with #Godless
The Star
13-06-2025
- Entertainment
- The Star
'Dept. Q' review: A dazzling display of decidedly dark material
When people go through life habitually inflicting verbal, mental, or emotional (and occasionally physical) blunt force trauma on others, it's tough to get a handle on them, let alone begin to like while we quickly write off such types in our personal spheres without considering their "backstory" (and sometimes suffer that fate ourselves), fictional characters have an easier go of things in our estimation as readers or viewers. This is very much the case with detective Carl Morck (Matthew Goode, The Good Wife, Watchmen's Ozymandias and Abigail's absentee dad), the fractured soul who is front and centre of the new, bingeable noir mystery Dept. Q. Goode's knack for instantly connecting us with Morck's haunted interior – among others, he affects a particularly hollow gaze and vulnerable posture while walking around with a palpable defensive wall of irascibility as his exterior – helps put the viewer quickly at ease with the investigator, regardless of how every other character reacts to or behaves around him. Plus, Morck's sharp as a tack, that one. Sometimes, as cutting as a razor, or bruising as a truncheon, depending on the mood you catch him in. 'So tell us, Mr, uh, Peacemaker, why should we let you join the Justice Gang? Oh wait, you're not here auditioning for the DCU?' Based on the Danish novels by Jussi Adler-Olsen (10 so far, all in the process of getting movie adaptations back home), Dept. Q transplants the setting to Edinburgh, Scotland, where Morck himself is a fish out of water. The series is the third Netflix production for showrunner Scott Frank after Godless and The Queen's Gambit, this time in collaboration with screenwriter/playwright Chandni Lakhani, a former script editor on Black Mirror. It's a winner right out of the starting gate. The very English (in this version, at least) Morck, still fixated on the 1966 World Cup win, finds himself thrust into a makeshift department handling cold cases after the startling opener of this nine-episode series. A neat narrative trick introduces us to his first case, and there are so many delights – large and small, including how "Department Q" gets its name – to be found throughout that I will do my best to steer clear of anything that might give these away. It's also intriguing to see how his motley crew comes together, from Syrian asylum seeker Akram (Alexej Manvelov, Jack Ryan Season Three's Russian defence minister) to PTSD sufferer Rose (a luminous Leah Byrne) to Morck's long-suffering (and currently struggling) partner James Hardy (Jamie Sives, Ned Stark's ill-fated captain of the guard from Game Of Thrones). 'So, detective, is that a tennis ball in your hand, or are you just stressed to see me?' They're not just passengers on Morck's mopey train, either, with each contributing immensely to the investigation. Yes, singular. Dept. Q has its investigators looking into one case for the duration, and while this sounds like it could bog things down or veer off course along the way, rest assured that it doesn't. There are moments when feelings of being gaslit/catfished cross over from the screen to the viewer, but it (sort of) works out in service of understanding and unravelling the central mystery. The acting ensemble is flat-out brilliant, including Kate Dickie (GOT's Lysa Arryn of the Eyrie) as Morck's fed-up but opportunistic supervisor Moira, Kelly McDonald (Giri/Haji, No Country For Old Men) as his fed-up and perplexed therapist Dr Rachel Irving, Chloe Pirrie (the mother-in-flashback from Queen's Gambit) as ambitious prosecutor Merritt Lingard, and Stephen Burns (Mark Bonnar, The Rig S1) as her pompous boss Lord Advocate Stephen Burns. It doesn't matter what each character's station in life may be, since Morck treats everyone with a mixture of barely-there tolerance and ever-present disdain, though sometimes his actual regard for them (ranging from grudging respect to, horrors, affection) slips through. It should be a crime to have this much fun watching something with such a grim premise. But yes, the series offers loads of it, neatly woven into the decidedly dark twists and turns of the story. Credit to Clark and Lakhani for deftly balancing the grim with the grins, giving us unexpected LOL moments amid the sombreness and occasional burst of violence. Goes to show that, just as the show's promotional material declares, "not all causes are lost", the same goes for its characters, some of whom do manage to hang around till the end. Bring on the rest of it! All nine episodes of Dept. Q are available to stream on Netflix.
Business Insider
11-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Business Insider
Netflix hitmaker Scott Frank on Hollywood: 'People are afraid now.'
Scott Frank figured out how to thrive in Hollywood. Now he's doing it at Netflix. But the writer/director has advice for young people who want to follow in his footsteps: Try something else. If Frank were starting out his career in 2025, he said he wouldn't mess around with movies or television. "I'd want to go work in the gaming world, where I think there's some really interesting stuff going on," he told me this month. That's quite a comment coming from someone who spent years as one of the most in-demand writers in the movie business, and has now established himself as a reliable hitmaker for Netflix. " Dept. Q" — his third series for the streamer, following his "Godless" western and the pandemic megahit "The Queen's Gambit" — is his take on the British mystery genre, and it's been near the top of the Netflix charts since it debuted in May. But Frank says the wave of digital distractions and options makes it incredibly difficult for traditional movies and TV to capture audience attention today. For all of Netflix's massive success, it still lags behind YouTube in terms of time viewers spend on screens, he notes. And teens are now spending an astonishing two hours a day on TikTok. "So, how do you get people to go to the movies? How do you get people to pay attention to your show? There's so much stuff," he tells me. "Whereas gaming — you're not folding your laundry while you're playing a game. You're not texting while you're playing a game. You're involved. And that seems to me like an opportunity for storytelling." That won't be an opportunity for Frank himself — "I'm too old," he says — and he says he'll continue to try making movies and TV shows. He'd love to make a second season of "Dept. Q," which is based on a series of crime novels by Danish author Jussi Adler-Olsen. You can hear my full conversation with Frank on my Channels podcast. The following is an edited excerpt from our chat: Peter Kafka: Some Netflix shows and movies seem like they'll generate huge numbers, but don't feel like they have cultural resonance. But it seems like people are talking about your show. Do you feel that? Scott Frank: You're certainly correct in that a lot of the movies, in particular, don't leave much of a ripple. There's not a lot of cultural wake. That being said, they are watched a lot, and people enjoy watching them and seek them out. And Netflix has 300 million worldwide subscribers, so way more people are going to watch your movie. As opposed to something getting released in theaters that no one watches, and it doesn't create any kind of long tail, either. With the television shows, it's a little different. Because when they hit, they tend to leave a mark. They tend to resonate. What accounts for that? Is it simply because there's more of it? There's 10 episodes, so you're spending more time? And there's more reason to talk about it, because it's episodic — you can tell people, "Wait till you get to episode five?" Yes, yes, yes, and yes. I think that's why. It's a different sort of investment. When you're sitting down to watch a show, you are hoping that it's something you're going to stick with. Whereas when you're watching a movie, you know: "I have a couple hours, an hour and a half, I'm gonna watch this thing." I don't have an easy answer other than to say that, for me, the engagement and narrative in the world right now have never been higher. During the Hollywood writers' and actors' strikes a couple of years ago, AI didn't start off as the big issue, but then became one, or at least the dominant talking point. What did you make of that discussion then? And how are you thinking about AI and tech now? Tech has been a bit of a disaster for the country in many ways, but it's also been an amazing boon to the world. I just think that these guys run the companies, so many of them are compromised and … Let's narrow it down to your world. We could have the other discussion … But I think it affects my world because they now own my world. We probably were striking against the wrong people that time. Because we're owned by tech people now. This is increasingly more and more a tech business. And so, ultimately, we're at the whim of these people at the very top of these companies. We saw after, after the election, everybody's sort of paying, essentially bribes to [ Donald Trump ]. So that affects us. That really does affect the business. People are afraid now. And so you see that. You see people are too careful. They're afraid because of the political climate, or they're afraid just because it's an era of consolidation and there just aren't that many places to go if you upset a studio chief? I think all of the above. I just think it's all at the same time. Also, the ground is shifting. This business hasn't landed where it's going to land yet, and people keep looking backwards and saying, "No, we just need to get moviegoing back to where it was." That boat's sailed. That's not gonna happen anymore. So we're not thinking about, "Well, what is the business now? What does the business want to be?" The audience is trying to tell us, and we're not listening. How do you feel about using tech and AI in your work? There's one theory that says someone's going to type in a prompt and the AI spits out an entire movie. The more conservative argument is, "We're going to improve flows, and instead of using 10 visual-effects people, you could do it with four or eight." The even more positive spin is, "Those eight to 10 visual-effects people could do much better work." We've always used versions of that. If it wasn't proper AI, there were always ways to shortcut those kinds of things, to create a smoother workflow and all of that. If an actor couldn't do a certain stunt, and we wanted to put their face on something else, that's been happening, and that's going to get easier. Which is scary if you're an actor. I think the bigger problem is not making stuff with AI, but deciding what to make with AI. That's the bigger threat, at least for me, in the immediate sense. Have you played around and asked ChatGPT to write a script in the mode of Scott Frank? Yeah. It was silly. But if you want to write a letter, a business letter or something … my wife needed to write this letter, and she just thought, "Let's see what ChatGPT said," and she sent me the letter and it was damn good. It was really good. I think it's more about the future of the algorithm. The algorithm is great for marketing after something's done. [But] it's death to the industry to use it to decide what to make because you're gaming something. And if everybody's using the same algorithm, it becomes a snake that eats its own tail eventually. That's my big fear. You started in Hollywood the old-fashioned way — you moved there and spent years trying to get work as a writer. I wrote one script over and over that no one wanted — " Little Man Tate" — until somebody wanted it. What would that path look like for you now if you wanted to get into making movies or television? Would you move to LA, for starters? That's easy. I wouldn't go into movies or television. I'd go into games. If I were 24 now, I'm not gonna fuck around with movies or television. I want to go work in the gaming world, where I think there's some really interesting stuff going on. Other than the fact that lots of people play games, what's appealing to you? They seem pretty narratively limited. But they're at the beginning, in a way. I mean, the first movies were narratively limited, too. And I wonder what you can do with them. I'm really curious. I just feel like that world is way more interesting. You know, more people watch YouTube stuff and TikTok stuff than Netflix. YouTube is No. 1 [for time spent] and Netflix is way down [the list]. And then the next closest thing, Disney, is way down. And people on average spend two hours a day on TikTok. So that's what you're competing with. So your next project is an immersive game … No. I'm too old. There's a series of "Dept. Q" books. Will you do more of them? I'd love to. It's up to Netflix. I would absolutely love to.
Business Insider
11-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Business Insider
The man behind Netflix's 'Dept. Q' thinks the future of entertainment is … games
Scott Frank figured out how to thrive in Hollywood. Now he's doing it at Netflix. But the writer/director has advice for young people who want to follow in his footsteps: Try something else. If Frank were starting out his career in 2025, he said he wouldn't mess around with movies or television. "I'd want to go work in the gaming world, where I think there's some really interesting stuff going on," he told me this month. That's quite a comment coming from someone who spent years as one of the most in-demand writers in the movie business, and has now established himself as a reliable hitmaker for Netflix. " Dept. Q" — his third series for the streamer, following his "Godless" western and the pandemic megahit "The Queen's Gambit" — is his take on the British mystery genre, and it's been near the top of the Netflix charts since it debuted in May. But Frank says the wave of digital distractions and options makes it incredibly difficult for traditional movies and TV to capture audience attention today. For all of Netflix's massive success, it still lags behind YouTube in terms of time viewers spend on screens, he notes. And teens are now spending an astonishing two hours a day on TikTok. "So, how do you get people to go to the movies? How do you get people to pay attention to your show? There's so much stuff," he tells me. "Whereas gaming — you're not folding your laundry while you're playing a game. You're not texting while you're playing a game. You're involved. And that seems to me like an opportunity for storytelling." That won't be an opportunity for Frank himself — "I'm too old," he says — and he says he'll continue to try making movies and TV shows. He'd love to make a second season of "Dept. Q," which is based on a series of crime novels by Danish author Jussi Adler-Olsen. You can hear my full conversation with Frank on my Channels podcast. The following is an edited excerpt from our chat: Peter Kafka: Some Netflix shows and movies seem like they'll generate huge numbers, but don't feel like they have cultural resonance. But it seems like people are talking about your show. Do you feel that? Scott Frank: You're certainly correct in that a lot of the movies, in particular, don't leave much of a ripple. There's not a lot of cultural wake. That being said, they are watched a lot, and people enjoy watching them and seek them out. And Netflix has 300 million worldwide subscribers, so way more people are going to watch your movie. As opposed to something getting released in theaters that no one watches, and it doesn't create any kind of long tail, either. With the television shows, it's a little different. Because when they hit, they tend to leave a mark. They tend to resonate. What accounts for that? Is it simply because there's more of it? There's 10 episodes, so you're spending more time? And there's more reason to talk about it, because it's episodic — you can tell people, "Wait till you get to episode five?" Yes, yes, yes, and yes. I think that's why. It's a different sort of investment. When you're sitting down to watch a show, you are hoping that it's something you're going to stick with. Whereas when you're watching a movie, you know: "I have a couple hours, an hour and a half, I'm gonna watch this thing." I don't have an easy answer other than to say that, for me, the engagement and narrative in the world right now have never been higher. During the Hollywood writers' and actors' strikes a couple of years ago, AI didn't start off as the big issue, but then became one, or at least the dominant talking point. What did you make of that discussion then? And how are you thinking about AI and tech now? Tech has been a bit of a disaster for the country in many ways, but it's also been an amazing boon to the world. I just think that these guys run the companies, so many of them are compromised and … Let's narrow it down to your world. We could have the other discussion … But I think it affects my world because they now own my world. We probably were striking against the wrong people that time. Because we're owned by tech people now. This is increasingly more and more a tech business. And so, ultimately, we're at the whim of these people at the very top of these companies. We saw after, after the election, everybody's sort of paying, essentially bribes to [ Donald Trump ]. So that affects us. That really does affect the business. People are afraid now. And so you see that. You see people are too careful. They're afraid because of the political climate, or they're afraid just because it's an era of consolidation and there just aren't that many places to go if you upset a studio chief? I think all of the above. I just think it's all at the same time. Also, the ground is shifting. This business hasn't landed where it's going to land yet, and people keep looking backwards and saying, "No, we just need to get moviegoing back to where it was." That boat's sailed. That's not gonna happen anymore. So we're not thinking about, "Well, what is the business now? What does the business want to be?" The audience is trying to tell us, and we're not listening. How do you feel about using tech and AI in your work? There's one theory that says someone's going to type in a prompt and the AI spits out an entire movie. The more conservative argument is, "We're going to improve flows, and instead of using 10 visual-effects people, you could do it with four or eight." The even more positive spin is, "Those eight to 10 visual-effects people could do much better work." We've always used versions of that. If it wasn't proper AI, there were always ways to shortcut those kinds of things, to create a smoother workflow and all of that. If an actor couldn't do a certain stunt, and we wanted to put their face on something else, that's been happening, and that's going to get easier. Which is scary if you're an actor. I think the bigger problem is not making stuff with AI, but deciding what to make with AI. That's the bigger threat, at least for me, in the immediate sense. Have you played around and asked ChatGPT to write a script in the mode of Scott Frank? Yeah. It was silly. But if you want to write a letter, a business letter or something … my wife needed to write this letter, and she just thought, "Let's see what ChatGPT said," and she sent me the letter and it was damn good. It was really good. I think it's more about the future of the algorithm. The algorithm is great for marketing after something's done. [But] it's death to the industry to use it to decide what to make because you're gaming something. And if everybody's using the same algorithm, it becomes a snake that eats its own tail eventually. That's my big fear. You started in Hollywood the old-fashioned way — you moved there and spent years trying to get work as a writer. I wrote one script over and over that no one wanted — " Little Man Tate" — until somebody wanted it. What would that path look like for you now if you wanted to get into making movies or television? Would you move to LA, for starters? That's easy. I wouldn't go into movies or television. I'd go into games. If I were 24 now, I'm not gonna fuck around with movies or television. I want to go work in the gaming world, where I think there's some really interesting stuff going on. Other than the fact that lots of people play games, what's appealing to you? They seem pretty narratively limited. But they're at the beginning, in a way. I mean, the first movies were narratively limited, too. And I wonder what you can do with them. I'm really curious. I just feel like that world is way more interesting. You know, more people watch YouTube stuff and TikTok stuff than Netflix. YouTube is No. 1 [for time spent] and Netflix is way down [the list]. And then the next closest thing, Disney, is way down. And people on average spend two hours a day on TikTok. So that's what you're competing with. So your next project is an immersive game … No. I'm too old. There's a series of "Dept. Q" books. Will you do more of them? I'd love to. It's up to Netflix. I would absolutely love to.
Edinburgh Live
31-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Edinburgh Live
Matthew Goode was 'cut' from Scott Frank's other Netflix series with Downton Abbey co-star
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info Matthew Goode, the star of Department Q, was originally slated for a role in another hit Netflix series by Scott Frank, but his scene ended up on the cutting room floor. During a live Q&A at the press screening of Department Q, Frank disclosed that he had intended for Goode to make an appearance in his acclaimed Western series Godless. The esteemed writer and director, famed for his work on the award-winning Netflix series The Queen's Gambit, divulged details about Goode's overlooked part. Currently, Goode is captivating audiences as DCI Carl Morck in Department Q, sharing the screen with talents such as Chloe Pirrie, Jamie Sives, and Kelly Macdonald. (Image: NETFLIX) This article contains affiliate links, we will receive a commission on any sales we generate from it. Learn more Free Netflix subscription Get Netflix free with Sky Sky is giving away a free Netflix subscription with its new TV bundles, including the £15 Essential TV plan. Members can watch live and on-demand TV content without a satellite dish, including hit shows like The Last of Us, Black Mirror and all WWE programming. from £15 Sky Get the deal here Reflecting on the chance to collaborate with Frank after years since their first encounter, Goode expressed his admiration for Godless at the Q&A screener event for Department Q, Reach can confirm. "I'm so pleased you got to make your Western," Goode remarked to Frank, prompting the director to interject playfully: "Tell them the little detail about Godless... That you were in it and I cut you out!" The two shared a laugh as Scott further explained: "He was in this coda that we shot and then it turned out that we didn't need the coda, but Matthew was amazing in that. He played a sheriff." Set in 1884, Godless follows a young fugitive from his vindictive mentor seeking sanctuary in a New Mexico settlement unusually dominated by women. The mini-series features Jack O'Connell from Skins as Roy Goode and Michelle Dockery as Alice Fletcher, reports the Express. Matthew Goode and Michelle Dockery, known for their roles as Henry Talbot and Lady Mary in the hit ITV period drama Downton Abbey, graced the screen together from 2014 to 2015. Goode initially joined the Downton Abbey cast as a guest star in season 5 before taking on a main role in season 6. (Image: ITV) Department Q has been grabbing headlines this week following its release on Netflix, with critics showering it with high praise. Netflix describes the series with the following synopsis: "DCI Carl Morck is a brilliant cop but a terrible colleague. His razor-sharp sarcasm has made him no friends in Edinburgh Police. "After a shooting that leaves a young PC dead, and his partner paralysed, he finds himself exiled to the basement and the sole member of Dept. Q; a newly formed cold case unit. "The department is a PR stunt, there to distract the public from the failures of an under-resourced, failing police force that is glad to see the back of him. "But more by accident than design, Carl starts to build a gang of waifs and strays who have everything to prove. "So, when the stone-cold trail of a prominent civil servant who disappeared several years ago starts to heat up, Carl is back doing what he does best - rattling cages and refusing to take no for an answer." Fans can now stream Department Q and Godless on Netflix.
Business Insider
29-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Business Insider
The cast of Netflix's 'Dept. Q' is already lobbying for a season 2
"Dept. Q" is Netflix 's new crime drama set in Edinburgh. It stars Matthew Goode as Carl Morck, a detective who returns to work after a traumatizing incident to run a new cold case department. The series comes from Scott Frank, who is best known for writing and directing the Netflix series "Godless" and "The Queen's Gambit." It's based on the novel of the same name by Danish author Jussi Adler-Olsen, and it is an ideal watch for those waiting for the next Harlan Coben adaptation to land on streamer. "Dept. Q" starts as Morck and Detective Inspector James Hardy (Jamie Sives) investigate a crime scene with a younger officer when a masked man arrives and shoots at the trio. Morck is injured in the attack, Hardy is paralyzed, and the younger officer is killed. When Morck eventually returns to work, he's sent to run a new cold case department in the basement of the Edinburgh station to keep him out of the way. He's joined by Salim (Alexej Manvelov), a Syrian police officer who fled his home and now works in Edinburgh. They start digging into the disappearance of Merritt Lingard (Chloe Pirrie), a prosecutor who went missing four years ago, and discover a sprawling mystery. The nine-episode first season, which was released on May 29, has received mostly positive reviews online. The Guardian called it "a grimy, gothic treat," while Variety described it as "an emotionally fraught crime thriller that never lets up." Here's what to know about "Dept. Q" season two. Netflix hasn't announced "Dept. Q" season two yet, but there are more stories to tell "Dept. Q" has not been renewed for a second season yet. The streamer may be waiting to see how many subscribers watch the series within the first few weeks before deciding whether to bring Goode back to solve more cold cases in Edinburgh. The good news is the cast has already expressed interest in returning for "Dept. Q" season two. In an interview with Yahoo UK, Goode said that he had told the director and writer that they "really need to do" a second season, and that the show could up its fight sequences in season two. His costar Pirrie echoed this, telling the outlet, "I'd love to see more. When I watched the episodes I was just like, these characters are such fun to be with." "I want to see that team do more stuff together," she added. Fortunately, there are already a handful of other stories for Netflix to adapt for the show. There are 10 books in Adler-Olsen's series, which means there are plenty of other mysteries to draw from if "Dept. Q" season two gets the go-ahead. But for any Nordic noir fans, the first six books have already been adapted into movies in Denmark, with the other four set to arrive between 2026 and 2032. "Dept. Q" is now streaming on Netflix.
