PCB TV Review: Whodunnit?

A reality TV series about a murder mystery? Sounds like a slam dunk? Well, it's some kind of dunk. If at the end, there's a drowning of this show.

When I saw the promo on Hulu for Whodunnit?, I admit, I was kind of excited. A reality show where folks solve murder mysteries? That could be really fun. I envision something like CSI meets Law & Order with a dash of Bones or Castle mixed in. Unfortunately, that's not what they made.

The premise is essentially Ten Little Indians (or if you prefer, And Then There Were None). A murderer is picking off the contestants one by one, and their task is to find out who the murderer is among them before it's their turn. Not the worst premise, if not as fun as what I'd hoped for.

Each episode begins with a murder, which is of one of the group that started with 13. But from the beginning, I was disappointed. The contestants were mingling randomly, and there were a lot of awkward obviously scripted interactions. You know "hey, could you say something like this to the other contestants?", that sort of thing. If you've never been on the set of a reality series, you may not pick up on it, but suffice to say, the introductory scenes were very stilted, even for a reality show.

And speaking of reality shows, all of the trappings are there: alliances, voice overs from the contestants about what they were thinking, solo interviews and b-roll of people looking off into distances. Yuck. But it comes with the territory.

Where I'm really disappointed with the show, though, is in the solving of the mysteries. First, the contestants are given a limited time, and can only look in one of three places: the murder scene, the last known location, and an on-site morgue. Granted, this does lead to some interesting interactions where some people have certain information where others don't. But it seems arbitrary, and isn't really in line with how an investigation typically goes. There are no people to interview, for one thing. And that, I think, is where the show falls flat.

If you've watched any crime scene show, you know there are three things you need to know in order to solve a murder: means, motive, and opportunity. How a person was killed is always the start of the investigation, not the finish. Supposedly, these contestants want to find out who the murderer is among them. Yet, they never ask a single question of who was where, when. Presumably, there is no motive - these people aren't related to each other in any way, although there is a hint of what might drive the murderer with the first murder, as the victim dropped a glass and broke it. But the second had no such justification. It was merely a play on his name. My guess is the producers didn't want someone to solve who the murderer was in the first or second episode. If that's the case, then why even have one of them be the murderer, or why not save that for the end, when there are say only four people left?

Because of this central flaw, the show fails. This doesn't even address some issues with the murder scenes. Since they are fake, it's understandable that some details wouldn't quite make sense, but still, there are so many great murder writers out there, surely they could have done a little better with those details. That said, there is at least one clever device in each murder (so far), so the little details are the least of the shows problems.

Bottom line: if you're hoping for an engaging murder mystery show where you get to challenge yourself versus the on screen contestants, you may be satisfied. But if you're hoping for a satisfying murder mystery experience, you're dead wrong.

Whodunnit?
ABC
4 out of 10 daggers in the back