Apparently there are three unofficial rules regarding the show and the killer’s identity:
1. There can be only 1 killer.
2. There is at least 1 death in each episode.
3. The killer is from this list of 25 characters.
Scream introduced to the genre (or did it just popularized) the idea of two killers working in tandem. The idea of using multiple killers is useful in providing airtight alibis for suspects which throw the viewers off a scent especially when continuity issues become impossible to resolve satisfactorily.
The people from CBS responsible for the show seem to be insisting that there is only 1 killer. It could be just wordplay from desperate individuals who realized the game is up. After all, if everyone is sure they know who the killers are, then what’s the point of watching the show.
We said only 1 killer. We didn’t say he/she didn’t have a helper.
Since only Booth died in Episode 4, the ‘at least 1 death in each episode’ is the rule that’s keeping the theory that Booth faked his own death from gaining more credence.
If this series is truly drawing inspiration from ‘Scream’ and ‘And Then There Were None’, it would be a fair guess to say Henry Dunn or Jimmy is going to meet with an early ‘demise’ while trying to save either Trish or Abby. A little corn syrup might do the trick?
There is a fair amount of speculation on the forums that the killer might be a character that has not been introduced or hitherto been lurking in the background. Either of the above scenarios would be evidence of lazy storytelling by the writers with the former totally inexcusable while the latter just unfair to the viewers because of the differences between a crime series and a whodunit murder mystery.
The crime series focuses on the discovery and (hopeful) apprehension of the perpetrator(s) via a process of investigation, induction and deduction by the characters in the world we are privy to .
A whodunit murder mystery, which is how CBS is marketing ‘Harper’s Island’, is about understanding a complex puzzle and the unraveling of its mystery by the viewers via clues and red herrings scattered by the producers of the show in the show’s universe.
After 9 episodes there is faint suspicions that the people responsible for the show have been spreading disinformation about its premise and episode structure to confuse viewers. That would be outright cheating. Red herrings should only exist in the alternate universe.
In trying to narrow down the list of suspects, reliance on the show’s timeline is a flawed premise. The sequence of events we (the viewers) see may not be the same as that on Harper’s Island. We cannot say that Henry could not kill someone because he was with Trish in the previous scene a ‘couple of seconds’ ago because those couple of seconds do not correspond to a ‘couple of seconds’ in their world.
The disparity in time flow allows the possibility that some airtight alibis could be discounted. Yet it seems increasingly likely that the only conclusion on the killer’s identity in this 1 killer universe can only come from the unsatisfactory choices of Nikki or Maggie.
Some quick guesses after episode 9:
Wakefield had a child with Abby’s mom. That child is not Abby.
The Wakefield child with Abby’s mom is a guy unless the gender neutral word ‘child’ was used to make us over-think the possibility that Abby is Wakefield’s daughter.
The child is either Henry Dunn or Jimmy. I’m leaning towards Jimmy because of Abby’s mother’s discomfort with Abby and Jimmy’s camping trip yet it seems highly unlikely that Jimmy killed JD unless he killed JD before going to the inn to meet up with the rest, before joining up with Abby, before discovering Shane and the slain deputy and before going off to the cabin to rescue the sheriff. I wonder if it was possible for him to sneak a few arrows at Harkin with Abby by his side.
Notes:
This show could be borrowing a lot from ‘And Then There Were None’. If you haven’t read the book, I seriously recommend not clicking the link.
HARPER’S ISLAND is about a group of family and friends who travel to a secluded island off the coast of Seattle for a destination wedding. This island is famous for a streak of unsolved murders from seven years ago. Although they’ve come to laugh and to love, what they don’t know is they’ve also come… to die. As the wedding festivities begin, friendships are tested and secrets exposed as a murderer claims victims, one by one, transforming the wedding week of fun and celebration into a terrifying struggle for survival.
In every episode, someone is killed and every person is a suspect, from the wedding party to the island locals. By the end of the 13 episodes, all questions will be answered, the killer will be revealed and only a few will survive.
Eric Bittner | 21-Jun-09 at 1:36 pm | Permalink
Re: Harper’s Island, 6/20/09
The latest episode supposedly revealed John Wakefield as the killer, which is terrible writing and doesn’t follow the “rules” (whether explicit or implicit) set out by CBS. It is unfair that he is involved at all, even if, as I presume, there is a second killer or accomplice (Wakefield’s child?) in the real cast of characters. It would have been more interesting if the killer had been Henry Dunn (wanting to get the money and marry Abby), the local islanders (trying to cover up some big crime like drug running through the island’s tunnels), or even the fortune teller from one of the early episodes (freaking out somehow about Abby). Granted, the fortune teller idea would have been cheating too, but is not nearly as bad as Wakefield.
I’ve been a big fan of this show up until now. I’m extremely disappointed.
iantimothy | 22-Jun-09 at 9:26 am | Permalink
Hello Eric. I was really quite disappointed with the revelation of Wakefield. But I guess there had to be someone outside the possible ‘victims’ because there was no way 1 of them could have committed all the crimes.
Maybe it was a terrible lack of imagination and lazy writing that led them down the “lets-have-Wakefield-still-alive’ route.
Or maybe there is an even bigger twist they can do with the revelation of Wakefield.
I hope it is the latter. Would be terribly disappointed otherwise.