The stand out thing for me this series is just how good Ólafur Arnalds score is.

Straight out of Scandi-noir, wasn't it?

S2 was quite different in tone from S1. Ridiculous plot and character implausibilities were piled on top of one another, and yet it still has plenty to commend it. But is a third series a step too far?

I read one humorous comment about series 2 which in all honesty was probably close to the mark - "Broadchurch series 2? Just watch the first and last episodes and save yourself a few hours of watching the filler inbetween".

You just knew when Hardy didn't reply to the taxi driver at the end about where he wanted to go that there was a third series on the horizon. Not sure where they'll go with it though.

I think series 3 will be ed around the case on freeing the young black lad (the son of the defence lawyer). I heard Colin Salmon was to feature in this series but it looks like Tennant and Coleman aren't fussed about a series 3.
I still don't think the banishment of the killer from Broadchurch is a closed case - they will look for a piece of missing evidence and bring him back in.

I liked series one, but grew quickly tired of this series ...
it was going nowhere fast.
Like Lost and Heroes, as soon as the feeling that things are left dangling and even worse plots are revisited and go round in circles and are altered for convenience ... I think bollox, this is all about money and logic can go hang!

Dramatic musical effects for emphasis, with the implication that something momentous has just happened, when it has not, and all that has happened is someone as shut a door for example or passed wind.
Endless looking out to sea, singularly and plural looking out to sea, with meaningful, soulful longing and implied menace but little substance.

Fine actors cast adrift to swim through a sea of blubbering and incompetence.
I suspect they themselves thought it shoite.