The second season of "Murder in a Small Town" hasn't quite captivated me from the start, but after a week's break leading up to Episode 6, "Trust, But Verify," the struggle between the weekly cases and the overarching storylines becomes palpable. Karl and Cass are kept in complete isolation, and their obligatory end-of-episode romantic scene feels forced, like a token effort to keep their relationship alive despite the script's lack of effort to develop it. With so many murders in this small town, each new one loses its shock value, making me wonder why anyone would want to live in Gibsons - the life expectancy must be around 35.
"Trust, But Verify" has a subtle Halloween vibe, as the victim, part of a group of young women in town to honor one of their number who had recently committed suicide, is mauled by a bear. The bear, largely left to the imagination due to budgetary reasons, is initially discussed as though it might be some kind of lurking monster rather than a typical part of the local wildlife. However, it turns out the bear isn't the culprit; Laurisa was killed prior to being feasted on, struck on the back of the head with a rock by one of her catty so-called friends.
This group isn't particularly likable, which detracts from the case somewhat. But there's a deeper reason why none of this resonates: the show continuously uses the same formula. There are murders almost every week (except for the previous episode, which coincidentally was the best of the season) and the victims and culprits are almost always out-of-towners. While this makes sense - Gibsons is supposed to be a "small town" and it would run out of people quickly if they were constantly getting killed off - it creates too much distance between the setting and Karl's investigations. The show reuses the same rhythm and structure every time.
The only real value in this case is the thematic underpinning of suicide, particularly its impact on the loved ones of those who decide to end their own lives, especially unexpectedly. This relates very personally to Laila, a new character to "Murder in a Small Town" Season 2 who still feels new even by Episode 6. That's not a great sign, so this little bit of detail about her background is valuable, even if it's overdue.
Cass and Holly continue working on their own case in "Trust, But Verify," looking into what increasingly looks like a string of revenge killings connected by gravestones and flowers. It's nice that they're keeping themselves busy, but this subplot feels like it exists only to give these two something to do together, as if working on their relationship will keep Karl and Cassandra's alive by proxy. It feels inevitable that this will end up with Cass and Holly on someone's radar, imperilling them both and leaving Karl to take action to save them. While I'm sure this will be engaging in real time, it doesn't feel especially organic.
To be fair, I do believe that this storyline feels deeply intertwined with the setting of Gibsons in a way that the weekly cases seldom do. It's through Cass's interactions with the mayor, and the ongoing issues with the mayor's son post the bullying incident, that the show feels like it's telling a larger, ongoing narrative about a place and its inhabitants, rather than a series of isolated events. There's proper development and growth in these dynamics, and I wish 'Murder in a Small Town' would dedicate more time to exploring them. We've had episodes that have almost exclusively focused on Karl's case, pushing Cass and her colleagues to the sidelines - why not the other way around from time to time?
Perhaps I'm being overly critical - I'll leave it to you (and I'm sure you will) to let me know. But this season just isn't resonating with me, and I'm starting to feel irritated by the obligatory quasi-romantic bits at the end of each episode, which feel like shortcuts rather than proper storytelling. And you know what? I didn't think Karl's portrayal of Cassandra was all that impressive either.
