Hmm, after reading all the responses here it seems to be the general agreement that the second Helen was rather a neurotic whiner.

I, too, noticed the change in "Helens" between "A Great Deliverance" and "Payment in Blood" and found it very confusing. I thought Helen was supposed to be a Lady -- the fact that she wasn't was fine with me. I thought the class conflict between a middle class Helen and the upper class Lynley could provide some good fodder for the screenwriters.

But instead of that, we received this very...how should I phrase it?...cool character who doesn't seem all that much in love with "her" Tommy. And there was no continuity with the backstory from the wedding at all!

It would make sense if the Helen-Deborah-Tommy triangle aspect were brought into the picture, since it's hard to put out an old flame. Also, the first Helen seemed so genuinely warm and concerned for Tommy, her dear friend, that she would respect his feelings---his love for his lost Deborah---and tread lightly. That could explain some reserve on her part towards him.

But the character of the second Helen in the series has this amazing man who is tender, loving, giving, funny, intelligent, socially adept, and passionate, handing himself to her on a plate while she is written to be so cold towards him it's just unbelievable for me. (How much longer could that sentence be?)

If any man in my life had given me the post-passion speech that Tommy gives Helen outside New Scotland Yard in "Missing Joseph", I would have thrown myself into his arms on the spot! I mean, a man who can express his feelings like that?!?! Only in novels and TV/movies!

Does anyone here know why the actors were changed for Helen between #2 and #3? I found it stretched my suspension of disbelief for the series. They were just too dissimilar.

i can see the subject of helen is still very much an issue. i have seen ( and own) all the books and films . the first helen was nice but she left a small impact as she was seen only in the pilot . i loved the second helen a lot and she and tommy made a really good match . i really wished her as helen to the end. the third helen catherine russell did not fit to tommy at all .she felt and looked like his older sister. i am disappointet that elizabeth george did not write a last story where tommy finally found fulfilment in his job and some private happiness with a new love and an heir for howenstow. i love happy endings

Hi, Renate,

What factors made you like the second Helen? I found her coolness (as written in the script) so disconcerting -- as when she walks out on Tommy in "Finding Joseph" after they've spent a night of passion. I just...didn't find that endearing or believable as a character trait. Was this what Helen was like in the books? I haven't read them, so am going solely by the series.

Thanks for the discussion,
Lynn

thank you for the reply. that helen walked out on tommy after that night i did not found too endearing ,but remember tommy had his faults too .he was sharp with words and opinions . i liked lesley vickerage as helen because she and tommy made a good looking couple together. i never forgave the producers for not keeping her to the end . the books are different and helens demise is not as in the films . i can,t tell since people who look forward to reading them might not appreciate me giving the plots away. also tommys first love deborah plays a much much bigger role in the books. cheers renate

Hi, Renate,

Yes, I was confused about why Leslie Vickerage was replaced until I read Nat's comment that she became a Mum and that's why she left the series. I thought she, as an actress, had really beautiful brown sparkly eyes and had great kissing scenes with Nat as an actor. I loved the way they played the "room service" scene together in "Finding Joseph".

I still just don't see Helen's character arc moving from "Payment in Blood" through to impulsively agreeing to marry Tommy in -- oh shoot! --- I can't remember, was it "In the Presence of the Enemy"? You know, the one where he practically pins her against the wall and says something to the effect of: "Let's get married this weekend!"

(And I'd be lying through my teeth if I said that this scene didn't make me swoon! *le sigh*)

Another aside, Tommy is so gorgeous and yummy, he's also so physical (remember how he gently brushes Bobbi's hair back from her face in "A Great Deliverance") and obviously caring -- I mean, sheesh! Why isn't Helen swept off her feet?

I wonder this especially since they were supposedly old friends according to the pilot. So she knew him, she knew he wasn't a blackguard who would "love 'em and leave 'em". Once again, I want to stress that I'm not criticizing Leslie Vickerage as an actress, I'm speaking of the character arc of Helen, the character, whom I find an enigma.

She just seems so unloving towards him.

And speaking of unloving, how about poor Tommy Lynley who gets ripped to shreds by the two most prominent women in his life within ten minutes of each other in "Finding Joseph": Helen in her rebuff to him, and Havers in her furious outrage over him having painted her ratty old apartment.

Sheesh! If I had a man who decorated my apartment, and paid for it, I'd give him a big hug, even if it is "duck white".

hi lynn! thank you you answered why lesley left the series . i never read nat parkers comment about that . i only can highly recommend reading all the books . yes nat parker was perfect for the role as tommy lynley just perfect .and he is very easy on the eye . talking to you now i have set time aside to watch a lynley fim again this afternoon . if you are a movie buff i can also recommend watching JANE EYRE with zelah clarke and timothy dalton .no other version will do for me .so perfectly cast as nat parker was with tommy lynley. nat parker has consistantly put out exellent work that is why i am a fan