"Mein Name ist Earl" habe ich auch nicht gesehen, hört sich aber gut an.
Weil es gerade zur Diskussion passt, ein Auszug aus dem Interview von Nick Hornby mit David Simon, dem "Creator" von The Wire. (Meine Gebetsmühle :grin)
David Simon: My standard for verisimilitude is simple and I came to it when I started to write prose narrative: fuck the average reader. I was always told to write for the average reader in my newspaper life. The average reader, as they meant it, was some suburban white subscriber with two-point-whatever kids and three-point-whatever cars and a dog and a cat and lawn furniture. He knows nothing and he needs everything explained to him right away, so that exposition becomes this incredible, story-killing burden. Fuck him. Fuck him to hell.
Beginning with Homicide, the book, I decided to write for the people living the event, the people in that very world. I would reserve some of the exposition, assuming the reader/viewer knew more than he did, or could, with a sensible amount of effort, hang around long enough to figure it out. I also realized—and this was more important to me—that I would consider the book or film a failure if people in these worlds took in my story and felt that I did not get their existence, that I had not captured their world in any way that they would respect.
Make no mistake—with journalism, this doesn’t mean I want the subjects to agree with every page. Sometimes the adversarial nature of what I am saying requires that I write what the subjects will not like, in terms of content. But in terms of dialogue, vernacular, description, tone—I want a homicide detective, or a drug slinger, or a longshoreman, or a politician anywhere in America to sit up and say, Whoa, that’s how my day is. That’s my goal.
....
Which brings us back to Average Reader. Because the truth is you can’t write just for people living the event, if the market will not also follow. TV still being something of a mass medium, even with all the fractured cable universe now reducing audience size per channel. Well, here’s a secret that I learned with Homicide and have held to: if you write something that is so credible that the insider will stay with you, then the outsider will follow as well. Homicide, The Corner, The Wire, Generation Kill—these are travelogues of a kind, allowing Average Reader/Viewer to go where he otherwise would not. He loves being immersed in a new, confusing, and possibly dangerous world that he will never see. He likes not knowing every bit of vernacular or idiom. He likes being trusted to acquire information on his terms, to make connections, to take the journey with only his intelligence to guide him. Most smart people cannot watch most TV, because it has generally been a condescending medium, explaining everything immediately, offering no ambiguities, and using dialogue that simplifies and mitigates against the idiosyncratic ways in which people in different worlds actually communicate. It eventually requires that characters from different places talk the same way as the viewer. This, of course, sucks.
There are two ways of traveling. One is with a tour guide, who takes you to the crap everyone sees. You take a snapshot and move on, experiencing nothing beyond a crude visual and the retention of a few facts. The other way to travel requires more time—hence the need for this kind of viewing to be a long-form series or miniseries, in this bad metaphor—but if you stay in one place, say, if you put up your bag and go down to the local pub or shebeen and you play the fool a bit and make some friends and open yourself up to a new place and new time and new people, soon you have a sense of another world entirely. We’re after this: Making television into that kind of travel, intellectually. Bringing those pieces of America that are obscured or ignored or otherwise segregated from the ordinary and effectively arguing their relevance and existence to ordinary Americans. Saying, in effect, This is part of the country you have made. This too is who we are and what we have built. Think again, motherfuckers.
And the only difference between what we’re doing and a world traveler getting off the beaten path is that our viewers don’t really have to play the fool. They don’t even have to put their ass out of the sofa. They now have a sense of what is happening on a drug corner, or in a homicide unit, or inside a political campaign—and our content, if gently massaged to create drama, is nonetheless rooted in accurate reporting and experience.
"Schijnbewegingen" ist Buch 1 und "Tegenspel" die Fortsetzung. Von den weiteren angezeigten Büchern der Autorin ist aber keines das dritte mit Adrian Mayfield. 
Gibt es das tatsächlich schon?
deutschen Fernsehprogrammen aufgewachsen, unser Englischlehrer hat uns damals immer schon empfohlen englischsprachige Filme und Serien im holländischen Programm anzuschauen. U.a. mit dem A-Team 
habe ich so Englisch verstehen und gleichzeitig Holländisch lesen geübt. ![:-]](https://www.buechereule.de/images/smilies/pleased.gif){kind=small}
Das hat sich ergänzt, Holländisch ist dem Deuschen ähnlich, aber es gibt natürlich trotzdem viele unterschiedliche Vokabeln, über die Kombination mit Englisch hat sich einiges in Holländisch erschlossen und umgekehrt. Die Methode halt ich zum Sprachen üben weiterhin für empfehlenswert!
:grin, die Umsetzung mit der detektivischen Jane scheint aber nicht ganz zu überzeugen. 
Das ist mir absolut unverständlich. Ich fand ihn nicht besonders spannend und den Plot ziemlich konstruiert.