The luxury suv, perfect for getting one’s golf clubs to the all important tee time, ideal for trips to the Hamptons, and made to accommodate the occasional bodily abduction of a member of the NYPD. (Rich people; they just don’t know how good they have it! I know when I kidnap someone I’m stuck with shoving them into my cluttered trunk--so unfair). Of course, that separation of class permeated this week’s episode, The Untouchable. From wealthy men who believe they are impervious to the law, to a homeless woman who’s mental degradation makes her unreachable on certain levels, this episode is all about contrast.
Writer Kim Clements makes her second foray into CSI:NY, and I believe my comments from her first episode hold true. In Scared Stiff, she strove for character interaction, effectively using the characters in her storytelling. It was clear they weren’t just pawns in the case, they were breathing, thinking individuals whose experiences contributed to the solving of the case. This episode was very similar in that aspect. Danny’s baseball knowledge, Jo’s pushing for answers, Mac’s desire to help Tessa James (Kate Towne), Lindsay’s useless trivia, are just a few examples of how the characters pushed the case forward. Clements seems to understand an important aspect of serial television; we come back week after week to see our favorite characters. To me, a great story is predicated on my connection to the characters. If a character doesn’t provoke some kind of emotional reaction, whether negative or positive, then I have no reason to be engaged. As I watched this week’s episode, I felt something.
Mac’s Close Encounters of the Crazy Candy-Eating Homeless Woman (a.k.a Ella McBride-lite) Kind were pretty sweet moments. I felt that Mac was truly concerned for this woman, and wanted to help her. Which is a pretty established characteristic of Mac Taylor--see the a fore mentioned reference to the other blond chick Mac got caught up in. It was also really cool to show Danny’s affinity for baseball (hip hip hooray for continuity!). I like it when a CSI’s history is used to solve a case, again it provides a deeper connection. Who else would be able to raddle off baseball information from 1919...of course his mustache may be the source of his power. Does anyone else worry that Danny is top hat and cane away from tying a girl to a railroad? Anyone? No? I’m the only one creeped out by his maniacal looking facial hair? That’s fine. I even like Jo’s up front approach with Mac. She sensed there was a problem and didn’t let him brood. I like Mac and Jo’s relationship, I like that they are friends, and I like that she forces him to step out of his comfort zone. I also like that it was there and then it was gone. The show “Jo”ed me out; too much too fast! Now that balance to the Force is beginning to be restored, I can again appreciate her character.
However, for all the strength in Clements writing involving characters and emotions, it is equally problematic. There were enough holes in the plot to literally convince me I was missing entire scenes. I had to watch the episode three times to ensure I wasn’t just blacking out at crucial moments. The actual crime solving seemed to mostly progress based on wild speculations. Lindsay petitions Mac regarding the legitimacy of Tessa’s claims. Mac responds, “Tessa wasn’t delusional Lindsay. She didn’t think people were listening in on her thoughts or that she was receiving messages from television or aliens.” Oh, well if Mac says it, then it must be true; as we all know the only two requirements to being delusional are paranoia and hearing voices. (As for me, I thought she was bat crazy!) Also, as they were spraying down the gentlemen’s club they come across a splattering of blood. Mac practically declares that the woman Tessa saw was murdered in that spot. I literally shook my head in wonderment at such a conclusion. That kind of conjecture keeps a story from being believable. The truth is, any defense attorney worth a dime is going to win against the “evidence” the team collected. Was the manager even arrested? I can’t think of a single reason they would have to arrest him. Yes they found his print on the coat, but as he pointed out, he handles lots of coats. The courts can’t use what Mac was told by Tessa James (again, I mention bat crazy) because it is hearsay. I’m not a lawyer but I did look up the law of hearsay; there are very strict parameters where an officer of the law can actually testify using what they were told by someone who isn’t able to testify on their own. This situation doesn’t qualify. So all they have is his print on a coat. Similarly, there wasn’t any hard evidence that the other two men were involved in either the prostitutes death or Tessa James’ murder. The word circumstantial comes to mind, and I don’t doubt someone with an actual law degree would be able to come up with several other words as well. A writer on this show has a responsibility to the integrity of the crime lab; Clements hasn’t grasped that yet. She relies too heavily on conveniences and dues ex machina-esqu conventions. Mac says he researched the names Tessa gave him, George Weaver and Billy Gleason, but came up with nothing. I googled their names and found plenty of articles on who they were. I don’t think that would necessarily have helped him solve the case, but that’s not the point. Also, Mac said that Tessa James had a job as an assistant at a law firm. Why not ask her former employers for information. Wouldn’t they have her I-9 form on file-which would include a social security number? I was expected to turn off my brain, and that kind of writing drives me crazy. The moment at the end of the episode was very touching, but it would have been even more effective if I wasn’t sitting there wondering why they were all ignoring the fact that they knew where she had worked. It’s not about solving a mystery (which is what happened in this episode), it is about legally catching the perpetrator(s) of a crime(s) (which is not what happened in this episode).
I did not care for Vikki Williams’ directing. It was choppy, and ill-balanced. As far as I can tell, or rather as far as imbd can tell me, it was her first time behind the camera on the show, and it was apparent. There was no flow from scene to scene, and some of the shots screamed of trial and error. We seemed to fly through some scenes, and then meander through others. It was too messy.
Now, having said all that, I still go back to the characters. Even an episode that buckles under the weight of heavy scrutiny still comes off as enjoyable to watch because I was able to see the characters I care about. If they could find someone to write the case aspect of an episode and simply use Clements to write the character aspect I think I would be quite pleased (basically if they can find two people to make one Peter Lenkov...sigh...Peter--said in my best teenage dreamer voice). For goodness sake, the woman gave us Danny and Lindsay talking to each other, teasing each other, working together. That fact alone puts this woman at the top of my list. So because I care more about the characters than I do the cases, I am giving this one a higher grade than it probably ultimately deserves, but sometimes it just boils down to watch-ability. And Mac Taylor was quite watchable this week.
Highlight of the episode: A tie: Mac’s “I’m her friend” moment was really rather beautiful-despite it’s plot flaws-and let’s see...what was the other thing...oh, I remember DL MOMENTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (enough exclamation points? No?)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(how ‘bout now?)
Guilty Pleasure: I will say it, I will proudly admit to it; when Mac pulled the bag off his head and was kinda staring straight at the camera I drooled on myself.
Monday, February 28, 2011
Monday, February 21, 2011
What's red, white, and gray all over? 7X15 review (*****out of 5)
“You just don’t get it do you? It doesn’t matter who the victim is; it’s the killer we’re after.” This was said to a rape victim after a rapist had been found murdered. It was said with conviction, and leaving no room for doubt. It was said to convey an absolute wrong in the face of vigilantism. And it was said by Lindsay Monroe. Not in this week’s episode Vigilante, but in season 4 episode Commuted Sentences, an episode about two women who kill in the name of justice. Sound familiar? Yet, when comparing the episodes (and their vast similarities...and there are a vast number of them) it is surprising the difference in tone between them.
A brief look at history contends that the CSI’s on our show are determined to find the killer, no matter who the victims is and in truth no matter who the killer is. In season 4, Flack and Mac interrogate rape victim and murder suspect Fern Laslow without apology; their job was to catch the killer. There was no discussion about right and wrong. In season 7, the episode revolves around such discussions; Lindsay and Hawkes, Jo and Danny, Jo and Lindsay, Lindsay and Kate (Lindsay Price), Mac and the lawyer Annie Cartland (Megan Ward). Everyone had a chance to weigh in, provide different sides of the argument. Writer Christopher Silber, who wrote one of my more favorite episodes of this season Out of the Sky and one of my least favorites Shop Till You Drop, really took the opportunity to explore our beloved characters. The dialogue was heavy with back-stories and emotion. This episode is an argument for how a single case story line could be successful. There was a lot of crime solving while allowing for a chance to get to know and grow the characters. Silber also had the characters move outside the formula of this season; Flack and Lindsay went after a suspect--allowing us the chance to see Action Lindsay--which was awesome, the episode didn’t end with Mac and Jo, no one had to play the lab idiot to make another character look good, the science was solid and not just convenient, and I wasn’t expected to turn off my brain. Simply put, this was a solidly written episode.
The next nod goes to director Frederick E.O. Toye. He too is rather inexperienced in the CSI:NY world, however he is a well established director in the realm of television. He has directed plot driven shows like Alias and Chuck, as well as character driven shows like Brothers & Sisters and The Good Wife. That experience helped him effectively move through the two aspects of this episode; the inhumane (the case) and the humane (the characters). He produced a well paced episode that was balanced between shades of dark and light, hard and soft, fast and slow. There were moments of intense emotion intermingled with moments of introspective quiet, and it never felt awkward. A particularly powerful scene shows Garland Clarke (Kevin Interdonato) attacking his victims; it is done as one flawless crime, the victim changing from woman to woman though Clarke stays the same, continuing his assault. These woman loose their identity and collectively become the rape victim; all defined by the same event. It is clear that a lot of time and detail was put into the presentation of this episode. Simply put, this was a solidly directed episode.
A well written and well directed episode will never mean very much if the actors are unable to deliver. Thankfully the caliber of performances was equal to the demands of the production. Lindsay Price’s performance as Kate established a woman whose life had been permanently altered by her rape. She was bitter, afraid, confused, and vulnerable. Price, the actress, didn’t go over the top. While her heartbreak was clear and worn on her sleeve, her desperation was subtle. It was clear that Kate was in pain and needed help, but it was also clear she wasn’t sure how to find that help. I think her character mirrored season 3 Lindsay. “I spent the last year of my life in a daze. I pulled away from friends. I gave up on life,” Kate professes. A description that can be well applied to what we saw Lindsay go through. Is this what prompted Lindsay’s great internal conflict, when just a few seasons earlier she was so sure of her stance on justice? Does she see herself in Kate? Or perhaps it is the experience of being guilty of taking a life, does she see herself as a vigilante? There are a few different options that would motivate Lindsay to see things differently or to at least feel prompted to examine her own feelings. She is confronted again and again with the idea that she doesn’t care enough about victims. We are left to speculate at her change in attitude, left to wonder why her internal struggle suggests a need to find balance between her heart and her head. Ultimately though Lindsay stays true to the character shown in season 4, telling Kate, “I know you’re going through a lot Kate, but eventually you’re going to see that what they did didn’t help you. What they did was wrong.” However, in a moment of growth, she hands her card to Kate offering a willing ear, showing her willingness to accept her need to change and allow more compassion in her job.
This was a beautiful episode that was made for Anna Belknap. She portrayed Lindsay’s internal conflict brilliantly; allowing moments of critical self analysis to be communicated with no more than an expression. An established character flaw of Lindsay’s is that she can be too aggressive, too unforgiving. She was forced to face the consequences of being that way and Belknap could not have presented it better. While the dialogue provided some insight into what Lindsay was struggling with, it was Belknap’s delivery that truly offered substance. For example, Lindsay subtly shrinking away from Kate as she is accused of being cold and unfeeling, her defensive tone as she spoke with Hawkes clearly showed a woman who was struggling with her own feelings, or the moment of slight hesitation just before she offers Kate her card were nuances that served to strengthen her performance. I hope the writers are smart enough to recognize that both Anna and Lindsay are more than capable of caring an episode and thus allowed more opportunities to shine. Simply put...well you get the idea.
Two issues in the episode--issues, not flaws--were 1) the vast similarities with Commuted Sentences and 2) the neglect of allowing Lindsay and Danny to interact. I really struggle when a show retells a story. It is usually a let down, and is left open for a wide range of criticism. But this episode took a great story idea and didn’t simply regurgitate it, but added to it and built on it. Silber took a gamble and the gamble paid off. With Danny and Lindsay, having spent season after season watching those two characters struggle with communication and a willingness to allow each other into their respective lives, I was disappointed to see the show miss an opportunity to really show how they have grown in that regard. Neither of those things change the fact that this is the best episode of the season. Simply put, 5 stars...um...I mean m&ms.
Highlight of the episode: The final scene between Lindsay and Kate as Lindsay is finally able to accept who she is, while taking the first steps in making herself better.
Guilty pleasure: Lindsay taking down that woman by her hair. Was I the only one who thought, ‘Damn Girl!’?
A brief look at history contends that the CSI’s on our show are determined to find the killer, no matter who the victims is and in truth no matter who the killer is. In season 4, Flack and Mac interrogate rape victim and murder suspect Fern Laslow without apology; their job was to catch the killer. There was no discussion about right and wrong. In season 7, the episode revolves around such discussions; Lindsay and Hawkes, Jo and Danny, Jo and Lindsay, Lindsay and Kate (Lindsay Price), Mac and the lawyer Annie Cartland (Megan Ward). Everyone had a chance to weigh in, provide different sides of the argument. Writer Christopher Silber, who wrote one of my more favorite episodes of this season Out of the Sky and one of my least favorites Shop Till You Drop, really took the opportunity to explore our beloved characters. The dialogue was heavy with back-stories and emotion. This episode is an argument for how a single case story line could be successful. There was a lot of crime solving while allowing for a chance to get to know and grow the characters. Silber also had the characters move outside the formula of this season; Flack and Lindsay went after a suspect--allowing us the chance to see Action Lindsay--which was awesome, the episode didn’t end with Mac and Jo, no one had to play the lab idiot to make another character look good, the science was solid and not just convenient, and I wasn’t expected to turn off my brain. Simply put, this was a solidly written episode.
The next nod goes to director Frederick E.O. Toye. He too is rather inexperienced in the CSI:NY world, however he is a well established director in the realm of television. He has directed plot driven shows like Alias and Chuck, as well as character driven shows like Brothers & Sisters and The Good Wife. That experience helped him effectively move through the two aspects of this episode; the inhumane (the case) and the humane (the characters). He produced a well paced episode that was balanced between shades of dark and light, hard and soft, fast and slow. There were moments of intense emotion intermingled with moments of introspective quiet, and it never felt awkward. A particularly powerful scene shows Garland Clarke (Kevin Interdonato) attacking his victims; it is done as one flawless crime, the victim changing from woman to woman though Clarke stays the same, continuing his assault. These woman loose their identity and collectively become the rape victim; all defined by the same event. It is clear that a lot of time and detail was put into the presentation of this episode. Simply put, this was a solidly directed episode.
A well written and well directed episode will never mean very much if the actors are unable to deliver. Thankfully the caliber of performances was equal to the demands of the production. Lindsay Price’s performance as Kate established a woman whose life had been permanently altered by her rape. She was bitter, afraid, confused, and vulnerable. Price, the actress, didn’t go over the top. While her heartbreak was clear and worn on her sleeve, her desperation was subtle. It was clear that Kate was in pain and needed help, but it was also clear she wasn’t sure how to find that help. I think her character mirrored season 3 Lindsay. “I spent the last year of my life in a daze. I pulled away from friends. I gave up on life,” Kate professes. A description that can be well applied to what we saw Lindsay go through. Is this what prompted Lindsay’s great internal conflict, when just a few seasons earlier she was so sure of her stance on justice? Does she see herself in Kate? Or perhaps it is the experience of being guilty of taking a life, does she see herself as a vigilante? There are a few different options that would motivate Lindsay to see things differently or to at least feel prompted to examine her own feelings. She is confronted again and again with the idea that she doesn’t care enough about victims. We are left to speculate at her change in attitude, left to wonder why her internal struggle suggests a need to find balance between her heart and her head. Ultimately though Lindsay stays true to the character shown in season 4, telling Kate, “I know you’re going through a lot Kate, but eventually you’re going to see that what they did didn’t help you. What they did was wrong.” However, in a moment of growth, she hands her card to Kate offering a willing ear, showing her willingness to accept her need to change and allow more compassion in her job.
This was a beautiful episode that was made for Anna Belknap. She portrayed Lindsay’s internal conflict brilliantly; allowing moments of critical self analysis to be communicated with no more than an expression. An established character flaw of Lindsay’s is that she can be too aggressive, too unforgiving. She was forced to face the consequences of being that way and Belknap could not have presented it better. While the dialogue provided some insight into what Lindsay was struggling with, it was Belknap’s delivery that truly offered substance. For example, Lindsay subtly shrinking away from Kate as she is accused of being cold and unfeeling, her defensive tone as she spoke with Hawkes clearly showed a woman who was struggling with her own feelings, or the moment of slight hesitation just before she offers Kate her card were nuances that served to strengthen her performance. I hope the writers are smart enough to recognize that both Anna and Lindsay are more than capable of caring an episode and thus allowed more opportunities to shine. Simply put...well you get the idea.
Two issues in the episode--issues, not flaws--were 1) the vast similarities with Commuted Sentences and 2) the neglect of allowing Lindsay and Danny to interact. I really struggle when a show retells a story. It is usually a let down, and is left open for a wide range of criticism. But this episode took a great story idea and didn’t simply regurgitate it, but added to it and built on it. Silber took a gamble and the gamble paid off. With Danny and Lindsay, having spent season after season watching those two characters struggle with communication and a willingness to allow each other into their respective lives, I was disappointed to see the show miss an opportunity to really show how they have grown in that regard. Neither of those things change the fact that this is the best episode of the season. Simply put, 5 stars...um...I mean m&ms.
Highlight of the episode: The final scene between Lindsay and Kate as Lindsay is finally able to accept who she is, while taking the first steps in making herself better.
Guilty pleasure: Lindsay taking down that woman by her hair. Was I the only one who thought, ‘Damn Girl!’?
Monday, February 14, 2011
He Can Kidnap Me! 7X14 Review (****out of 5)
Ah, the days of the rat pack; a slick looking suit, a shot of brandy in the bottom of a short tumbler, a subtle beat, a fedora set rakishly to the side, and of course the amazing precision and accuracy of shooting someone in the heart and head...wait, what? It’s Ocean’s .22...ok, maybe it’s not quite so dated, but this week’s episode, Smooth Criminal, was definitely an homage to the idea of the bad boy who isn’t all the he seems. There was science, mystery, emotion, and there had been a dash of DL then I would have gladly given this episode 5 out of 5!
Just because writers of CSI:NY aren’t bored by writing the same thing over and over again, doesn’t me I’m not. It is really difficult to review the same thing week after week, and since the show has been so bogged down in stale, repetitive stories and narratives, I’ve been stuck on the same review cycle. This week, however, is a breath of fresh air! I have to be honest, since the episode is credited to writer Aaron Rahsaan Thomas--he doesn’t have the greatest track record-- I was prepared to suffer through trite dialogue, poorly constructed plot, and unimpressive story telling. Imagine my surprise when I found myself actually enjoying this episode. Yes, the dialogue left a bit to be desired, and yes Thomas suffers from adolescent like immaturity in his writing, but it was all forgivable when combined with a decent episode. Thomas doesn’t know the meaning of the word subtle, preferring to hit us over the head with each point that he wants made, but thanks to Scott White’s competent directing those points were presented in a creative way. White’s previous venture into the show was for Dead Reckoning, an episode I thought was rather well done. He didn’t disappoint in his second time behind the wheel. The opening sequence was, quite frankly, really cool. Watching The Handsome Man --a ridiculous name and testament to Thomas’ need to get out of his creative writing workshop mentality--(Guest star Ne-Yo) pull out his gun and with amazing precision take out three guys in quick succession as the beats of the song pound around the room, and interspersed with well used slow motion, helped me forget the stilted conversation between him and Camille (Lesley-Ann Brandt), and definitely got my attention. White efficiently added tension to the story as well. Interspersing the two scenes where Flesser (yes, I went there, because I’m massively irritated by their constant man love) knocks on the door and the apartment manager knocks on the door was brilliant. I know it isn’t a new tactic, but I can’t argue that it didn’t work. I fell for it. White also ensured there was an element of emotion. I know it meant ending the episode with Mac and Jo...again (my tone is of course one of long suffering) but I thought it was more effective to show Hawkes and Camille from a distance. That way we aren’t forced to listen to Thomas’ poor writing, but instead are able to witness Hill Harper’s acting ability. It was easy to believe there was affection between Hawkes and his lady friend, because Harper’s face was perfect. White prefers showing emotion through action--Lindsay witnessing Danny standing and holding Lucy last season was done with zero dialogue. It was a pretty powerful moment, and one of my favorites. They need to hold onto White and use him more often!
I am not for stunt casting, and am not too impressed with the show’s attempts in the past to incorporate non-actors into the show, but I will say that Ne-Yo, while he isn’t headed to any Emmy or Oscar nominations soon, fulfilled the requirements for the role. The guy’s got mad “smolder” skills! It was a bit of a rocky start, but once he got into it, I found myself enjoying watching him. It’s easy to hate a bad guy, which is why when I don’t hate a bad guy I am impressed. I had to keep reminding myself that this guy was a murder, because I just liked him too much. He had character, panache, and was a killer with a tender side. He played it beyond the cliche and sold the idea well. I was disappointed when he was arrested at the end, because I wouldn’t mind seeing him again. It was interesting that we were allowed so much time with the killer. Normally we are allowed a glimpse into their lives, or it is only at the interrogation at the end that we even face our killer, but this episode we got to know him a bit. It was a departure from the typical format, and that is something the show desperately needed. It has been so redundant of late, that I rather enjoyed the new perspective.
I was a bit distracted when I watched the episode the first time and that may be why, but I was a a little surprised by the reveal. I wasn’t expecting the good Dr. Kumi (Adrienne Barbeau) to be the culprit, and I appreciate having Camille’s involvement to be left so ambiguous throughout the episode. This gave Hawke’s (and Harper) a great chance to shine. And even more exciting than that was the use of the science. Where last week’s episode was embarrassingly void of what our CSIs actually do, this one effectively included a great deal of unraveling the tale by discovering clues through science.
This is the first episode, since the beginning of the season, that I would be willing to rewatch. I desperately need my DL fix, but this episode was at least closer to the success of previous seasons.
Highlight: Believable character interaction. Hawkes asking Mac for permission to participate in the investigation was a necessity, and a small example of actual, real character interaction. Not the superfluous, empty interactions we’ve been forced to suffer through this season.
Guilty Pleasure: A man in a fedora!
Just because writers of CSI:NY aren’t bored by writing the same thing over and over again, doesn’t me I’m not. It is really difficult to review the same thing week after week, and since the show has been so bogged down in stale, repetitive stories and narratives, I’ve been stuck on the same review cycle. This week, however, is a breath of fresh air! I have to be honest, since the episode is credited to writer Aaron Rahsaan Thomas--he doesn’t have the greatest track record-- I was prepared to suffer through trite dialogue, poorly constructed plot, and unimpressive story telling. Imagine my surprise when I found myself actually enjoying this episode. Yes, the dialogue left a bit to be desired, and yes Thomas suffers from adolescent like immaturity in his writing, but it was all forgivable when combined with a decent episode. Thomas doesn’t know the meaning of the word subtle, preferring to hit us over the head with each point that he wants made, but thanks to Scott White’s competent directing those points were presented in a creative way. White’s previous venture into the show was for Dead Reckoning, an episode I thought was rather well done. He didn’t disappoint in his second time behind the wheel. The opening sequence was, quite frankly, really cool. Watching The Handsome Man --a ridiculous name and testament to Thomas’ need to get out of his creative writing workshop mentality--(Guest star Ne-Yo) pull out his gun and with amazing precision take out three guys in quick succession as the beats of the song pound around the room, and interspersed with well used slow motion, helped me forget the stilted conversation between him and Camille (Lesley-Ann Brandt), and definitely got my attention. White efficiently added tension to the story as well. Interspersing the two scenes where Flesser (yes, I went there, because I’m massively irritated by their constant man love) knocks on the door and the apartment manager knocks on the door was brilliant. I know it isn’t a new tactic, but I can’t argue that it didn’t work. I fell for it. White also ensured there was an element of emotion. I know it meant ending the episode with Mac and Jo...again (my tone is of course one of long suffering) but I thought it was more effective to show Hawkes and Camille from a distance. That way we aren’t forced to listen to Thomas’ poor writing, but instead are able to witness Hill Harper’s acting ability. It was easy to believe there was affection between Hawkes and his lady friend, because Harper’s face was perfect. White prefers showing emotion through action--Lindsay witnessing Danny standing and holding Lucy last season was done with zero dialogue. It was a pretty powerful moment, and one of my favorites. They need to hold onto White and use him more often!
I am not for stunt casting, and am not too impressed with the show’s attempts in the past to incorporate non-actors into the show, but I will say that Ne-Yo, while he isn’t headed to any Emmy or Oscar nominations soon, fulfilled the requirements for the role. The guy’s got mad “smolder” skills! It was a bit of a rocky start, but once he got into it, I found myself enjoying watching him. It’s easy to hate a bad guy, which is why when I don’t hate a bad guy I am impressed. I had to keep reminding myself that this guy was a murder, because I just liked him too much. He had character, panache, and was a killer with a tender side. He played it beyond the cliche and sold the idea well. I was disappointed when he was arrested at the end, because I wouldn’t mind seeing him again. It was interesting that we were allowed so much time with the killer. Normally we are allowed a glimpse into their lives, or it is only at the interrogation at the end that we even face our killer, but this episode we got to know him a bit. It was a departure from the typical format, and that is something the show desperately needed. It has been so redundant of late, that I rather enjoyed the new perspective.
I was a bit distracted when I watched the episode the first time and that may be why, but I was a a little surprised by the reveal. I wasn’t expecting the good Dr. Kumi (Adrienne Barbeau) to be the culprit, and I appreciate having Camille’s involvement to be left so ambiguous throughout the episode. This gave Hawke’s (and Harper) a great chance to shine. And even more exciting than that was the use of the science. Where last week’s episode was embarrassingly void of what our CSIs actually do, this one effectively included a great deal of unraveling the tale by discovering clues through science.
This is the first episode, since the beginning of the season, that I would be willing to rewatch. I desperately need my DL fix, but this episode was at least closer to the success of previous seasons.
Highlight: Believable character interaction. Hawkes asking Mac for permission to participate in the investigation was a necessity, and a small example of actual, real character interaction. Not the superfluous, empty interactions we’ve been forced to suffer through this season.
Guilty Pleasure: A man in a fedora!
Monday, February 7, 2011
Buckle Up! It's the Law. 7X13 Review (**out of 5)
There are laws against drinking and driving, but no one has ever really covered dancing and driving. Well now’s the time. You see kids, when your parents told you to never attend a party in the back of an unknown semi--even if you were specifically invited with blood ink art stationary--they were absolutely right. I can’t help moralizing when I see people acting completely retarded...I mean the back of a semi?! Seriously? At least I can get a chuckle out of the episode’s title; Party Down, because the episode didn’t sink quite as quickly as the truck, though it did have it’s issues.
CSI:NY has a pretty consistent ability to hook an audience with the teaser openings, and this episode was no different. I was interested as I watched the truck speed around corners, narrowly avoid two brawling cab drivers, slam through a fence, and finally submerging itself in the freezing, dark waters of the river. The effect of people swimming up through the water was attractive, and beautiful--a stark contrast to the violence of several people drowning or nearly drowning. We even had a typical groan worthy comment from Mac, only this week it was actually funny to me. “Crashing this party wasn’t an accident.” It’s the rest of the episode that I usually struggle with, and, again, this episode was no different. However, I enjoyed this episode much more than I have episodes weeks past. This episode reminded me of a really weak or, forgive the pun, a watered down season 2 or season 4 episode.
The story was a bit of a modern twist on the old murder aboard a train tale; only this time it was a semi and Hercule Poirot’s mustache did not make an appearance. We have four people in a room and we have to figure out who “done” it. I have issues with the story lacking in the science. They spent nearly 20 minutes in the police precinct questioning and taking statements. It really bothers me when they have CSI’s doing the jobs of NYPD detectives. I don’t mind it in small doses. It keeps the characters involved in the story, and as with most tales a suspension of belief is necessary, but writer Adam Targum was really stretching the limits. Law & Order is about solving crime through interviews and conversation. The CSI franchise is about solving crime through the science. There wasn’t much of that going on. It was also frustrating that the show turned into the Jo, Mac, Danny, & Don happy hour. If there isn’t enough story to go around, then add another case. I want to see Hawkes. I want to see Adam. I want to see Lindsay. Get off your lazy butts writers!
Targum really did expect us to swallow a lot. The party goers claimed to not know the truck was moving. I once drove over a speed bump a little too quickly and woke my child up from a deep nap. I’m suppose to believe a truck full of adults didn’t notice the earth moving beneath their feet? Also, I find it hard to believe that Abigail West (Marla Sokoloff) didn’t recognize Neal Cooper (Michael McMillian). Jo specifically said they were best friends when they were younger. They spent all evening together and she didn’t look at him for one moment and think, “huh? That guy looks familiar.” There were several other issues, but why harp?
The characters were entertaining, but a little random. I’m still not certain what Carmen Enzo’s role in the episode was. We saw Mac’s character regurgitate dialogue from season 2 episode, Zoo York. “Stay out of this investigation,” and “when there’s something to report, I’ll call you.” It sounded better the first time around. Enzo shooting Cooper at the end was a joke too. Season four’s episode Admissions was a pretty powerful episode. When Gerrard shot and killed that boy in the police precinct, I distinctly remember my jaw dropping and the strong emotions I felt. I was absolutely floored me. I’m not sure why they chose to go that route with this week’s episode. They did it so well the first time around. I mean really well. Why ruin it with a half-assed version of it now? Episodes just don't inspire the emotional response they once did. A writer should only reuse something if he/she has found a way to make it better. Although, interestingly, the man who played Inspector Gerrad was an actor named Carmen.
I like Agatha Christie stories, so the premise of the plot was interesting enough that I wasn’t bored the whole episode, but this still isn’t the caliber I expect from what was once the best show in the CSI franchise. As far as episodes go this season, I would probably put this one closer to the top than bottom, but in comparison to earlier seasons this one wouldn’t have even show up on the radar.
Guilty Pleasure: The music. I liked it.
Highlight of the episode: Don’s reaction to the artist’s installation. That was pretty funny!
CSI:NY has a pretty consistent ability to hook an audience with the teaser openings, and this episode was no different. I was interested as I watched the truck speed around corners, narrowly avoid two brawling cab drivers, slam through a fence, and finally submerging itself in the freezing, dark waters of the river. The effect of people swimming up through the water was attractive, and beautiful--a stark contrast to the violence of several people drowning or nearly drowning. We even had a typical groan worthy comment from Mac, only this week it was actually funny to me. “Crashing this party wasn’t an accident.” It’s the rest of the episode that I usually struggle with, and, again, this episode was no different. However, I enjoyed this episode much more than I have episodes weeks past. This episode reminded me of a really weak or, forgive the pun, a watered down season 2 or season 4 episode.
The story was a bit of a modern twist on the old murder aboard a train tale; only this time it was a semi and Hercule Poirot’s mustache did not make an appearance. We have four people in a room and we have to figure out who “done” it. I have issues with the story lacking in the science. They spent nearly 20 minutes in the police precinct questioning and taking statements. It really bothers me when they have CSI’s doing the jobs of NYPD detectives. I don’t mind it in small doses. It keeps the characters involved in the story, and as with most tales a suspension of belief is necessary, but writer Adam Targum was really stretching the limits. Law & Order is about solving crime through interviews and conversation. The CSI franchise is about solving crime through the science. There wasn’t much of that going on. It was also frustrating that the show turned into the Jo, Mac, Danny, & Don happy hour. If there isn’t enough story to go around, then add another case. I want to see Hawkes. I want to see Adam. I want to see Lindsay. Get off your lazy butts writers!
Targum really did expect us to swallow a lot. The party goers claimed to not know the truck was moving. I once drove over a speed bump a little too quickly and woke my child up from a deep nap. I’m suppose to believe a truck full of adults didn’t notice the earth moving beneath their feet? Also, I find it hard to believe that Abigail West (Marla Sokoloff) didn’t recognize Neal Cooper (Michael McMillian). Jo specifically said they were best friends when they were younger. They spent all evening together and she didn’t look at him for one moment and think, “huh? That guy looks familiar.” There were several other issues, but why harp?
The characters were entertaining, but a little random. I’m still not certain what Carmen Enzo’s role in the episode was. We saw Mac’s character regurgitate dialogue from season 2 episode, Zoo York. “Stay out of this investigation,” and “when there’s something to report, I’ll call you.” It sounded better the first time around. Enzo shooting Cooper at the end was a joke too. Season four’s episode Admissions was a pretty powerful episode. When Gerrard shot and killed that boy in the police precinct, I distinctly remember my jaw dropping and the strong emotions I felt. I was absolutely floored me. I’m not sure why they chose to go that route with this week’s episode. They did it so well the first time around. I mean really well. Why ruin it with a half-assed version of it now? Episodes just don't inspire the emotional response they once did. A writer should only reuse something if he/she has found a way to make it better. Although, interestingly, the man who played Inspector Gerrad was an actor named Carmen.
I like Agatha Christie stories, so the premise of the plot was interesting enough that I wasn’t bored the whole episode, but this still isn’t the caliber I expect from what was once the best show in the CSI franchise. As far as episodes go this season, I would probably put this one closer to the top than bottom, but in comparison to earlier seasons this one wouldn’t have even show up on the radar.
Guilty Pleasure: The music. I liked it.
Highlight of the episode: Don’s reaction to the artist’s installation. That was pretty funny!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)