The show must have hired new writers or Dick Wolfe decided some sort of change in the formula would pep up the show in its tenth season. The alternative is that age is turning my brain into tofu.
The plot is anfractuous and it's burdened with an unpleasant confrontation between Lenny Brisco and everybody else in the department, including his partner, Green.
I don't think it holds together very well. Something about a "gang" of purse snatchers pops up early in the game and then is dropped without further mention. It's not just dismissed. It's not another of the familiar and endearing red herrings. It's just never mentioned again, as if the writers had forgotten about it.
But that's a minor example. The whole plot is hard to follow. I don't mean any single scene. Each scene is understandable on its own terms. But the links between scenes, though they may make perfect sense on paper, are weak on the screen.
And Brisco's anger -- he was the only guy to hear the murderer blurt out a confession -- isn't characteristic of the character. In earlier years, Brisco had been there before and so had his partners, and they'd handled doubt and suspicion with resentment that was understated, if not exactly with aplomb. Ray Curtis actually had to contradict Brisco on the stand at least once. Here, the absence of corroboration leads Lenny to slam the suspect around in interrogation and turn snotty towards his colleagues, which generates a lot of alienation.
It ends on a note of ambiguity, not resolution. It's all a little unpleasant although it has the expected virtues of local color and well-drawn ancillary figures. Isn't S. Epatha Merkeson the embodiment of irony and nurturance? I'd rather talk to Lieutenant Van Buren than a shrink.
The plot is anfractuous and it's burdened with an unpleasant confrontation between Lenny Brisco and everybody else in the department, including his partner, Green.
I don't think it holds together very well. Something about a "gang" of purse snatchers pops up early in the game and then is dropped without further mention. It's not just dismissed. It's not another of the familiar and endearing red herrings. It's just never mentioned again, as if the writers had forgotten about it.
But that's a minor example. The whole plot is hard to follow. I don't mean any single scene. Each scene is understandable on its own terms. But the links between scenes, though they may make perfect sense on paper, are weak on the screen.
And Brisco's anger -- he was the only guy to hear the murderer blurt out a confession -- isn't characteristic of the character. In earlier years, Brisco had been there before and so had his partners, and they'd handled doubt and suspicion with resentment that was understated, if not exactly with aplomb. Ray Curtis actually had to contradict Brisco on the stand at least once. Here, the absence of corroboration leads Lenny to slam the suspect around in interrogation and turn snotty towards his colleagues, which generates a lot of alienation.
It ends on a note of ambiguity, not resolution. It's all a little unpleasant although it has the expected virtues of local color and well-drawn ancillary figures. Isn't S. Epatha Merkeson the embodiment of irony and nurturance? I'd rather talk to Lieutenant Van Buren than a shrink.