This is an episode that covers a very difficult subject matter with interesting moral dilemmas worthy of much debate. It is though a subject matter that can go either way in execution, it could either be harrowing and thought-provoking or it could be too sleazy and sensationalist. Which is the case with ripped from the headlines type stories in general, which is why this type of story doesn't always appeal to me (especially as there is a lot of the latter in the later seasons).
A bit of both can be seen here. It is an example of an above average episode with a lot of good, but suffers from heavy handed tactlessness and a truly unsatisfying ending. As far as Season 16 goes, it is neither one of the best or one of the worst. Middling if anything and firmly in the middle of that category than in the better or lesser ends. Far from a bad episode, just not a great one and it could have done more with this difficult subject.
By all means there is a lot that is good. The production values are fine, have always liked the photography's intimacy and grit and the look of the show has come on a good deal over-time (and it was good to begin with). The music doesn't intrude and has a haunting quality, have not always remembered to say that the theme tune is easy to remember and holds up. The direction is alert and accomodating enough. Much of the script is thought provoking and doesn't ramble.
It starts off very harrowing and will hit home for anybody who has been through similar or knows someone who has. Peter Scanavino and Raul Esparza bring a lot of spark to the episode as they have done consistently in the previous Season 16 episodes. The regulars are all fine, especially those two, and they are very well supported by affecting Hannah Marks and intimidating Delaney Williams as every prosecution witness' worst nightmare.
However, like too many ripped from the headlines like episodes the story is very slight and very predictable, due to being too closely indebted to the real life case, except not done tactfully. Did find the defense argument very heavy handed and out of order, Buchanan's treatment of Evie was overblown and makes him even more of a serpent than he already is.
Really liked Dodds when he was first introduced, but he comes over as very pushy and condescending and the friction is forced here. Am not blaming Peter Gallagher, the writing is to blame in regard to this. Like others have said, the final decision really brought the episode down, it makes no sense whatsoever and is a slap in the face.
Concluding, worth a look but a long way from a must. 6/10.
A bit of both can be seen here. It is an example of an above average episode with a lot of good, but suffers from heavy handed tactlessness and a truly unsatisfying ending. As far as Season 16 goes, it is neither one of the best or one of the worst. Middling if anything and firmly in the middle of that category than in the better or lesser ends. Far from a bad episode, just not a great one and it could have done more with this difficult subject.
By all means there is a lot that is good. The production values are fine, have always liked the photography's intimacy and grit and the look of the show has come on a good deal over-time (and it was good to begin with). The music doesn't intrude and has a haunting quality, have not always remembered to say that the theme tune is easy to remember and holds up. The direction is alert and accomodating enough. Much of the script is thought provoking and doesn't ramble.
It starts off very harrowing and will hit home for anybody who has been through similar or knows someone who has. Peter Scanavino and Raul Esparza bring a lot of spark to the episode as they have done consistently in the previous Season 16 episodes. The regulars are all fine, especially those two, and they are very well supported by affecting Hannah Marks and intimidating Delaney Williams as every prosecution witness' worst nightmare.
However, like too many ripped from the headlines like episodes the story is very slight and very predictable, due to being too closely indebted to the real life case, except not done tactfully. Did find the defense argument very heavy handed and out of order, Buchanan's treatment of Evie was overblown and makes him even more of a serpent than he already is.
Really liked Dodds when he was first introduced, but he comes over as very pushy and condescending and the friction is forced here. Am not blaming Peter Gallagher, the writing is to blame in regard to this. Like others have said, the final decision really brought the episode down, it makes no sense whatsoever and is a slap in the face.
Concluding, worth a look but a long way from a must. 6/10.