The episode is in on right now. Last time I saw it I was so upset at the end for hours thing I had trouble sleeping. Now this was over a year Can't bring my self to watch it again. And I have seen this episode once and like the movie requiem for a dream which I saw 15 years ago. I just can't stomach go the end results. Both are great but also both are something that i think one will suffice. Unless you're mentally and emotionally prepared. The girl made a decision in her past. No matter her reason it was her decision. Not that I agree with the decision but it's one made by thousands if not millions to use your body for money. But to then be forced To preform an act that you had chosen to do willingly. Then to be treated like it's her fault for doing it in the first place. The fact that she wasn't able to get justice by law. Then the school to treat her like that to protect their own image. To then feel like you have no worth and that you're only good for one thing in the end. And to have it end like that the sympathy I had for her was such a shame. Wanted to reach in and save her why I give it a 7 and not higher was for it to end in her humiliation But I understand that like both requiems this is the truth at times happy endings unfortunately are a dime a dozen. And not everyone pays for their crime nor does everyone get justice.
Law & Order: Special Victims Unit (TV Series)
Pornstar's Requiem (2014)
User Reviews
Review this title9 Reviews
Defense attorney and Judge
melanie-7352216 July 2021
Warning: Spoilers
Delaney Williams does a great job portraying a highly unlikeable defense attorney. Often on this series, he represents the worst of the worst. He doesn't disappoint in this episode, either.
Richard T. Jones, as the judge, also gave me pause. I don't usually wish harm on a character's family, but this time? It might be what it takes to help him see how evil his "judgment" was.
Richard T. Jones, as the judge, also gave me pause. I don't usually wish harm on a character's family, but this time? It might be what it takes to help him see how evil his "judgment" was.
Even ants can get angry!
rfndayitabi22 November 2019
Those who work in adult entertainment are Human
yazguloner31 October 2021
It's a terrific piece of writing that hits and blows up the final scene.
The guest character Evie becomes huge and unforgettable with her struggle and loss.
One of references of this section 22x5.
Also, 3x7 with starring Elizabeth Banks.
The guest character Evie becomes huge and unforgettable with her struggle and loss.
One of references of this section 22x5.
Also, 3x7 with starring Elizabeth Banks.
No means no
TheLittleSongbird22 August 2022
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.
The player and the role
bkoganbing11 March 2015
Young Hannah Marks makes a very bad decision when she decides to go into pornography to get tuition money for Law And Order's fabled fictional Hudson University. Once these things are out there, there's no taking them back. The power of the internet. So when two kids believe that image they see and rape her, she will have a difficult time getting justice.
Kelli Giddish takes this one especially personal. She gets quite invested in Marks and her plight. The two young men who raped her, Casey Thomas Brown and Max Ehrich, believe what they see and film creates some powerful images on the big and small screen. So much so it's hard to separate the player from the role.
Delaney Williams is back as John Buchanan lawyer to the rich and mighty who can afford him. Richard T. Jones plays the judge who throws an unexpected curve at SVU and the New York County DA's office.
It's always with you.
Kelli Giddish takes this one especially personal. She gets quite invested in Marks and her plight. The two young men who raped her, Casey Thomas Brown and Max Ehrich, believe what they see and film creates some powerful images on the big and small screen. So much so it's hard to separate the player from the role.
Delaney Williams is back as John Buchanan lawyer to the rich and mighty who can afford him. Richard T. Jones plays the judge who throws an unexpected curve at SVU and the New York County DA's office.
It's always with you.
Just not logical the ending
Kit-Angel21 June 2020
Warning: Spoilers
The episode has a compelling narrative can a former porn star be raped ? Well yes of course they can just as any one can be raped irrespective of what they do the students former " job" has zero to do with what happens to her. Well in an ideal world it wouldn't but of course the Defense blacken her name and to be honest the line of questioning would really be shut down by a impartial judge in the real world but here it plays to the ending. I wasn't surprised by the ending although in reality it makes little sense. The judge overrules the jury's guilty verdict a so called JNOV judgement notwithstanding verdict A judge is not allowed to enter a JNOV of "guilty" following a jury acquittal in United States criminal cases; such an action would violate a defendant's Fifth Amendment right not to be placed in double jeopardy and Sixth Amendment right to a trial by jury. But they can overturn a guilty one If the judge grants a motion to set aside judgment after the jury convicts, however, this action may be reversed on appeal by the prosecution. Why I say it makes little sense is because the defendant admits his guilt on the stand therefore the judge has zero reason to overuse the verdict and also before such a serious step he would almost certainly have summed up to the jury in a manner that made it clear to them that an acquittal was what he was thinking and when that didn't happen well tough cheese he should have sucked it up and let the verdict stand. A bit of a silly episode overall if they are to play this sort of game they should have at least stated the verdict would almost certainly stand on appeal considering what the prosecution got the defendant to admit on oath re him raping her. Not a good episode in the end just played for shock value and little truth to it.
At this point I lost faith in SVU
rholliston26 June 2015
Warning: Spoilers
I've enjoyed the Law & Order franchise for over 20 years so I won't pretend that it's never succeeded in manipulating me before, but this episode was so egregious that I felt compelled to comment. The African-American judge who throughout the trial appeared to be impartial literally changed into a different character during the last scene(s) so as to serve the plot - a cheap trick that L&O has so scrupulously avoided in the past. Shame on everybody who took part in this episode - it was and is unworthy of the first-rate series that spawned it. At this point I should also admit that the device of introducing unpleasant and (usually) ignorant impediments to Olivia Benson has grown very tired. The addition to the cast of Peter Gallagher - himself aged and tired - to play an unnecessary, ugly, and disruptive character violates the high standards set so many seasons ago when this show was worth watching. This particular episode was crudely manipulative, not at all believable, and essentially cheap.
Odd episode.
wkozak22125 November 2020
Warning: Spoilers
This is my opinion. I tried to have sympathy for the victim but I couldn't. The reason? Here you have a college girl secretly doing porn. Then she becomes a supposed victim. Everything is brought out at the trial. Fast forward. Instead of getting professional help she goes back to doing porn. Sorry. But I can't be sympathetic.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
