Change Your Image
viv_harv
Reviews
Law & Order: Criminal Intent: Depths (2007)
From A to B
I have been growing fonder of this series, which is actually my favourite of the Law and Order franchise. It makes more sense, the acting and the implications are more subtle, less jazzed up and Goren has those micro-expressions and insights that make him a revered character. I like how each episode of this series starts as something and ends as something quite different. Though if they shoot scenes sequentially, I wonder how actors cope with the open ended dialogues. Before the opening, you rarely have an idea what the strange unconnected events mean or who might be the one to be popped until some bloody corpse is splattered across the screen. That is a trademark of this series and seems to be one thing the screenwriters have agreed to be the signature of this series. The progression from investigative supposition to blunder and then to the truth looks a bit more natural. The kudos of solving the case rests mostly on the eclectic knowledge, acute observation and impeccable discernibility of Goren or the experience of filtering out what matters of Logan, and of course the Watson playing Eames who is THE perfect partner for Goren- I do love this woman!
Going on to this episode, which I wanted to review just because I like the plot of History in here. I like how "terrorism" was indicated and how it was not actually so. The opening of a Muslim man praying and how people can easily take it as an "Oh! Another bomb ploy", made me relieved to see the plot turn a very different direction before a quarter of the episode. It might be a pure contrivance to mislead, but this small thing showed that the battle of showing "Muslims" in telly as something other than terrorism, innocent people in connection to that, very orthodox, honour killing etc related characters is being won bit by bit.
I think most people watching a fictional crime series episode of this kind (not talking about the fans of The Wire), tend to predict mentally what happens next and the more stumped and surprised you are, provided you understand the ending clearly, the better the episode/the series is for you. The solution should be wonderful enough to keep the thrill of the experience with you and to make you want to watch the next episode, and this is one of those episodes. You are surprised by the reason of the murders and you do get something out of it. That is my end goal of watching any episode. And this one is one of them.
Law & Order: The Drowned and the Saved (2009)
Political and Legal
It took me a while to realize that there is a reason this series has survived for so long. The best thing I like is that personal lives have been kept to a minimum, and the legal aspect, binded by laws and manipulating or fitting the case in the rules to serve justice, is what keeps the boat afloat as in many cases, disappointing as it is, the right thing is not done.
This particular episode takes a sleaze based homicide to a surprising political twist which is refreshingly fascinating for a telly version. I never watch West Wing but I do like the window view on a ferris wheel, where you are carried from ground level to a surprising height. Fantastic though the position of the main characters are, this series seems to carry a little less of the non-sense and superfluous gimmicks of most other contemporary series of this genre.
I would recommend this episode to most fans of law & order series, svu is like cartoon when compared to this series, not disrespecting the subject matter of the former.
CSI: Crime Scene Investigation: Coup de Grace (2009)
A perspective of the thin line between presumption, discrimination and human nature
Last Season was flagging in quality, hanging onto the coat tails of Grissom but this season, CSI is trying to pick up its flagging reputation, actually quality with an updated database of going-ons. CSI gave me some interest facts that maybe some people out of the US wouldn't know of. And though there isn't something fantastically new but characters are given a shine of their own without Grissom watching from the shadows.
I still get that Ray Langston being another version of Grissom but he easily catches your attention be it for the resemblance of his character of many's favourite Grissom (I hope) or that Laurence Fishbourne has the screen presence that can dim or at least keep up with the veteran cast of CSI. He may be the newest member but he is easily the one called upon by everyone, be it for the writer's choice or maybe to perk up the ratings.
Nonetheless, I like how the team is sort of building up this season and though Catherine is the head, she is more of a 'gather-around' head for exchange of ideas than 'You pose the problem, and I will do magic in instantly posing the answer, delegating tasks to do it and all will miraculously fall into place'. I notice, no one personally walks up to her with a problem but she is a sort of submerged head which makes a team of CSI working for the work, not for a man or woman. Funnily, even Eckley has come into sync.
Now about the topic at hand, I have to say I like this episode though the end was an empty triumph of sorts. A police-shootout turns dismal as the killed 'suspect' was a police officer who was not a threat. Racial motivation comes into play and may have the underlying reason to some extent but what interested me is how Laurence Fishburne's character was made to be objective and the understanding tolerant CSI who did his utmost to prove the shooting officer was not wholly responsible for what he did.
I never understand what would go through their minds, being of neither race but I would say it would be hard to hold Ray's untempered focus to find the direction the evidence pointed. It Did seem that most of CSI were trying to exonerate the shooting officer honourably be it whatever they say, but most CSIs were sort of tiptoeing around Ray.
The thing that hits the mark though is never said in words, are the victims' bound to their deeds and sense of duty, including the shooting officer's. It seems to say, no matter what you think, what you did or have done makes you the person in your mind. And if you are happy with that person, you are happy.