storyskip

Since it keeps coming up. Jamie and Matt played their SITD because it allowed them to avoid voting. SITD has historically proven to be useless in its originally designed form because, as Jeff said, in 4 years Jamie's is the first that ever proved to be "Safe". So Jamie and Matt used the SITD for its unintended benefit: neutrality. The interviews, while everybody was scrambling around at camp made, it clear that being on the wrong side of this first vote was going to "dig your own grave" right out of the gate. Neutrality in this first vote was the goal, not the SITD outcome. Kudos to Brandon who read the wind when Jamie and Matt made it clear they were NOT voting this TC, and so he went ahead and got rid of that albatross of an immunity idol, saved himself and sent Maddy home.

As I understand it, it is complicated but actually a really savvy bit of gameplay. No one wanted to be on the "wrong" side of the vote for this vote because if they picked wrong they were going to be targeted next. By playing SITD Matt and Jaimie avoided having to vote so they basically got to remain neutral and see which way the wind blew. Historically given how poorly SITD has turned out for people as a sure fire save at TC, using it this way was strategically sound. Same as Brandon going ahead and dropping the idol. I was pleasantly surprised that it was Maddy who went and not Lauren. That was a nice bit of editing on Survivor's part, because they gave the audience the clips to show why Brandon would want Maddy out, without giving away the twist at the end.

This probably won't surprise anyone, but in all honesty? I didn't miss her.

I also have to admit that I’m a simple audience member to please. Nolan helping himself to Frank’s lunch made the episode for me.

Anyone else considering the possibility that Jean-Luc is lying? Just bear with me a minute. Beverly said “trust no one” and especially not to bring in StarFleet. Giving the writers the benefit of the doubt, Jean-Luc is fast on his feet and strained 20 years aside, by just coming out to the nebulae he’s backing Beverly’s play. A quick, down and dirty “excuse” to override the sitting Captain and try to run/hide/buy time would be “kid’s my son so I’m going to save him!” Then unwind the details later. The writers may prove me a fool, but I think Jean-Luc ran with a handy assumption that suited his needs in a tense moment. I don’t think it’s the reality of the situation.

Up until the very end, this was -for me- the best episode of the reboot. The team working together, most everyone getting a chance to shine -except Dixon, she got the short straw- and the whole team through the whole hour, give and take. Then the end came and the anvils fell.

Aiden got to drive the Land Rover! Sometimes, it's the little things.

Nolan deserves a break. Isn’t the show supposed to be Law and Order working together? Might be time to remind the writers of this basic plot point.

Count me in with the minority as well. I prefer Aiden to Joe

Given the history of dramatic "and then they died" final scene events in the reboot I expected the foster brother to be dead as well. Which makes me annoyed with this scene simply because I have to look at it from the perspective that "oh, they at least left it ambiguous ..." as being positive progress in the writing?? I agree about the CPR being a lazy way the director choose to convey the "dire" situation since Price didn't have anyone to verbal exchange "OMG DIRE SITUATION" with in the scene. I don't think lead actors get paid by the line, I think he gets paid in Pop Tarts. Before anyone asks, I'm referencing an interview Dancy gave where he was asked if his children enjoy daddy working in NY and getting to go to the set with him, and he answered that they enjoy the Pop Tarts from the commissary. Seriously though, Dancy is very professional in his interviews and he obviously enjoys working with Sam Waterson and his castmates, but the impression I took away is he took this job because it was "home based" and something fun to do, not because he's expecting it to be ground breaking television. It is pretty obvious that Dancy is more of the "stay at home" parent in support of Claire Danes' career.

I liked this one. I feel that of all the episodes this season at least, this felt more OG Mothership. It was solid police work, passionate ADA work, no one was personally entangled in the case or being emotionally manipulated by the case and the case itself wasn't pelting us with woke anvils. The weekly foot chase scenes on the Law side I get the sense that the writers are poking fun because, at least the past 3 chases, just before the perp bolts you hear either Shaw or Cosgrove saying "oh, not again / please don't" or something to that affect. I enjoyed Price getting pissed off at the end and getting to be a little "And you get prosecuted, and you get prosecuted, and you want to be asshats also, come on over here and get some prosecution of your own, I've got extra."

Eh, I think there was supposed to be more nuance in it all, but since Odelya can't act her way out of a paper bag it was lost in translation.

I cannot tell a lie. The minute she suggested Nolan could have a second career as a psychiatrist, I started looking for Mads.

That was a crappy episode. It could be used in a masterclass to teach how NOT to write an episode. The writing was crap The plot was crap The cinematography was crap The guest characters were crap Even the mains appeared to either be dialing it in, or pod people. Shaw, after the events in the previous episode (and I know time is not linear in the L&O universe but still) doubles down and leads the charge on blatant lying to a suspect in order to manipulate the suspect? SHAW?? McCoy and Price both take on the role of the completely uncaring government stooges so Maroun can shine, but then Maroun is naïve enough to believe ICE will play by the rules?? These are the characters we're supposed to root for, and every single one of them were assholes or idiots in this episode. No character development, just assholes or idiots. The offset being that the victims and perps were so cookie cutter bland that I couldn't find myself with an eff to give at the end of the episode. Agreeing with what has already been said. Can the "good guys" just have a win without the audience being beaten over the head with some social agenda message or another? Do the writers just hate their own show or something?

YES!!! Go Gabler!

I’m beyond done with hearing about Jesse’s family.

Anybody else catch that on the walk up to tribal Jeannine's torch was snuffed? Looks like they had to re-shoot the walk up and someone in production forgot to re-light her torch.

Oh yeah, that's much better. Okay guys, peace I'm out!

Does anyone know of any other forums where people can go to talk about what they enjoy about a show? I know this forum absorbed a lot of the TWOP approach to discussion which, hey you do you, but I'm just wondering if there is somewhere folks can gather to talk about things they enjoy in an episode? Even little fun details, without feeling like we're out of step with the main focus of the rest of the forum population? Pleasedon'tsaytumblrpleasedontsaytumblr.

nvm

nvm

This part of the episode, and the end where the woman got shot jarred me out of the narrative because there really was no story telling to either situation. It just felt like the writers getting up on their soap boxes and pelting the audience with anvils, rather than telling a story. There was NO reason for the witness to tell their story and honestly, the way the defense attorney was laying the ground, Price should have been furious that the witness walked right up that path and should have (would have in real life) requested a recess to stop it. It would have been better story telling if that bit of speech-ing by the witness HAD cost the DA's office the conviction in the case because the defense lawyer's framing of "hey you've had an abortion, so how do we know you're not here in part as a way to stick it to a pro-lifer?" raises very solid reasonable doubt. But L&O writers gotta soap box I guess. I think it would have been more compelling if the main witness (the woman who got killed) had instead been forced to go back to Texas and face the long haul consequences of her choices and what it means to takes the risks to live that life, or even if she had been killed back IN Texas. The way it was done/played out just felt like lazy story telling.

I'm going to sit over here on my unpopular opinion bench, but I'm glad Anthony Anderson has moved on to other projects. I got the sense last year that he was phoning it in, and it just feels like the cast is more balanced this season. If Anderson had other projects he wanted to be working on, then good for him for moving on to those projects and I'm happy to see what Mehcad Brooks does with Jalen Shaw.

I am not a lawyer and don't even play one on TV, but I believe anything they shared with her would be considered hearsay and inadmissible. It had to come from someone actually in the room with the man to collaborate that what was seen/said on the video was actually said by Rublev. With Ava dead that left Sirenko and the girl. So it was either the girl who had to testify or the deal with Sirenko for him testifying. What Olivia did was illegal and immoral as hell and she should pay consequences for it. It would make absolute story sense for her to move on to become a victims' advocate and would be a great job for her, but she needs to get out of police work if she no longer believes in the law.

Having had some time to think through some more of the episodes I do agree that I think it was a VERY well done crossover format. Rather than it being 3 individual hours with some shared characters/plot, this really felt like the entire team (OC, SVU, Regular police) working together against a serious threat. It was very solid story telling and even if NBC was getting their monies worth by shoving in as many commercials as possible, it was 3 fast moving hours of content. Also I appreciated that I really felt an emotional punch when the characters who got killed. Even with brief screen time, the writers made me care about Ava and Vincent, especially Vincent. Not bad writing work given that these were episode specific characters! I really enjoyed the different dynamics between all the characters, except for Olivia. She really is not a team player, which makes me sad because I used to really enjoy the character back in the day. But the rest of the team, from the police, to the lieutenants, to the DAs, I'd love to have more of that please. Two things I also noted, which have been noted above, the wall of windows, with a bridge behind it when they were questioning Rublev. Count me as another someone who was waiting for a sniper bullet to come flying through those windows. And the end, when it was obvious that the girl was still in NY with Liv, I honestly do not know WTF the writers/producers were trying to make us feel with that. It made NO story sense, EXCEPT to show Olivia in a very bad light. Because if that girl was in NY the whole time, not only does that effectively get Rublev killed, it got Sirenko the deal and the entire DA case falling apart for ... nothing? Definitely Olivia playing God there and I agree with other posters that I hope McCoy figures this out and nails her to the wall. If she really is taking the law into her own hands like this, and hey it could be part of the story and a natural progression of a jaded cop, then it is time for her to retire from the Force. The way I understand it is the madam wasn't in the room. It had to be someone in the room to give legal legitimacy to what was said on the recording. Also it is suggested that all she did was deliver the girls to the yacht and Sirenko. Probably she never even saw Rublev, so again she can't confirm -from a legal standpoint- that he was ever there. Not sure about the madam getting shived in prison, since she honestly doesn't know that much to make it worth anyone's efforts. Sirenko is probably going to have to watch his back for the next twenty years. But he came across as someone who has a lot of 'friends' and influence so hard to tell how much danger he's in. Ironic that the man who was seen as the 'top' of the food chain in this one, turned out to be the one who had the most to lose.