Chyromaniac

Burnham and Saru were both Captains last season, as were Kirk and Spock for Star Trek 5 and 6. Rank doesn’t necessarily have to be an issue. Sure, we’ll see how it works with Rayner. Yet even on Q’Mau (when they actually were still both on equal footing), he could have put his drive to complete the mission ahead of her plan to save the outpost- but he still did the right thing in the end. He also could have just sat by here- but he stepped up to help Tilly and Adira solve the problem. I think he’s going to push Burnham and crew - but unless this is some weird long con on his part, I don’t think he’s going to betray her, or try and take matters into his own hands. Otherwise, I loved seeing Burnham and Saru on one more mission together. I fully expect him to be back with Discovery by the end of the season - but if those two characters don’t get a chance to team up again, this was a good mission to go out on. Regardless, I’m looking forward to seeing what the rest of the season brings for him. Hopefully it’s worth him not being with the rest of the crew- but it’s good that Doug is getting a chance to continue to evolve Saru. His character journey has been one of the best things to come from this series.

The Pabuans really need to seal off that cove…

I wouldn’t call the magic castle a tourist trap, mainly because they don’t really cater to tourists. It’s not like a museum that you can just show up to and visit - it’s essentially a club, and to get inside you generally have to be a member or know someone who is. I’d like to check it out someday - it seems like something that needs to be experienced in person to fully appreciate. I make a concerted effort to not care about anything on this show that doesn’t directly relate to the actual competition. I find it’s pretty simple to not get annoyed by the contestants or judges, if I simply ff past practically everything that isn’t cooking or judging, and ignore as much of the commentary as possible.

I don't have a go-to role for Tony Goldwyn - but as someone who follows Disney Theme Park news, I think he looks a lot like Bob Iger. Personally, my problem with Baxter is I just don't know what to make of him as a character. I think with pretty much every cast change, we've had a decent idea of their background and viewpoint within an episode or two. Nora was a law professor and took an academic approach to cases. Arthur was a big time lawyer who ran on a public safety platform. This guy? We know he was appointed by the Governor. He told the detectives he wants a more transparent relationship with police, and he's redecorating the office because it looked too... lawyer-y? Beyond that, he fired some of his employees, and makes a lot of passive aggressive remarks to the one guy we see. But... is he even a lawyer? If anything he comes across as a finance guy (again, I see Iger) who doesn't really understand the business he bought position he's been appointed to - but he's trying to maximize profits convictions to make a good impression on the shareholders voters. Jack's exit episode suggested that he was retiring so the Governor could put someone in place who would put justice before politics - but that doesn't really seem to be the case. If this is the guy the Governor chose, it feels like it really cheapens the sacrifice Jack was trying to make.

I don’t get how it took until the end of the show for the DA’s to put the pieces together. The victim was a gay black man. His partner described having a confrontation with Arnou as he exited the train. The police only tracked Arnou down, because he was a member of the mma combat course run by a guy with a WP tat. And the DA’s couldn’t find any evidence that he’s a racist? He only spends multiple hours a week associating with an obvious white supremacist. And how about the other half dozen dudes in that group? Any of them have ties to radical groups or espouse racist ideology? Did anyone in Arnou’s personal life (the ex-wife maybe?) notice any idealogical changes lately? It shouldn’t have taken an undercover agent holding their hand to prove that Arnou was a racist- let alone needing that agent to actually testify. Also- so Ellis’ partner wouldn’t have left him in the middle of a full blown asthma attack, right? So what happened between when he got off the train, and when Ellis stumbled into dancer girl? Ya don’t think Arnou could’ve said something to agitate him that set off his flare up, do ya? One other thing- I think when the defense attorney says he “prays there’s someone like Arnou” on the train with him, that’s an open invitation for Price to put the jurors- particularly the minority jurors- in Ellis’ shoes. Because really- if you’re on that train, is this really the guy you want to decide if you’re a threat? Or your son, husband, or brother? That’s the question they needed to be asked- are you okay with him making that decision about you? I dunno- overall I agree with Price at the end that Ellis deserved better. But he deserved better from the writers. It feels like they went out of their way to make this case a loser- not because they actually wanted to say something about the dangers of vigilantism or white nationalism, or even just assumptions about what makes someone appear threatening. Instead it’s some vague debate about the “greater good” that’s more about the personality conflict between Price and Baxter than anything else. And really- after only two weeks, it honestly feels like Price is just expecting to get fired. If that’s where this is going, I wish they would just get it over with, because it’s just dragging the show down more than it already has been.

Tbh, I’m surprised if anything about the show is memorable. I don’t even mean that negatively- what I want is for it to be funny in the moment while I’m watching it, which it generally is. I feel like that’s the goal of the show- to be cheap, disposable humor. I mean, the signature game is about spitting out as many puns as possible in a minute. If anything, the memorable things are the times where the show didn’t work- like that chud Pally trying to hijack the games. Since I don’t want to end on a negative note, I’ll add that if something is going to be memorable for a good reason, I’m not surprised PFT was involved.

I thought this was a strong episode, buoyed immensely by Mehcad’s performance. However, I think this is a good point- I seem to recall affirmative defenses allowing some kind of evaluation from a state expert from the old show . I think that could have helped explain some of the debate over whether the defendant fit the diagnosis, and also taken some of the heat off Price- because honestly it felt like the defense expert felt more credible than he did questioning her. And hey- if the message of the episode is that this condition is real, then having Oliver say, “you don’t want to put me on the stand” is a way to convey that. How do you make time for that in this episode? The easiest solution is to just have Shaw confront the guy on the bridge after the shooting instead of before. Then he goes to the precinct, hears about the shooting, and he and Riley investigate the crime. Eventually they come across the shooter at that apartment, because Shaw told him to go be with his kid. I think that would shave at least 10 minutes off the investigation side- you could even keep the scene about the hospital video. As it is, we get to the bail scene at almost exactly halfway through the show- I suspect that’s the case in nearly every episode now. I don’t think it’s always necessary for this show to be literally half cop show/half lawyer show. Sometimes one side is going to need more time. Right now I feel like they are so beholden to this format, that they end up padding out the first half with red herrings or extraneous issues - but the second half almost always feels rushed and confusing. In an episode like this one- where it’s perfectly obvious who the killer is going to be- they don’t need to treat that part of the show like a big mystery. Save that screen time for when it can really make the story better.

I made this screenshot of my favorite moment from Dune 2:

For me it felt like a worthy exit for Jack - and I’m glad he got one last witness to grill, and one last big courtroom speech on his way out. He knew this case was a one way ticket, and he made it count, and spared his team in the process. This is not meant to denigrate Price or Maroun- tbh, I wonder if some of the problem with their characterizations are because the writers are trying to give them attitudes and temperaments that set them apart from him. Still, with Jack there’s just something more compelling about his character. Whether it’s the writing, Waterston’s acting, or something else entirely, there’s just a sense of (forgive me) conviction about Jack McCoy, and how he presents himself in court. Maybe now that the new kids are out from his shadow, the writers might be able to infuse some of that zeal into their characters.

Of course, ymmv - but my assumption is that the issues potentially come off as heavy handed, because sometimes they only have room in the script for someone to just literally say what the message is supposed to be, rather than let it play out as part of the leap story. And, I feel that's mostly due to all the stuff they have to accommodate happening back at HQ now. That's what I meant when I said focus on the leap, and treat the issues thoughtfully - dial back the present day stuff, and concentrate on working the message organically into the leap. Because frankly, QL has always been about social issues. Whether that's big societal stuff like oppression or intolerance, or small personal matters - this show has always been about taking people from the past, and changing their circumstances for the better. It's about taking the audience and, through the experience of the leaper, literally allowing them to understand and empathize with those people. To me, that's what made the original show special. I feel like the new version has the same potential - I just want them to do it more consistently.

Yep, it's all still Universal Studios Hollywood - and the location at the end is their famous European Street. Funnily enough, during the first hour I was thinking it was a shame that the park bulldozed the Backdraft Show to build the Transformers ride - they probably could have shot some of this in there too. I've joked before about wanting them to work the Jaws animatronic into an episode - but screw it, let's do all the attractions. Like, I would absolutely love it if they could justify shooting outside Hogwarts or at the Waterworld stunt show. Yeah, the lack of any follow up on Hannah felt like a pretty big omission. I was frankly expecting her to die in part one, and have that be the impetus for Jeffrey to go bad. I wonder if that was the plan at some point - because having him create a secret identity makes a lot more sense if she's gone. "Moooooom, I keep telling you - I'm Gideon Rydge now. No, it's not a silly name!" BTW, I guess kudos, show, for making the fake sounding name an alias - whoever came up with "Gideon Rydge" must have spent time writing for WWE because that name seems right out of their playbook. But back to Hannah - it just feels weird for there to be no follow up on her post-70's, once the crisis has been resolved. I get that we need to know that Jenn is alive, it's nice to hear that Beth and Janis are back where they should be, and it's even fine to reveal that "Jeffrey Take 2" is a big donor to QL. But with Hannah, all they talk about is her formula. It kind of makes her entire character run feel like a means to an end - as if all that really matters is this thing she came up with. Still, I'm hoping that the show comes back, because I'm still here for the basic concept. I'm concerned that this season was their idea of a "course correction" - I feel like they heard that viewers didn't care about the present day story, and their solution was to try and make us, by giving us more of it. No thank you - just focus on the leaps, and give us characters whose lives we want to see fixed. If that involves a pressing social issue, that's cool - giving the leap more time will only help present it in a thoughtful way.

True - there's a difference between his real life and his wrestling persona. But, I think it's pretty significant that they've decided to make "The Rock" a bad guy now because many fans were upset at things "Dwayne" was doing. Specifically here, they felt that he was trying to use his pull (he's now on the board of the parent company) to insert himself into the top match at Wrestlemania. In doing so, he was going to step in front of Cody Rhodes, who the fans felt "deserved" that billing (Rhodes "earned" his spot following a year plus long storyline, so they are heavily invested in seeing him there). That's where I think Disney has a problem - because it's Dwayne that needs to sell movie tickets, not The Rock. Now, I concede that they can (and probably will) find a way to flip The Rock again - but I think it would be concerning that what people think of Dwayne can impact the way they view his performances.

The Moana news is pretty wild, given what’s been going on with Dwayne in his wrestling career. I can’t imagine that Disney is thrilled about him being back to calling entire arenas full of people trailer park trash, even if they probably aren’t the target audience for Moana 2 or the remake.

I’m sure Magic will be back- they’re not going to just dump Ernie Hudson, at least not like this. But honestly, I’m not sure what he or Jenn really brings to the table- QL could lose them both, and it really wouldn’t make much difference to how they operate. Addison works with Ben, and Ian is there to run the computer- that… pretty much covers everything. I don’t know why they need a “security” expert (when people just seem to walk right in), or an on-site administrator. In retrospect, I think it would have been better to have one of them be a historian or researcher - someone who could comment on the times and circumstances Ben finds himself in. I don’t think we needed both of them- although I can generally do without the present day story altogether.

Agreed- there’s a difference between hearing a couple of notes sung from a song, and actually showing someone singing. The bit from Defying Gravity isn’t even a word, it’s just a vocal run. What’s the difference between that, and the kind of vocalizing found in any number of movie scores? And while Wicked absolutely was a phenomenon, that was also twenty years ago. If this movie is going to be successful, it’s going to have to draw in kids who weren’t even alive back then, and adults who have probably forgotten/never knew that there even was a musical. The fans know, and they’ll show up (unless they’ve heard that it’s only half the show, and decide to just wait until they can watch both parts at home). Either way, it would be nice for them to make it clear that this is a musical - I think Hollywood would be in much better shape if they would just tell us what their movies are actually like, rather than trying to fudge them into looking like what they assume random moviegoers would want to see.

If nothing else, a SB ad costs $7 Million for 30 seconds- so if they had run the full trailer it would have cost $35. Why pay that much, when everyone is just going to watch it online anyway? I think this did a good job of setting the table- we got a little bit of plot info to establish what’s happening, and they gave us enough Easter eggs to suggest that there’s a lot more on the way.

Goldblum will be fine. He’s been in a jazz band for at least a decade, and they’ve put out a few albums. Here’s a duet he did with Sarah Silverman, and if he can pull off harmonies with someone doing comedic vocals (no offense to Sarah- I think she is fun here), nothing in Wicked will be a problem: Me and My Shadow

Well, we've certainly come a long way from Mike Bodak... Overall, I also enjoyed this episode. Checking the credits, the writers were Pamela Wechsler and Gia Gordon - I know that Wechsler was responsible for (IMO) the better episodes last season, and I think Gordon worked on some of them as well. At this point, I'm willing to say that they (Wechsler especially) are the only writers on staff that seem to know how to write courtroom drama for this show. Yes, we still got some of the same problems that we always seem to get with the relaunch - the obligatory chase scene, the DA's being caught off guard by stuff they should know, the self defense arguments... But, even there, I think some of it could be justified. Like - given what we find out later, George taking off from the cops actually does make sense. I can even forgive them not literally showing the other evidence against Luke at trial, because it's stuff we already know. I'm sure that the fake alibi probably did influence the jury as far as who to believe. I'm also going to put Price's redirect of Shaver in the "good stuff" column - it's his best lawyerly moment all season so far. TBH, I think he could have redirected Robbie as well to clarify that, whatever else, he and Andrea never used pills together. Still, a few issues remain. If two people are present at five locations where pills go missing, maybe the cops should find out if both of them have a history with drug use. Price also still comes across as very ineffectual. Look man - you have George dead to rights. He can either do nothing and go away for a long time, or cooperate and take a slightly shorter sentence - that's the choice. Oh, and also besides the numerous Federal charges that Shaver is probably facing, lets not forget that he nearly ran Riley down with his car - I don't know that anyone ever gave him an honest to gosh, pinky swear immunity deal for that. Beyond that, I think it's dumb that they get stopped in the hallway every week by some ancillary character who's angry about the case (this week we get two). It's like they don't trust the audience to care about the outcome unless they see someone yell at Price to "do better." Yet, overall this at least felt like an episode of Law & Order. And hallelujah - a closing argument! Clearly this episode was set up as a moral question of what's worse - failing to convict a killer, or letting the worst creep imaginable go free. Which, at it's heart, L&O has always been a show about these kinds of dilemmas. That's the reason that a closing argument scene is so important - it puts that question to the jury and the audience. Then we get the verdict, and decide if we're okay with the outcome.

My favorite part of this show is fast becoming spotting locations from the Universal Studios Backlot Tour -which, the flood scene this week is an absolute highlight, especially if you’re on the left side of the tram. At this point, I legitimately expect them to work the Jaws animatronic into an episode. I thought the leap story itself was fine- although I also had a tough time placing it. I figured that “finishing school” meant that we were pretty far from present day- but would it kill them to just give us a date like the old show? “Okay Ben, it’s August 12th, 1953…” Of course, it doesn’t help when Ben keeps treating everything like it’s last Tuesday- really? “Badass”? What exactly are they teaching you at that finishing school, “Nadia”?

Look - I watched this right as the forums went down for maintenance, so forgive me if I'm misremembering some of this. However - was the first time we learned that Riley had interviewed the defendant for one of the prior murders really when he was on the stand? Not after they had already been reviewing the cold cases, and presumably his notes? No, "hey man - you talked to this guy, anything you remember about him?" before they went to check his story? They certainly didn't seem to recognize each other during the obligatory foot chase, or the ensuing hostage crisis... Did I just miss any of this, because it seems like a pretty important dramatic point that a writer might want to establish early on in a script... And I had kind of high hopes for this one too - after they initially decided to not bundle all the cases (because they didn't have hard proof on the old ones), I thought, "finally - a sensible strategy. Hopefully this means they'll slam dunk the current case, but have to come back and fight hard for the others - like that time Abbie had to threaten to extradite a killer to Texas to get him to give up the details on his past victims. Maybe here they can use the other recovered jewelry against him." Well we finally got to that point, but not before it turned into yet another episode where the writers' only idea of courtroom drama is to have our slack-jawed DA's being caught off guard by some incoherent ruling, or new evidence/testimony that they arguably should have known about already. Here, Nolan freaks out at the first sign of trouble - and, rather than just relying on his overwhelming physical evidence and trying to disprove the outlandish defense claim (was there any proof at all that the victim had been sexually active that night?) for some reason he decides that the best response is to bring the old cases in, circumstantial evidence and all. Then when, whoops! looks like the defendant was prematurely cleared of one of the murders, the obvious choice is to ruin the reputation of your own police detective - rather than I don't know... reopening the investigations to hopefully find some new evidence? Speaking of which, whattaya know - here's photos of the victims wearing the jewelry found in the defendants home. Wow, cases solved with actual proof - what a concept... Honestly, at this point, I have to assume that the current writers just don't know how to write a courtroom drama, don't have enough airtime to plot coherent legal issues, or they're specifically being asked to pull these cheap gotcha reveals in every script. Whichever case, it's kind of sad - I think L&O fans aren't just here for "ripped from the headlines" issues or personalities - I believe we want cases that make sense, and feel like they're using authentic legal precedents.

I agree that this was a better episode than the last one- at least it felt more focused. I was also a little afraid that they would do something truly stupid, like have the defense claim that EVA was setting up Stafford- so by comparison, blaming the cutthroat co-owner was kind of a relief. Not that there weren’t issues- as many people have mentioned, there just wasn’t enough time again to make the trial half make sense. Big unanswered questions include: 1) was there any way to tell who’s gun it actually was? Any proof it was purchased by Stafford? 2) as has been discussed- could they not find evidence of Stafford doing other tasks right handed? I’m also a lefty, but there’s some stuff you can’t avoid doing righty. 3) okay Defense attorney- can you provide anything to substantiate your claim that the partner had Marks killed? Any proof that he planted the gun or cloned the keycard, let alone faked the video?

No kidding- that was my HS mascot, so it’s been odd hearing it all these weeks as a child’s name. Still, cute kid- seeing the family together went a long way towards reforming Jonathan’s reputation for me. Still, it feels apropos in a season where they’ve so thoroughly beat us over the head with the American Dream metaphor, that an actual immigrant would win. Congrats to Ryan- I feel like not only did he have a better/smoother finale service, but that his menu also felt more on par with what you’d expect from HK Vegas.

I knew we were in for a rough one after this scene- nothing about it made any sense to me. Let’s not even talk about the logistics of walking around with a six inch chef’s knife loose in your coat pocket- are the writers really going to tell me that the natural reaction of someone being stopped on the street by two cops with guns drawn is to pull out that huge knife, and start arguing over their rights? And he said he didn’t know about the knife before then, right? If two cops were about to shoot me, and I suddenly realized I had a f$&@ing knife on me, I would freak the f out, drop it on the ground and immediately start begging for my life. Otherwise, I agree that they tried to cram in too many “ripped from the headlines” stories. Like, why did we need Chloe at all? I feel like they wasted a bunch of time on her just so she could get shockingly murdered- maybe that could have been used to make the trial half more plausible. This is my main issue with how they do the show these days. The closing should be where the stakes of the case get laid out for the jury (and the audience). The defense can say, “whatever you think of her and what she says, she has a right to her opinions. And no matter what, she didn’t stab anyone- and you can’t blame her for what someone else did.” And then Price can argue, “she held the kid’s future in her hands. She wanted the victim dead, and she used her influence over Cam to make it happen. It was a hit job, just instead of money she paid him in attention, grades, and… whatever else was going on in that relationship.” But, by the time we got to that point in the show, there wasn’t any time to lay any of that out. Instead they went cheap, and tried to make her inflammatory remark about “being proud” of Cam do the job, but that’s just not enough, and the verdict felt unearned as a result.

Anyone else watch Season 2 of What If yet? Overall it’s okay - but Episode 6 is astonishingly good. I won’t get into details since it feels like not a ton of people have seen the season. But like, I feel that particular show is one of the best things the MCU has ever made. Also- imo, it destroys any argument that Marvel shouldn’t have social messages in their shows- the episode is great precisely because it has a lot to say about a great many things.

I thought it was common knowledge that plans for Episode 9 changed pretty dramatically throughout the production of the sequel trilogy. It makes sense that storylines would probably change as well - even something as big as the fate of the main villain. The biggest inflection point was probably the decision to fire Colin Trevorrow outright after Book of Henry came out. In fact, if anyone wants to get an idea of what the original story for Kylo might have been, I strongly suggest looking up the leaked details of Trevorrow’s script (Jenny Nicholson’s YouTube recap is particularly entertaining). I don’t know if it would’ve been better overall than what we actually got. Or, if perhaps that script also would’ve also been revised to include a redemption arc (tbh, that’s one element of TROS that actually works for me dramatically). But I really wish I could visit a world where some version of that film did come out, just to see what it would have been like.