Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

TotalDrama

Member
  • Posts

    62
  • Joined

Reputation

48 Excellent
  1. It would obviously have to involve him again considering he knows Hudson and is one of his "victims", so it makes no sense to continue it without one of the prime people involved in his shenanagans.
  2. OMG. I had to look it up to see how right you are and load and behold, you are. Tsk. Tsk. It would be better if she WAS the girlfriend, given Pilar was released back in Season 16. MISSED OPPORTUNITIES. The woman appears in three episodes as the same character and you bring her back a few years later as SOME ONE ELSE? I swear....I can't....I feel like strangling myself at this rate. Can we FIRE Warren Leight please? Make me the showrunner, I'd do things correctly when it comes to these returning actors. -_- You see people? THIS IS WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT. Maya could have been PILAR! Carlos, could have been PACO. We could have linked SVU and CI together and continued two different character arcs at ONCE in the same episode. I'm crying.....
  3. Yeah, that was a little weird, even if they were playing what the kids tried to brush off as a harmless game, you have a child in a cage and Noah looked extremely uncomfortable so Olivia and that other mother should have handled the situation better like "That's not a good game to play Hudson!" I can tell this is likely not the last time we see of this family though. I can see Hudson being a suspect in a future case. 1. Even lesser known actors deserve their slow build up and callbacks if they return and reprise their roles. 2. I don't get your point here regarding the Noah stuff to Olivia taking charge to handle Carlos' attempt of suicide. My point is, the Noah stuff didn't take up much time for anyone to be offended or bothered by. Has nothing to with Olivia managing another person's attempt at suicide in a whole other situation. 3. Noah looks his age to me. I don't think he "looks older". I am surprised at how much he knew about the LGBT, but hey, it just may be the generation we're in. Kids apparently know more about that than when I was growing up and his age back in the 2000s. My issue is, don't bring back actors/actresses to play new characters especially ones that have played a role just one or two years (or in Jeremy Sisto's bizarre case on L&O, the PREVIOUS DAMN EPISODE) because it's just silly. Then you look back at these episodes and it's like the makers think we forget these people were on as different characters or these episodes don't exist anymore and just one and done. RERUNS IS A THING. Anthony Anderson for example played a cop on SVU named Blaine who could have very well been the same cop crossed over onto L&O when he became a main cast member, yet they write him in as a new character? I don't get it. You're establishing all sorts of twins and triplets and quads into this universe doing things like this and I find that a lot of the people who return can very well be playing a previous character they appeared as the first time, especially if this is many years later and that character would have served their potential incarceration time if a criminal. I saw an episode of L&O which had Eric Bogosian on it playing a lawyer. I'm like, his CI character could have been this dude who went from lawyer to becoming a cop to establish a nice callback to this character we saw one time. I would have totally done that instead of leaving it as a one and done. As I stated, both Kirk and Jon could have been reprising their roles they played the first time when brought back into the L&O universe in new stories and link back to the shows they were on the first time. MISSED OPPORTUNITIES.
  4. True, but it helps if they were playing the same characters to establish links between the shows and sometimes when actors come back and they play other characters, it makes no sense. Like Kirk Acevedo for example. He came back to SVU from 2013 onward playing a different character than when he started off as DA Investigator Hector Salazar in Trial By Jury in 2005 who also guest-starred on SVU in a crossover episode. The head scratcher is that in his 2013 appearance, he played a character who worked in the DA's office and knew Barba. But he's not Hector. Why is he not playing Hector!? Then his following SVU appearance, he's playing a new character as a cop. Huh? Hector was a former cop and could have easily gotten back on the force. Kirk could have been Hector in all these appearances to establish a link instead of playing two new characters. I DON'T GET IT. -_- Jon Ceda could have played his Homicide: Life on the Street character on Chicago P.D. and Chicago Justice as he was a cop character, STILL LIVING by the end of that show (done in a similar fashion with John Munch when Dick Wolf brought him from that show to SVU), to establish a link between shows instead of creating the new character of Antonio Dawson. Missed opportunities to have these people reprise their roles, but have them play new characters with the traits of their predecessor. How odd.
  5. Noah is not the bad guy here. No one should be hating on a child that isn't even a badly written character or one with bad traits. I just got done watching the episode, it was good. Noah had VERY LITTLE TO DO as expected so the uproar about him is nothing that should be a complaint. His stuff only took up the very opening and closing moments of the episode so nothing really big there. I will admit, it was surprising to hear him know what "bisexual" meant at his age, but his moment with Olivia at the end was very touching and emotional. I LOVED IT. I recognize the Carlos actor from a 2007 episode of Criminal Intent where he played a character named Paco whose friends murdered three black teenagers at a park. I wish this was the same character to establish a connection. Whatever jail/prison time Paco would have gotten being involved, he surely would have been out by now to be able to be involved in this story. I hate when they bring back actors and they're not the same character when they very well could be. Ugh, I swear we need new people running these shows and establishing connections with the other shows the proper way. I was stunned during the courtroom scene where we had those brief conversation moments between Carlos's family and those protest dudes. Not often do we see background scenarios play out like this between guest characters not involving the main characters or even moments. This was a treat to see as it was very Criminal Intent-esque, so I'd like to see more of this in future episodes. It wasn't entirely like the moments in CI as Carisi was still present, but he was feet away and oblivious to all of this. It was as close to private moments with guest characters we really get to see on the show.
  6. Her having a child isn't a problem. I think the timing to finally give her one was off because there's no telling how long this show would go on for and I'd like to see him as a preteen or teenager where this will open more doors for him to be involved in the stories. But we have long ways to go with that if the show even makes it to 30 seasons. I wouldn't be as bothered by Noah's incorporation into the show if we saw other kids come into the picture sooner Olivia had or adopted. I wish Eli was Olivia's son with Elliot during an affair they had during Season 8 because then with Elliot out of the picture by Season 13, there's a part of him still present for all those years. Then we have that kid Calvin from Season 12 who she adopts and raise (I hated they removed him from the story) and then we move into Noah so she has three kids total, two of which will be mature ages by Season 23 to see them caught up in some good mature storylines to shake things up for Olivia. Watching Organized Crime and seeing Eli go through what he's going through, I'd like to see that for Noah but he's too young, but if Eli was Olivia's son or if Calvin was still in the picture, I wouldn't be bugged out by Noah being too young because what I'd like to see out of him now can be given to an older sibling of his if they already existed. Overall, they waited too long to give Olivia a kid and one that would be too young upon meeting him, meaning it'd be years before we finally see him do things on his own.
  7. Noah represents a part of Olivia's personal life so this is not surprising if we dwell in that. And we have many episodes where the other characters are front and center and her personal life explored like Amanda's family drama with either her mother or sister or both and frankly, that's more dramatic than Olivia's ordeal with Noah. The investigations are not always going to be top and center especially for a spinoff where it's looser with its format and can go beyond just the investigations and be done. Noah is not a bad kid, so he deserves no hate. He's for the most part, tame and obedient and just trying to be a kid as he should be. If he was like Henry Messner who's spoiled and troubled (but probably without the killer antics) then you'd have a point, but he's nothing like that. The show is not strictly about the cases. This is not the original L&O. We've seen similar things with Stabler and his kids, Finn and his son, Amanda and her kids/sister/mother going as far as back as Season 1 altogether. What we're seeing with Olivia is nothing new given the past times she's had her family ordeals with her mother, her dad, her half-brother, etc. so it's nothing pointless seeing her have a relationship with her adoptive son. It's simply adding personal depth to these people we should be getting outside of the case and since this isn't the usual L&O format, we're allowed to explore more with this.
  8. Well Noah is her son. He has to be involved somehow. No sense just showing him on and off for the heck of it. Utilize him in some personal stories of his own. He's also a child so I don't get the hate for him. We barely see much of him as is and when we finally do get a bit of spotlight on him, it ruffles people. It makes no sense to me.
  9. Jenny and Henry's stories I'd like to see a redemption because people are too quick to believe "Oh yes, that girl is gonna be bad" or "Oh yes, that boy is gonna be bad" because of how they come off as young kids. Seeing them reformed THIS MANY YEARS LATER I MIGHT ADD can surely throw you in for a loop like "Oh, maybe there is hope for people like them". You said the key words, "MOST LIKELY PATH" not the "ONLY PATH" so Henry or Jenny can be in the small percentage where there's change. Even if you don't buy they could, as I suggested, have there be an episode where they aren't the killers this time around but the URGE of doing so still isn't completely wiped from them and they have to struggle with that. But I just don't want to see them come back and they're back killing which would be too obvious and predictable.
  10. It makes no sense for it NOT to be. It's LAW AND ORDER in name only. Meaning, we need a LAW portion and an ORDER portion. The show works on this format so it can't be serialized unless it's like one of those two or three parter episodes and I don't really mind that ONCE IN A WHILE, but that's as far as it can go. It cannot go on the similar vein as Organized Crime to stretch a whole one-third season or more and why would it? Parent shows should not copy its spinoffs that are meant to be different from it.
  11. Not really a retcon. He could have easily changed his mind, One could choose not to work a job and pursue something else in the meantime only to find themselves finding value later what they turned down initially. You can never really predict the future and mindsets can change, Bottom line is, he became a defense attorney like a lot of ADAs do so him working on Wall Street isn't too far-fetched when he has a defense mindset now.
  12. The point is, Manhattan being so small warrants all the crossovers. These people want to treat the shows like they don't co-exist in the same area here to avoid crossovers, which is what is needed when you have them set so close and even airing back-to-back. I had this issue during the 2000s when these shows were airing together. They were best taking place on different boroughs of NYC then. As for the crossover airings, this is a tactic that has been going on since the early 1970s. It's nothing new and is going to stick with television for many more years to come. It is frustrating when it comes to reruns because you're left hanging with the second part, especially if it's a show you don't even know about or watch and then you have to look up that episode to see the conclusion. During the reruns, the networks have handled this cliffhanger issue in ways that are both reasonable yet jarring: You have situations like the Magnum P.I. crossovers with Simon & Simon and Murder, She Wrote crossover where while the first parts which are the Magnum episodes that initially carried over onto S&S and MSW, the makers had alternate endings filmed for the reruns which wrapped the stories up so you weren't left hanging or researching the other show. This is somewhat good, except confusing when you have characters from the crossover show appearing on these episodes due to the continuance of the stories on their shows. It makes their roles seem random and out-of--place. It's also misleading because you're under the impression there's no more story to tell, when there actually is. If one were to watch the other shows and see these stories continuing in a random episode, you're scratching your head especially if you're familiar with the Magnum episodes where you're shown the alternate endings and here you are watching a continuation which seems off because those alternate endings wrapped the story up. How can this be happening/continuing? For example, Murder, She Wrote continued the story of a character on Magnum KILLED in the alternate/rerun ending, but not killed in the initial ending hence his role over on MSW. Then you have situations where networks take the second parter of episodes of the other show and stick them to the run of the first show they're airing on the regular and under that show's title. This was the case with the classic sitcom Hello, Larry which crossed over with Diff'rent Strokes and then you have Promised Land (the CBS show from the 1990s which has no relation to the new show on ABC) which crossed over with Touched by an Angel. The episodes of HL and PL were aired as DS and TBAA episodes. This often caused errors as I noticed the in-credits of the PS land episode, "airing" as an TBAA episode still had the TBAA cast members credited as guest-stars. I disagree with this display because it's also misleading like changing the ending to one episode to wrap the story up. If a person wanted to rewatch the episodes and look up the so-called two-parter of what you believe is just on one show, you'll be in for a rue awakening when you get to the episode list of whatever video site has them only to find Part 1 not 2. Then you do more research to discover Part 2 is actually associated with the OTHER show. Oh geez.... Then you have the third scenario in which you have networks who DID IT RIGHT as the case with the TNT Network. I've noticed a couple times when a L&O episode led to a crossover with Homicide: Life on the Street or Trial By Jury and the episodes of THOSE shows were placed right afterwards. I'm like, hey the network is airing these shows now? But they weren't, it was just one-time special airings to finish out the story presented on L&O that preceded them, which was very unique and cool. This is something all networks should be doing, but I understand if the rights to license episodes of another show can be iffy even for a special presentation, but it shouldn't be that bad if said network owns that other show if they also own the show this network is airing on the regular with their permission and this is a crossover thing, so there shouldn't be a problem. But hey, TV can be complicated. But there you have it, the different cases where networks air crossover episodes differently in reruns that could either satisfy you or lead to confusion. L&O isn't going to be serialized like OC. I don't know why you'd think that when the original has its own format that it will make do. OC's format works because that's the difference it's establishing from the other shows and besides, it's hard to believe you'd have a different organized crime every episode. The angle is more-so limited than simple homicide and rape/child abuse/domestic violence cases that can happen dozens of times a year to make up individual stories in a full season of shows. If you don't like the format of OC, then you're missing the point of the whole show really. The format NEEDS to be like that.
  13. They better not be. The revival of the original is coming and we'll already have three shows. No franchise works when there's four running at once. All the times L&O did this, the newest shows got cancelled and four spinoffs between CI and OC all got cancelled. It's best not to even try at another spinoff until one of the other shows end or at least have it air on a different network away from the others like TBJ did when CourtTV got the rights and CI on USA Network. That could probably work best.
  14. There is no HC show coming out, and I suppose you're not quite familiar with the original L&O because they only investigate homicide cases, nothing resorting to hate crimes. Plans of this show happened as early as 2019 when it was initially the show Chris Meloni was to be a part of, but then that became Organized Crime. This one has been cancelled for a while. I was kind of hoping OC wouldn't happen given the tainted stigma L&O spinoffs have been under post-CI (TBJ, Conviction, LA, and True Crime all lasting a season), so I didn't want them to make another and have it be a waste. He was best off being incorporated back into SVU. But I'm glad OC has broken the curse and lasted more than a season. Let's see how long this one continues in the long haul.
  15. It seems that way and I point this in out in my prior comment above yours, but as I also stated they shouldn't bother. The L&O revival is happening and there's already two L&O shows on the air and we're about to have three. To throw in another anytime soon would be too much so they're just best not greenlighting this one. And the hate crime thing I can't see stretching enough to make a whole season of a show and it being continuous for years and years as normal as the other shows have done, even a half of season of episodes. Things like this seems to occur on rare occasions so they're just best keeping them part of an existing show that pop up now and then if it ties into the existing show's unit whether it be SVU, OC or homicide.
×
×
  • Create New...