Danielg342

One last, sobering thought about Lee- perhaps they're making Lee into some kind of "over the top", "perfect for Jim" girl because at some point, she will be taken from us...and by that I mean killed. Series like this don't like their happy ending...I could see the show ending Gordon's.

Heh. Just try to make fun of Oswald's mother...just try. You'll realize you're the fool soon enough, right before Oswald turns you into pieces with the um, pieces of glass. ...boy, it feels so wrong to laugh at a death...but it's the Penguin...how can you not be creepily charmed? Speaking of charming, isn't Lee quite the charmer? Over-eager, yes, but I think Jimmy needs it...he plays it safe way too much, he needs someone to relax him and "take a leap", which is what Lee does. That, and Morena Baccharin is just adorable as Lee, isn't she? She's just so snuggly...I love it. (I think I need a girl like that :'( ...anyway, enough of my sad Valentine's stories...) Bullock was barely there, as was Nygma and Essen, but I can accept it since Lee needed some time to shine in the episode, plus all three got to contribute to the case. Furthermore, Bullock's comraderie with Gordon is just fun to watch...what a 180 he's done since the pilot, where he first wanted to shoot him and now he's his best friend. A loyal best friend. (Almost kind of like a dog...but I don't mean that as a derogatory remark. Bullock's more of a pitbull- got a lot of bark, a lot of bite, but a lot of love and a lot of loyalty...maybe I'll take to calling him Dog from now on...or maybe not...) Barbara...well, good to know Gotham hired Erin Richards for sex appeal, because, gosh, was Richards ever the bombshell in those clothes. I mean, she was Grade A sex in those clothes...A++ even...a total 10...hot babe...wowza...the superlatives could just go on. Yet at the end of the day I was vaguely underwhelmed. It was so over the top that it made Barbara look like a desperate has-been...I agree with others who loved her chemistry with the kids because her maturity level seems to be right there with them. I find that sad. Here I was, hoping we'd get a strong female character, someone who'd be worthy to be with Jim, but instead we've got an overgrown child that not even a desperate guy like me would want. Perhaps it's time I stop hoping for "strong Barbara" to show up...maybe if I lower my expectations, I might learn to like Barbara more. Might. (On the other hand, if I chat up Barbara at the bar, she just might go home with me and make me happy in my pants...but then I think to myself, "man, I can do so much better, so why bother?) Fish...as much as I enjoyed seeing her rise in the ranks of the prison, I would have liked it a lot more if I knew right away what the prison was for. It was awfully "convienient" that we learned it was a haven for organ transplants when we did learn it, because it seems like the writer was trying to find some way to have a standoff instead of working with what they were given. The other plot hole is- why did those patients need to be alive? Organ transplants can still work if they're dead. You don't want them damaged, but "alive" is not necessary. Then the Case of the Week...seemed a bit too simple to solve, but at this stage, I've come to accept it since I tune in more for the stories of Gotham's characters and how they all interact than I do for some complex mystery. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the show has ever tried a single misdirect in any of its cases- everything was straightforward. I pegged the killer as the kid right when I saw him. Perhaps it had something to do with having seen Cameron Monaghan play a 12-year-old killer on Criminal Minds way back in 2007, but I also remember the first rule of detective fiction and that, more often than not, the culprit is usually the first person you see...and there was Jerome. Is Jerome The Joker? I don't know, I have my doubts...he was so "obvious" that it feels like a trick, but we'll see. Finally...Victor. Great seeing Butch again, and great seeing the maniacal Victor at his best. Of all the henchmen, I think he's my favourite. Having said that, I echo what others have said in the hopes that Butch is just playing along and wasn't actually brainwashed...but, then again, part of me hopes that Victor's brainwashing worked, because we've seen Victor twice "on the job" and he failed both assignments (capture Gordon and capture Fish/Butch), and a third failure would make the character look ineffective. Then again, Anthony Carrigan is just so scary that even if he never has an on-screen success, I could always believe that he's good at his job. Great episode overall.

I guess I would fall into the video game category, but I'm not sure I'd use that spectrum. I think it's more of a question of what the viewer seeks through their entertainment- is it a matter of a show that always tells you that “right makes right” and those that do wrong will always get their comeuppance? Or is it a matter of questioning just what we think is “right” or “wrong”, with no clear winner in the end? (I realize I'm simplfying, but it's the easiest way to explain my point of view) For me, I've seen enough shows as a kid so that I've got to the point where the idea of a work of fiction where the “bad guys” and the “good guys” are clear is boring to me- I'd rather watch a show that's ambiguous about what's “good” and “bad” and let me figure it out for myself. This might make me sound like a cynic but it's the opposite- I'm of the firm belief that most people are upright in their moral standing and beliefs, they just have different ways of meting out justice, and not every way of doing so I would agree with. There's the old adage that says “we're all the heroes of our own story” so, to me, it's foolish to paint someone as a “good guy” or a “bad guy”, because not everyone will agree with that assessment. It might be easier if we could categorize everyone as “good” or “bad” but reality is far more complex- interestingly so, I think. Having said that, I'm much more comfortable examining the struggle for justice through the lens of a TV show like The Blacklist or through my own fiction writing, than I would be in real life. In fiction, there's the “safety” that no matter how “bad” things may get, everything is contained within the story and, at the end of the day, I can wave it off as something that wasn't actually “real”. Reality is far more different- whatever happens in “real life” will affect real people, so much so that it might even affect ourselves, so an examination of “good vs bad” is a far more “risky” proposition. It's easier, say, for me to debate Red's actions because, at the end of the day, Red didn't actually kill anyone because Red doesn't exist. It's much harder for me to debate the actions of the Tamil Tigers because, even though I know people who support them, knowing that real lives have been affected and worse, lost, at their hands makes it harder for me to say “their ends justify the means”. At least when it comes to fiction I can handwave that the “victim who deserves it” is some kind of lowlife who alienates everyone, is estranged from their family and has no actual redeeming qualities. In reality, you can never do that. I realize it sounds cruel that I'm comfortable with fictional characters being nothing but “pawns”, but knowing they're not “real” allows me the freedom to explore the questions the work of fiction wishes to raise, questions I'd be far less comfortable asking if this was real life.

I suppose now we get into the moralistic debate about “is killing ever good?”, but that's a debate for another forum. I will say this much- TV has a way of framing people as “good” or “bad” that doesn't happen in reality, and thus I'm far more comfortable with people being offed on TV than I am in real life. To me, neither Denisov or Red have killed anyone onscreen that “didn't deserve it” (in so much the sense that the show can simplify their victims as “all around baddies”). They're no more “bad” than, say, Dexter Morgan or Walter White or any number of Jason Statham's movie characters. Sure, there's very much the argument that those victims- if they existed in reality- really never “deserve” it. However, those aren't victims that exist in reality, they exist solely in fiction, and in fiction, you can restrict what the audience sees so that they only see the character as “bad”. Furthermore, I'm a strong believer that you can't evaluate what you don't see, so if a character is supposed to be “good”, I expect the show to, well, “show” me their good side. Could the scumbags Denisov or Red offed have good qualities? Sure, they could- but I didn't see it so I can't say they do. That makes them bad and makes me more comfortable with Denisov or Red killing them. I suppose what it really boils down to is if you're comfortable with TV characters killing others on TV. I'm of the opinion that I can be, simply because TV raises contexts that reality won't or can't raise. One of the things that drew me to this show- and Gotham- is the whole idea of asking the question of “who really are the good guys?” I think this show hasn't always been the best at dealing with this question, but I think this episode was a great exploration. The people who we'd think are the “good guys”- in this case, the CIA, since they were the ones most willing to follow protocol and wanted to arrest the baddies- really weren't up to much good while the episode's real “good guys” had to be ethically challenged in order to get there (and not just Red and Denisov, Keen and Ressler had to violate protocol to solve the case). Of course, then you get into the question of “do the ends justify the means?” I think it can, but as the show tells us, it's still very much an open question.

I always thought it would have made for a better story for Meg if the person she was meeting was actually the boy she believes she was messaging, only for the boy to turn out to be the kidnapper or a ruse for the kidnapper or a "kidnapper in training" or something. Sure, it'd still be somewhat rote, but at least it's a bit of a twist of the usual "online predator" story in that, this time, the predator is actually the one communicating with the target instead of posing as someone else to "fool" the target. I also thought the chess tournament joke was a nod to Gideon, with Reid saying that as a way to preserve his memory for some reason.

I see it as Denisov being “good” like Red is “good”- they have strong morals and do everything within this moral framework, but they're not adverse to doing what they need to do in order to achieve “the right thing”, even if what they do is illegal or disrespectful. Yeah, the things they do are ethically questionable, but their motives are grounded in moral objectives.

Considering that Scandal is getting torn to shreds on their forum, NBC might be prudent to re-evaluate the timeslot at the end of the season. ABC might just give away the timeslot by themselves- that, and judging by the last two episodes, The Blacklist might actually turn into a viable alternative.

I gotta say, I loved it. Start to finish, I loved it. For once there was a simple plot, a simple goal and a simple execution- no extraneous things that get in the way and cloud things. So far, The Blacklist post Super Bowl is getting off to a great start. Here's hoping that it continues and the ratings rebound next week. (At least we get a Season 3 which could mean a newer, better timeslot...or, as I see on the Scandal forum, Scandal implodes, which I think would be a shame because that too is a good show...or at least was) I loved seeing Farhan Tahir...he was also on Criminal Minds as the terrorist in “200”, reappearing in a flashback in “The Forever People” where he was the lone bright spot. He was excellent as Ruslan Denisov here, and I liked how Denisov turned out to be a good guy in all this. I also liked how the episode was all about defending “the little guys of the world” in Uzbekistan...far too often we don't see the struggles that many of these nations face when the “big countries” bully them around and plunder their resources, so it was great to see the show highlight that...and take out the corrupt government officials that allowed it to happen. Not sure what to think of Red's motives...on one hand, I believe him when he says that replacing the rusty pipeline with a new, state-of-the-art one is a “win-win” for everyone because I do believe Red is a man of honour, so I don't think he'd do something like that if he couldn't justify it. On the other hand, the optics sure are bad, and, as Keystone XL taught me, I'm not sure if there's ever a pipeline that could be made to look good, but I doubt the show will revisit this story so I won't dwell on it too much. One part I will dwell on is Lizzie. I can picture a reviewer or two moaning about Lizzie’s “agency” in this story and being mad that she has absolutely no power in all of this (one reviewer did that when he reviewed “The Decembrist”), but I don’t think it’s the right way of looking at this. Lizzie’s supposed to be in way over her head dealing with a criminal mastermind, and while I believe Red to actually have a moral centre who’d always be willing to “do the right thing”, he’s also the type to not mess around when people cross him, as Lizzie is doing. While I think Red would be better served to be upfront with Lizzie and explain to her the method to his madness, I can accept that he has some kind of master plan that he needs to fulfill with Lizzie and if she were to know all the details surrounding it then it could compromise what he needs to get done. Regardless, Lizzie fails to understand that she is in no way capable of taking on one of the world’s greatest masterminds, and I think it serves her right that Red would give her the “tough love” approach- especially if he waits until the final moment to save Lizzie from prosecution for killing the harbour worker/police officer. Red’s actions are par for the course, as far as I’m concerned.

Did CM move this up or is it still on March 4?

The good: well, it wasn't "politically correct"- it's your average (good old?) CM episode where a guy is hunting women. Slightly different in that there weren't three victims- teaser, middle, and the final one (who is saved)- although the first victim kind of served as a teaser victim and a middle victim all in one, with the final girl being completely powerless against the UnSub. Oh, and so too was JJ, so it's almost like there were three victims in this episode after all. I suppose I could say Kate saving JJ is "politically correct" since it's a woman saving the day, but it's no different from past CM episodes (like "The Slave of Duty" or "Broken Mirror") where Emily Prentiss or Elle Greenaway saved the day, so I let that part go. The main takeaway was that this was, finally, a more "traditional" (for the lack of a better descriptor) CM episode where the crime narrative featured a man hunting women (and whose only victims were women), a narrative this season stayed away from way too much up to this point. That was the only positive, and sad to think that "misogyny" was the episode's only bright spot. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for a "misogynistic" episode because cases like that happen in real life, but we need to have a mixture- not too many and not too little. Some seasons had too many. This one had too little, with some (like "If The Shoe Fits...") that are totally unrealistic. Enough of that rant. On to the rest of my thoughts: (Okay I lied- there was one other, minor positive: Reid's statement that chess tournaments could be a place where singles hook up. That was a pretty funny line, and the team's confused silence upon hearing it was gold...and hey, maybe the kid's on to something.) -Brian Poth played the UnSub, and he looked so much like Gotham's Dr. Crane that it was uncanny. Gotham's character was played by Julian Sands, so, no the actors weren't the same, but the two looked so much alike. -Thought Poth's acting was pretty good, but that's about all I can say about his character. The storyline- heck, this entire episode- felt like one giant cliche. Oh, so he decided to turn to murdering domestic violence victims because his mother was a domestic violence victim? Okay...like I didn't see that before. Even the part where he wanted to harvest his victim's screams, while sounding novel, still came off as rather rote. -Leads to a good question- if all he wanted was to harvest a scream, in the world of YouTube, why didn't he think of watching a few movies or something? It's certainly less risky (and less illegal) than kidnapping women to do it, don't you think? -While I suppose I could appreciate the fact the kid wasn't killed, I still wonder why it didn't happen- it's leaving behind a witness. Which leads to the next misstep, which is why no one bothered to talk to the kid (the UnSub wasn't known at this stage). Also, in a sobering thought, I realized the kid saw his mother's kidnapping, which is likely going to turn this kid into a psycho killer like the death of the UnSub's mother did for this week's villain. Fun- well, I guess CM is making sure they've got villains for future episodes, I guess -The profiling really didn't ring true, and it showed pretty bad. Usually I need to think about it before I start thinking maybe the profile CM came up with is pretty wonky, but this week I saw it right away. For example, I thought Kate and JJ came way too quickly to the conclusion that the slash across the throat was because he wanted to "silence his victims" (which turned out to be wrong anyway). I thought, quite naturally, that the UnSub slashed his victim's throats to ensure that they're dead, because a victim who was beaten to death might not always actually be beaten to death, so you'd need to shoot them or slash their throats just to make sure. -Also felt that the profile was just a lot of leaps and guesses- there was just no rhyme or reason to them. -Going back to the episode's penchant for hiring lookalikes, the lead Detective sure looked a lot like Lester Holt. I don't care that the character was really named Detective Davenport played by Tyee Tilghman, I like Holt better than the actual actor in this episode, so I'm naming the lead Detective Lester Holt...because I can (Aside: anyone think the Brian Williams fiasco could make a great case? Especially if the event actually happened only that we find out it was all staged? Just throwing it out there) -Getting back to Detective Holt, like a lot of Detectives on this show (and unlike the real Holt), he sure didn't know how to do his own job. Let's see: both victims checked in to domestic abuse shelters- maybe you want to start by seeing if one of the workers is the culprit? -Speaking of not following your leads- the UnSub as a boy received a gift from a former police officer. That might be useful, Detective Holt, right? -No one also seemed to mention that the UnSub wasn't technically a serial killer- he only had two victims, and not much of a cooling off period. So mark that as another point against Detective Holt. -I will give Detective Holt this much, though- he did seem to be involved in the case and contributed, which is more than a lot of detectives lately. Most of the other detectives seem to be lazy, simply calling in the BAU in and then leaving to play checkers or something while the BAU does the actual work. (Hey, wait a minute...that might actually be a great job...it's a job that looks good, pays well but requires you to do no more work than to make a phone call! So where can I apply to be a CM Detective?) -While I appreciated the fact that JJ got her butt kicked in this episode (and literally- one of the swings of the UnSub's bat struck her rear. Not sure if that was, ahem, by design...), it still points to some rather inconsistent writing. How does JJ go from shaking off PTSD and kicking butt to suddenly losing all of her skills in a heartbeat? It reeks of the show trying to tell the fans "look, we finally put JJ in peril, so stop complaining!" instead of making the situation organic. Oh, and though I may find JJ's fight skills to be unbelievable, there's no way she could get her butt handed to her by the UnSub: he's not exactly the picture of fitness...but then, we wouldn't get to see Kate save the day...*groan* -Finally, the Meg storyline...I thought from the start it was stupid, and this episode was of no help. On top of the already established faults of Meg's poor Internet skills and the cliche of the "boy not actually being a boy", there were other problems. Meg told her father that she was meeting someone at the mall...not meeting someone at night. No way I'd allow something like that, if I was a parent. Also, the "boy" bumped into Meg's father, so he had a chance to "deal" with him but didn't...why? I also wonder- like zannej did- what his plan was. You'd think he'd use the old "I'm the boy's uncle, let me take you to him" trick, or text the girls to meet him at some other point where the dad couldn't follow them (and maybe implore them to move quickly by playing some kind of "game" or something). I also think it's rather "convenient" that the father "just happened" to be in the same area as his daughter...I guess I could buy his stalking skills (uh oh, does this mean he'll be a criminal?), but unless it's a small mall, I'd imagine he could lose his kids pretty quickly. -Anyway, there were just too many holes in the Meg story and ultimately it was an unsatisfying "cliffhanger". Nothing really happened, meaning we'll get another "lure" episode and go through this dance all over again, making this episode a waste of time. The writers really don't know how to "get to the point" do they?

Well, I think Nicaragua and all their bananas would give Kazakhstan a run for their money. :p I know Borat was Kazakh...the Uzbeks were their biggest rivals, though.

That's what I was thinking too. The prisoners could have tried to sexually assault Fish but given how easy Fish won control of the prison, I can see that any unwanted advances would get quickly- and painfully- rebuffed.

I'm getting Borat flashbacks thinking about Uzbekistan...doubt the show will go there but it'd be funny. Oh well, I'm all for a good romp in Tashkent. :)

I tend to think Bruce showed her some actual love for her, but he had no idea what he was doing and he wound up turning Selina off. Yes, it was a love based on Bruce hoping he could get stuff out of her, but I still think it was a love. It's difficult to know for sure what Selina actually saw, and it's a fair point to note she has manipulative tendencies and thus isn't adverse to lying to get her way, but her statement very much felt like "leave me alone, Bruce" and I don't construe it as Selina telling the truth- just like "I saw his face" likely isn't the truth.

I'd prefer that ending too, with the BAU still out there. Apparently it's how Angel ended, to symbolize "the fight never ends"- I'd like that kind of resolution, because the BAU's fight never ends, but I'd want it to be reassuring too- the BAU's fight may never be over, but at least here's some fighters you can count on. Although I'd have to agree with the other part of your post- knowing the chuckleheads (nice name for them), we'll get some knockoff of Die Hard and maybe a bit of Saw where each agent is picked off one by one with the case being solved by the local detective or some other agent the show brings in for the final show, just so the new blood can start the BAU- or something different- all over again. *sigh*

I thought the two-parter was pretty entertaining, but I do think the sum of its parts was better than the whole. We had a whole lot of action, whole lot of pondering and positioning, feints and misdirects...for absolutely no resolution. I guess I should have figured the show wouldn't provide answers just to keep the post-Super Bowl crowd watching, but I might have liked it more if answers led to more questions...instead of dragging out the questions we already have.

Loved the visuals...this was wonderfully dark. Seemed like a wonderful reminder to Jim just what can happen if you continue blindly down an altruistic path. Dr. Crane meant well...but he screwed up his son instead. Speaking of Gordon, I sure hope Dr. Tompkins will get him to loosen up...one episode of “stuck up Jim” was hard enough. Penguin vs Riddler was pretty cool...man, when you can creep out the ol' Cobblepot, you know you're messed up. It was also nice seeing Oswald finally trembling again...he grew in power too soon so the show needed to check that, and I think they did a pretty good job. It's also nice seeing Falcone and Maroni being such good buds...for such mortal enemies, they do seem to get along just fine. Thought the Bruce storyline, while touching, was distracting...I think something like that would have worked better if it were tied to the case at hand. Then there's Fish...no idea what her storyline is at this point. Where exactly is she and who took her, and why? What is that prison for in the first place? I suppose we'll all get the answers at some point but it's just too strange at this stage. Overall, it was a great episode.

Season's heating up...show won't return until March 4, so I'm anticipating a mini-cliffhanger.

Which one? I'm curious.

I know the CM character she was talking about was Einstein. I'm wondering if she posits that Einstein is a rip-off of a character in a bad fanfic.

Is that a “general” statement or a reference to a real character?

I suppose that makes sense, although I still think it's pretty negligent at least that Hotch sends his agents without at least taking the precautions against him setting the bomb off...it's not like he's just a guy with a gun that can't do too much damage. A bomb is a bomb. As for Einstein- I forgot to mention her. I totally got the “Valley Girl” vibe from her. I personally thought she was cute, and I could totally see Reid liking someone as vibrant as she is. Problem is, I'm not sure if I'd like her without seeing her more often- her voice is nasally and her vocabulary seems sophomoric, which can get tiring. However, if she's developed right, I could see Einstein as a viable love interest.

I thought this episode had a chance to be entertaining. It was very much an "old school" episode, everyone had lots to do and there was a good amount of suspense over who the actual UnSub was. I knew the "hero" would be a bad guy from the get-go, but I didn't see a second guy...thought maybe it might have been his wife. (As an aside, I could have dug it if the "second UnSub" was the hero's daughter...kids can be smarter than they look, and I think it's the perfect misdirect to use a brainiac kid, but I digress) I also liked how Morgan essentially was the one playing the "lead" in the investigation, since he'd be the one who'd know the most about bombs. Interestingly, a friend of mine- who just recently got into the show and only saw a smattering of old episodes- rolled her eyes when she saw Morgan diffuse the bomb until I told her about "Won't Get Fooled Again", after which she was impressed with Morgan's abilities. Makes me wish it didn't take them this long to remind the viewers that Morgan is the bomb expert, but better late than never I guess. Liked Reid and his never-ending chess game, and, though I felt Rossi was a bit heavy-handed in essentially telling Reid to "get over it", I did feel he was genuinely sympathetic towards him. I also liked how they "finished the game"- I really enjoyed Rossi's line, "who do you think he played before he met you?" because it gave the game a sense of purpose. I get the sense that Rossi would be as much of a challenge for Reid to beat at chess as Gideon was, so perhaps when Reid wins that match he can finally say he beat Gideon. It's a nice way to "close the book" on Gideon much how like Rossi "closed the book" on Maeve- maybe Rossi really *is* becoming Reid's next father figure. (Which doesn't bode well for Rossi's survival, but I digress) I also liked JJ handling the media and Kate and Hotch handling the interrogations...Callahan and Hotchner do work well together as an interrogation unit. Not sure if they're quite at the level of Prentiss/Hotch but give it a few more episodes and they may get up there. I also liked seeing Hotch having a plan and working it with his natural partner, Rossi, and I enjoyed Morgan and Reid being paired up for this one, since they work so well together. Still, I just felt like this lacked "something"...I really don't know what it was. Obviously the callback for this episode was "Won't Get Fooled Again", with a little mixture of "Empty Planet", but try as it might to be that kind of episode, it failed. Perhaps it was the acting of the UnSubs themselves, since I didn't really get a sense that they were the "hidden terror" types, and I guess the story had a "roteness" to it that it just couldn't get out of. I also really didn't get the sense that Indianapolis was really "plunged into terror"- they tried with a few references but they never got there. I think I would have liked a resident or two- not just the Mayor- give the FBI grief over their inability to catch the guy- at least it would have given the episode more urgency. I also wondered, why Indianapolis? This is a complaint I could use for just about any episode, because most of the time they feel like the setting for the crimes are completely random, being placed somewhere for the sake of them placing the crimes somewhere. I get the show wants the vibe that "this could happen anywhere" but I really felt like a guy who wants as much attention as this bomber would work better in a city where something is actually happening, like perhaps New Orleans. Yeah I know, there's the cliche about using New Orleans for Mardi Gras but I think if you want a story where a bomber is craving attention, nothing can beat the Big Easy after Shrove Tuesday (if you want to get away from the obvious choices like Vegas or New York). Indianapolis? Why not wait until Memorial Day or the Colts' home opener? I think the big thing for me was the takedown scene...I do not like it. Not because I thought JJ or Reid did a bad job (I thought JJ did, but Reid was terrific), or because Morgan should have been down there (he should have, but that's beside the point), but because the writers themselves didn't seem to learn anything from "Won't Get Fooled Again". How come neither Hotch or Rossi thought to take some kind of precautions before sending their agents after a bomber, especially one as narcissistic as this one? Surely they would have remembered Adrian Bale and thought twice about putting their own agents in peril. JJ and Reid were basically in a death trap and no one seemed to even be bothered by it. Why? If Rick Dunkle really wanted to pay tribute to Gideon, then why do it by getting his "signature story" right? I suppose you could argue that the team thought the UnSub wouldn't be the kind of guy who'd blow himself up because he wanted the attention but I don't buy that- the bomber's got all the power in the room, and I would think a guy as narcissistic as he is would believe he'd make a bigger- and better- story as martyr than as a convicted criminal. Even if reality would be different, I'd imagine a mind as warped as a bomber's would believe there's "glory" in death and thus wouldn't be afraid of it. Regardless, even if the bomber had no actual intention of blowing himself up, why not call the agents' bluff? What are they going to do if he doesn't drop the bomb? Blow it out of his hands? Then they're all dead. I think- just like "Nelson's Sparrow" before it- the show tried too hard to call back to earlier seasons without quite getting there, only this time the mistake was far more glaring.

Seems to me that this will appear to be an isolated incident that the BAU believes could lead to more. Of course, I openly wonder who the “hero” really is...

I do agree that Gordon gets his clues handed to him far too often, and I think he lets his ego get in the way of things, but that's where my agreement ends. This really sounds like the writer is a super-obsessed fan of Agent Carter and tried everything she can to justify her fandom, instead of evaluating both shows on their own merits. Did the writer not notice that Jim Gordon fights in almost every episode, and wound up destroying in a fight a man who was literally twice the size of him? Plus I've only seen Gordon lose one fight- to Lovecraft's Assassin. Every other time he's more than held his own. Then Harvey Bullock...yeah he's caught in the corruption of Gotham. However, he's had Gordon's back more often than not, so much so that whenever he has to pick between corruption or helping Gordon, helping Gordon wins out all the time. I can't think of a more loyal partner. Plus, the amount of times Bullock has come up with the clue needed to help Gordon solve the crime has been many- Bullock isn't just a loyal partner, but he's capable. I also believe Gordon has a better love life- Barbara gives him BS, he doesn't put up with it and shacks up with another woman. Might be a display of questionable loyalty, but when it's Barbara, it's justified. Don't get me wrong- Agent Carter has many great qualities, but I'd rather see them put on display in an honest evaluation than put up in a kangaroo court so the writer can continue justifying that her own new obsession is the best on television.