Danielg342

I thought the episode was great. The case was actually interesting this week- as opposed to just obtuse- and I thought it was plotted pretty well. Having Harlan Emple and his neurotics just sealed the deal for me, especially how rounded he was as a character- he just wants to be liked, and good on Sherlock to recognize that. Was mildly disappointed with Phil Sims' cameo. I mean, it was neat to see- I'm a football fan (Bills, though) and I've watched many a CBS game Sims has called (although I don't think of him as one of the game's best color commentators)- and I thought of having Sims be one of Sherlock's Irregulars was a nice twist (especially how he used football as a cover for the knife throwing thing), but his cameo meant nothing to the episode. I would have preferred if Sims' skills turned out to be of use in solving the case (at least) or if Sims played a character who would be involved in the case (such as being one of the competing mathematicians or being the factory worker that let Emple in or something like that), but I'll take what I can get. Learning that Kitty was a rape victim was an interesting reveal...I mean, I predicted she was troubled in some way but not in the way I thought of. I also thought it was written and acted pretty well- Kitty made no big scenes about her torment, and Olivia Lovibond gave a nice detached performance that let on that she was struggling with a need for help against her feelings of helplessness and a fear of being “a bother.” I don't want this to come out the wrong way, but she was very believable- how many other Hollywood victims go for theatrics and be an overt “pity party”? So I have to commend the writers for their performance here. I also probably should blast Sherlock for being so manipulative that he found a way- through Kitty- to bring Watson back into his life, but I think in doing so it would negate the fact that his heart was in the right place. I know if I was Watson I would have liked it better if Sherlock simply asked, but she knows that's just not his style. Lastly, I enjoyed the script in this one...lots of nice zingers. My two favourites (both directed at Emple): “Well, here's some math for you- we've got one dead body and one live body...”- Thomas Gregson in the interrogation “What makes you think I wouldn't recognize an anagram of my own name?”- Sherlock Holmes, calling out Emple's usage of the pseudonym “Mo Shellshocker”

Right at the end, Tucker is contemplating the words of her therapist- specifically, “you're repressing (a memory)”- and as she does so, she's picturing those moments in her head. As I understand it, the flashbacks occur via her perspective, so you first see Aaron screaming and writhing in pain but at the end, right before Aaron is blown up, he points a gun at Tucker and even aims.

So the male is the damsel in distress...and I bet since he's a lawyer, he'll be a jerk too. I guess this means we've gone full circle on the political correctness chart...maybe the only solace is that this doesn't appear to be a murder case.

I'd bet my bottom dollar and go triple or nothing on it the show will go to that well. It's too, um, sexy to ignore.

Well...I thought it has potential...but I also think it's got a long way to go. First, when I started to hear about this, I rolled my eyes when I saw they decided to make the President an African-American woman. Maybe it's just me, but I'm tired of Hollywood sticking minorities in positions of power so that they can claim that they're "inclusive" when it's just a smokescreen- that, and it seems like they want to avoid "misogyny" claims by having a man be in power over a woman, forgetting that misogyny doesn't come because characters are in that situation but rather what they do in that situation. Anyway, I digress, because it's apparent the President, Constance Payton (Alfre Woodard), is going to have a bigger role in the series than simply the one character that barks orders and leaves it at that. Of course, then it gave me the opportunity to roll my eyes again once I saw what role President Payton and Charleston Tucker (Katherine Heigl) were going to play. Evidently, Tucker and Payton have been sprung into action because one year ago, Payton's son and Tucker's fiance, Aaron Payton, was killed in a terrorist attack in Kabul. The only thing I could say about that is, "really show? Really?" (Of course, the terrorist attack in Kabul and the choice of Omer Fatah as the "Big Bad" points to another cliche, since it seems like Hollywood loves Muslim terrorists, but I might be willing to let that go on a show that's about American politics) Back to the fiance part...there's a trope on TVTropes called "Never A Self Made Woman" about the tendency for female characters to owe their presence on the show to a male, and this one falls for it hook and sinker. Right off the bat, we're supposed to care about Tucker and President Payton since both lost the same man that they love. I'd be moved if I didn't see that about a hundred different times. The other part of this is that you never see a woman on TV do anything substantial unless they have a strong "familial" connection, as if the only roles a woman can play on TV are that of mothers or lovers. Men can have their love lives in the background and have wildly different ambitions and motivations, but women on TV? What drives them has to be a love, or a lost love, or shaking off questions about why they don't have a family. Gosh, can I not get a woman that's driven to action because she strongly believes in justice or has a new way of doing things? To me, other than the cliche of the choice that Fatah is Muslim, the whole set up didn't need a fallen fiance. Tucker could have just started her job with her first task to be bringing in Fatah, gaining the job because so many before her failed. Then we can have the President slowly warm up to her (and the resulting conflicts) without the two of them being best buds right off the bat. Enough of the premise...I suppose I could let all of that go if the show was entertaining. It's got potential...but... Katherine Heigl, I think, is a phenomenal actress. She can give you warmth, confidence and vulnerability at seemingly the blink of an eye, and I just wish she had much better writers (and maybe a better agent) to best utilize her skills (for instance, she could do very well as a hard-nosed detective on a CBS cop show). I'm not sure she'll get that here, because it seems to me like the producers love "pouty Heigl" and want to thrust as many reasons in our face to make her pouty as they can, when I think Heigl can do much better than that. Why can't her strength be the main focus of her character? Why must she be a delicate little flower right off the bat? Did think she looked very beautiful on this show, even during the sex scenes (what can I say? I'm a guy :p). Even though I know why NBC put those scenes there, at least Heigl can pull it off, and, based on the plot of the series, they did make sense, though I hope they don't go to that well every week. As much as I might personally enjoy Heigl without clothes on, please, NBC, she's more than just sexy. I did enjoy Woodard in the few scenes she was in...though the writing didn't give her much to do she at least displayed some humanity and warmth in the role. Something tells me she's going to be "motherly" to Tucker, which I think I'd enjoy- you get too many higher ups playing simply the role of a thorn so it's nice NBC wants to mix it up here. Really thought the "Story of the Week" was, well, weak...I almost knew right away that the General, since he was Syrian, was going to be a bad guy. Of course, I guess the twist of it being "someone from the inside" has also been done to death, but the General being a baddie played to the show's usage of Muslims as bad guys, so I groaned at the reveal. I also thought that whole subplot with Tucker getting suspended made no sense at all- it just unnecessarily muddied the story and I don't see why she was suspended anyway. They could have cut that whole thing out and maybe used Tucker in the role she's supposed to be used in- as a foreign negotiator. For all the posturing that Heigl did in her portrayal, we never really did see Tucker do her job in any technical capacity, so we still don't have any knowledge about her actual skills in the field. It all just seemed like an excuse for Heigl to run around in her dress and get saved by "Mommy" (the President) in the end. The other actors...not too particularly fond of them, but I guess that's par for the course on a show like this. Did particularly like Sheila Vand, though- she was quirky. I think if this show gives me more strong Heigl, less soapy stuff and more action (not necessarily where things blow up but with the characters doing more than just talking, as seems to be the case in the pilot) it could be great. However, I'm not holding my breath.

So my own thoughts on the podcast: 1) I agree with Erica Messer that I, too, am more interested in the journey of the characters. However, it's plain to see that CM of the last four years hasn't been anything except going after cheap thrills and mindless drivel, with very little done to explore any kind of journey for the characters, either main ones or episodic ones. The main characters seem to only get one-off centric “moments” (or, if they're lucky or JJ, an entire episode), the recurring characters like Savannah or Cruz are nothing more than props for the stories of the main characters, the UnSubs are one dimensional (with the only noticeable trait being that they're deranged) and the victims are essentially props for the UnSubs' delusions. It's very telling that none of the show's more memorable UnSubs or victims have come during Messer's time, and this is because Messer has yet to understand the intricacies that mould a character. That, and her writing has all the subtlety of a chainsaw, but that's another discussion. 2) Messer, if I'm not mistaken, said leaving was Jeanne Tripplehorn's choice. I wonder if it was now that Jennifer Love Hewitt is on the show now. What I think happened is that Hewitt became available and CBS decided to push Tripplehorn out to make room for Hewitt, someone I would do anything possible for just to have her on my show. If they'd replaced Tripplehorn with another, lesser known actress I might believe it was Tripplehorn's decision, but I can't see that happening and then, just by a stroke of luck, Hewitt signs on. It could be possible, but I'm not buying it. 3a) Kate's attitude sounds more like Morgan's than Rossi's. I suppose if it is nothing more than talk I can accept it (or some kind of character development where she learns there's a time and place for that kind of stuff), but if Messer is oblivious to what's wrong with this attitude, it highlights everything that's wrong with her as a showrunner. First of all, we enjoyed CM since it made an attempt to ground things in reality and highlight the real struggles law enforcement officers have to deal with, so having LEOs being so disrespectful of the process is a slap in the face to that. Secondly, what kind of message is Messer sending by having her LEOs be some kind of altruistic rogues? That, as long as you are doing things for 'just' reasons, you are entitled to do anything you want? Granted, on a better written show (like Scandal, Gotham or even South Park (yes, as crude as it can be, at least Matt Parker and Trey Stone show you the consequences of your actions)) the question of ethics and what are the "right" ways to go about justice would be an interesting question to explore, but the point is there would have to be some exploration. Not, as CM often does, to present something as "the only way to do things" with everyone else being mere strawmen. 3b) I suppose it's a nice angle to explore, since it's a little "out of the box" to explore the life of a surrogate mother (especially considering that typically moms Hewitt's age don't have 13-year-old daughters), but here's a question that Messer- and no one on TV it seems- has ever bothered to answer: how come women can't be "motherly" without having to be mothers already? Why must the only storyline for women be about love and how much they care about their families? Why can't we have a female character that, say, wants to end deep municipal corruption, must wrestle with intense personal demons (like, say, overcoming an addiction) while leading their lives, or decides, after winning the lottery, to correct every wrong they've ever committed? Why must it be always men who play these roles? 4) I would have had no problem if "A Thousand Suns" was ripped from the headlines- the Malayasian Airlines flight is the strangest news story I've ever read. That's worth the exploration alone...not that I thought how CM handled it did it any kind of justice, though. 5) I'm surprised that Messer was disappointed with "To Bear Witness" because it wasn't "real"- doesn't she realize a good many of her UnSubs, victims and situations are beyond realistic anyway? Besides, she's basically blasting an episode that had everything she was looking for in an episode- a deep, personal exploration into the motives of the UnSub and the trauma of the victims, some very good character moments (especially by Morgan) and a case that is very cerebral and multi-dimensional. I couldn't care less if it wasn't actually realistic- it was still believable, and I thought it was scary for the simple reason that it wasn't one-dimensional and that you really got a feel for how terrifying the situation was for the victim. I thought where the episode failed was in the concept (a guy who turns his victims into zombies? Why doesn't he create an army of them? That would be scarier- and far more urgent for the BAU to tackle) and in the ending, because Anton Harris received no comeuppance at all. Not because it wasn't the "simple scary" she believes CM does so well (it doesn't). Why is she incapable of listening to the fans who keep telling her deeper explorations are what they want, not one-dimensional "comic book" villains? 6) Messer is right in principle (I get the sense that she has a good idea of knowing what her audience wants to hear without realizing what she's actually doing). However, as I've said before, the execution of her episodes have been anything but what she thinks she is putting out. One dimensional UnSubs and disposable victims are not relatable, not scary and they're not compelling at all. She brings up "The Itch" as an example of how she thinks she's fulfilling this principle but I think it did the opposite- she gave us an episode about a disease that many experts believe is fictitious, did nothing to explore the bug angle, and riddled the episode with (again) a one-dimensional UnSub and disposable victims. How can I relate to any of that? 7) So Messer blames the actors and the network for the characters not having enough flaws? Does she not think to look in the mirror? I could name several characters who are on a network that are very flawed- just off the top of my head, you've got Gregory House (House), Sherlock Holmes (Elementary), Abby Whelan (Scandal), Olivia Pope (Scandal), Harvey Bullock (Gotham), James Gordon (Gotham) and Christy Plunkett (Mom). Heck, even Homer Simpson, at least in the early days of The Simpsons, was wonderfully flawed. Just because CM can't resort to the overt violence of The Sopranos or the sex of Game of Thrones doesn't mean it can't have flawed characters. (In fact, I'd probably argue that network writing needs to be stronger than cable writing, since HBO writers can easily get a cheap thrill through gore or nudity whereas a network writer cannot do that, but that's another debate altogether) I do disagree that JJ and Garcia are the only characters with flaws- I don't think any CM character has anything remotely approximating discernible characteristics and thus any sense of realistic character flaws...they're all just caricatures at this stage. In JJ's case, she's just been assigned all these positive traits and brushes off adversity as if nothing happened- you never really see any fallout from anything JJ does, she's just always got the right answer all the time and whatever pain she may go through gets glossed over. In Garcia's case, she's just a big, blubbering infant, so whatever suffering she goes through rings hollow. That's not a character flaw- that's poor characterization. Full stop. 8) If it is true that Matthew Gray Gubler took a stand against Messer and the writers for wanting to go down the addiction subplot again (and I believe it is true), then he should be commended for that and the writers admonished for taking away so much screen time in retaliation. Addiction storylines are so overdone today that another iteration would be boring, and I side with Gubler that Reid's old enough not to fall into that trap again. Certainly there are other options on the table to have a storyline about Reid overcoming the effects of his injury (for example, he could begin to doubt his field skills, expanding on the storyline they could have used after or before "L.D.S.K."), and the fact that the writers are this uncreative to think about that makes me wonder why they're employed on a long running show such as CM in the first place. Also, if there is a lot of collaboration with the actors and the writers, I sure don't see it. If there was, I think we'd probably see each character have some kind of discernible storyline each season, or, at the very least, each character insisting they have some traits that makes them useful in each case. Instead, it seems that unless it's JJ, no character is allowed to have much of an impact. I can't see the actors being too thrilled about this. 9) Never watched Alias, but I agree with ForeverAlone on this one- if Messer didn't like that the show turned from Sydney Bristow's personal life into a show about her as a superspy, why do that with JJ? It's also more telling that we hardly see anything really revealing about the team's personal lives these last few seasons, when the writers before were much better at it. 10) All I can say is- does Messer watch her own show? 11) I never really liked the scenes of the sobbing parents- to me, they always came across as providing some cheap emotion and never really added to the story. Perhaps other people like it, but I almost always thought seeing some mother blubber that "Susie could chew pieces of cheese into U.S. states and would have been on Letterman had that guy not killed her!" slowed the story down unnecessarily- we never saw the victim do the things that made them special before they were offed, so it makes no difference to me if the parents mentioned it. To me, I care more about why the killer chose the victim and what kind of sordid story the victim and killer may have had, because that would be relevant to the story and eventually the case. So if you're going to have the parents crying, at least have them spout information that will be relevant to the case later. I also can't help but bring up the gender angle but it applies- because, as Season 10 seems to show me, that having disposable male victims makes it no more right than when the show had disposable female victims. One way to combat this is to make the victims mean something is by making them mean something to the story. The killer targets women of authority because he was once emasculated by a woman? Then it's okay to populate the story with middle aged, professional women because then the story wouldn't make sense any other way. I also liked how in the early years Gideon and Elle would make constant remarks about how the UnSubs were really cowards for what they were doing- sure, it kind of played to the stereotype that women were weaker than men, but at least you got the sense from the BAU that they cared about the victims. Now people die and the BAU never seems to care, and that's the real problem. 12) "Erica is interested in Criminal Minds, because of the personal nature of the stories and what makes people tick." Well, thanks Messer...me too. Now let's actually see that instead of having more mindless drivel, one dimensional UnSubs, disposable victims and faux action movies. 13) Seems like every year Messer promises "more team stories", great guests, better cases and "love letters", and every year we get let down, because she's assembled the laziest batch of writers I've ever seen. Walk the walk, Messer, don't just talk the talk.

To me, even though I'm a Morgan fan, I'm somewhat ambivalent since I think the character doesn't have that much more usefulness on the show anymore (unless he becomes BAU Chief and I doubt that will happen). I also don't think he's been at all dominant either- he just seems to be a prop to show how good JJ is (since JJ is supposed to be "tough" it makes sense they'd pair her with another character who is tough, even if Morgan doesn't do much in those scenes except deliver a scowled look). I've always believed that Morgan and Reid ought to be "dramedy" duo on their own show, because those two have impeccable timing and play off each other so well, plus if they had writers that could better develop those characters we could see a wonderful (platonic) relationship develop. That, and maybe Reid would be able to get in a few zingers this time instead of always being the butt of Morgan's jokes

I see it as more of Falcone knowing something is up but deciding to play dumb until Fish is deep enough into the plot that she can't claim plausible deniablity that she wasn't trying to unseat him. If Falcone brushed her off then and confronted Fish afterward, he would have had no proof that Fish was trying something, since Fish could reasonably claim she was just a girl who happened to like that aria. Once Falcone takes her in and then see her try to take something from him, Fish would have no recourse.

Has Shemar Moore reiterated recently his plans to leave after Season 10? I saw an article last year where he said “10 years would likely be it for me” but nothing else. Surely if you look it up on Google you turn up nothing.

Yeah. It's easier to prevent this in print, but live action you almost have to have characters raise questions to each other that normally they wouldn't raise at work and discuss details with others that would normally be hidden because otherwise we as an audience wouldn't know what happened.

Man that's just...criminal...

LOL. You win the Internet...and, as a janitor, I'd love to have a product like this.

I get that part- I'm just not sure why it was plastered all over his wall (wouldn't they be better in a drawer?), and I can't imagine he'd have more than a handful of sketches at most. The big thing, though, was Connor attempting to escape through the window. He didn't do anything wrong so why did he attempt to flee? It's like Dunkle desperately wanted me to think Connor was the Mirror Man, as if Garcia's Magical Computer© wasn't enough.

Is it just me or did Morgan give off this creepy UnSub vibe walking Savannah to their new house? "I need you and you need me- and NOW I TIE YOU UP AND KEEP YOU HERE! BWAHAHAHAHA..."*cough*"Why does Reid's hair keep on getting stuck in my mouth? Oh well." Did like the Morgan/Savannah storyline even if it was rote, and I'm happy that Morgan actually got Savannah's help for a change. Now if only Savannah could have a role in a story that isn't brought upon by Morgan's doings, but I'll take what I can get. I liked the reference to Creepypasta...it's a dedicated wiki where people have their hands at horror stories. Many of them- like The Russian Sleep Experiment- have entered greater lore as stories that were actually believed, so I think it was neat that someone actually tried to recreate one. I also liked the sly nod to "The Internet Is Forever"...at least Rick Dunkle knew which episode he was basically redoing. They were very similar, but at least they were different enough to be slightly unique. Predicted an omnivore and that's what we got...didn't like how one dimensional the victims were, but at least they had a dimension- vanity. I think that was simplistic, and I kind of wish they'd acknowledge not everyone who likes selfies is an extreme narcissist, but at least the victims had a personality, for a change. Third victim obviously doesn't watch Criminal Minds or any horror movie, because he violated the Cardinal Rule- DO NOT TAUNT THE KILLER. Maybe just once I'd like the killer to leave the guy behind and maybe tell him the survivor that he "could" have killed him, but I suppose- once we realize the Mirror Man knew the third victim- he probably had no choice but to kill him. Liked the twist of the final victim- usually we get the team catching the killer redhanded in the act but this time the killer was opportunistic and still went through with the kill. Sure the final victim still survived but she was attacked and had to be revived (just like the killer), which I can appreciate from a storytelling standpoint. Good to mix it up. Don't get why Connor- who wrote the Mirror Man story- had millions of sketches on his wall (they'd likely be on his computer) and felt the need to escape when the police got there- he was innocent after all. That was a pretty forced misdirect, I must say. Thought the team was evenly balanced in this one...no one went to the drug store and took vacations. We need more of this. Only real quibble I had with this one is why the killer didn't try mixing up ways to kill people and how to gain access to them- him being on the Internet means that he'd at least know about the BAU and its exploits (which would likely be well known in the CM universe, after they took down Ian Doyle and all), so I didn't get, apart from leaving behind the hashtag and the Mirror Man graphic, why he didn't at least try to fake out the BAU. I get that he was a teen and all but someone as bold as him would at least try, even if his attempt would be bad. Overall, I did like this one. First time since the opener.

Or that psycho killers haven't figured out how to dupe the profile. Every case just seems to fit so...nicely...I can't seem to remember the last time they had to “correct” the profile. I could buy how easy the profiling was in the early years since the BAU wasn't likely to be very well known, but now? The BAU took down a freaking terrorist (two, actually, although I suppose the takedown of Jamal Abaza might have been kept under wraps)...there's no way these guys aren't at least celebrities in the crime fighting circuit. So why someone hasn't tried mixing up signatures, kill methods and points of entry (as well as victims) is beyond me.

My guess is that Barbara and Jimmy are “star-crossed lovers” or something...they'll be on, and then off, then on, off, on, off before becoming “on” again just in time to have Batgirl. Her departure at the end seems to suggest we're supposed to have some kind of “mystery” involving her loyalties, I think it rings hollow.

No Bullock? *sad panda*

Had a thought- “Gotham” as a word originated from the Old English words for “goat home”, so I wonder if this is a reference to that.

I was disappointed. Fitch was one of the few characters that could stand with Red so it's sad to see him go.

Gosh, Madeline was an absolute knockout in that dress. I need to rewatch The Muppet Movie...I saw it as a kid so I don't recall much from it. I do fondly recall Kahn from Blazing Saddles and, more recently, Cosby. I'm also thinking Madeline Kahn would have been wonderful in this series, maybe as Fish. She's got the right sense of timing to bring humanity to what's very much a campy role.

Quite the insight...totally slipped my mind. I'm also thinking it does, in a way, bring the Cold War to an end, with the Red/Berlin battle being the last one.

...and it's Madeline Kahn. RIP. Perhaps...but I do get the feeling if she wrote a fake note, she'd have to ensure that Falcone has her back, because I'm sure Fish would kill Lizzie right there once she realized she was played. Of course, Fish does seem a little stupid, so maybe this is Lizzie's opportunity to gain the upper hand on Fish? I might like that twist- at least it means one female character has some real gumption on this show.

I think this shows that Falcone has a plan of his own, and isn't just waiting for the right moment to tell Fish he knew her plan all along. I never doubted that Falcone was two steps ahead of everyone- including, perhaps, Oswald- it just seems that now Falcone is putting a plan of his in motion.

The Fulcrum sounds like an...“enhancement” pill. Perhaps this is why Red wants it so badly. :p

That actually felt like...a finale. Red kills Berlin and Fitch, Lizzie resolves the situation with Tom and then Red tells Tom to bugger off. Aside from the whole "father" thing...all the storylines were wrapped up in a neat bow. ...and it was fantastic. Really, it was. (Aside from some strange audio problems I had at the beginning where the voices were only faint echoes...but I digress) Perhaps where the show goes from here is some kind of redemption story for Tom...surely Tom's comment to Liz that she had the wrong answer to "did I really love you?" leaves a lot of doors open...I'm not sure I trust the writers enough here but if it's done well it could be a nice story. Of course, what's likely is that the post-Super Bowl episode will feature an all new threat and serve as a "second" pilot...but, for the first time in a while, I can say that I'm actually looking forward to it. Boy...Thursday will be a tough one to figure out. :P