Danielg342

This. A thousand times this. Heck, why not a million times this? Maybe it's just me spending way too much time on the Internet but I find that I can't have a reasoned discussion about feminism and feminist topics without someone getting oversensitive, playing the victim card and construing whatever I have to say as "women-bashing". Somehow I can't see how any of this is productive- or helps out women's rights at all. When it comes to this show, it's a perfect example of just what's wrong with political correctness. You don't correct one extreme by going extreme the other way- all that does is anger another set of viewers with the net result being that you don't gain any new viewers- in fact, I think you'd wind up losing viewers, since you'd likely lose your original audience and others who might have been interested, and only gain people who'd appreciate the other extreme, which doesn't number much. Furthermore, pandering to political correctness raises questions about tokenism and just how invested the writers are in the stories. To me, there's absolutely nothing wrong with a show where the leads are solely minorities or women or any other seemingly "politically correct" setup provided that the motivation is entirely creative. Otherwise, you're doing a disservice to inclusive television- if all people see is poor programming from shows that don't feature a white male lead, it'll be harder for those kinds of shows to get picked up or even given a look at all. With CM, I see no motivation for the rise of JJ, female UnSubs and male victims as anything other than political correctness, and the show's quality is suffering because of it. I don't believe the writers seem all that invested in the stories, and the acting quality has gone down since it's pretty apparent that AJ Cook doesn't have the chops to be a lead actress. Seems to me like the rest of the actors have already acquiesced and have phoned it in realizing that Cook has pretty much taken over. It's unfortunate, and the series seems worse off as a result. Of course, the past had its fair share of problems. Did we have too many cases where the victims were female for no other reason than the writer decided they would be female? Yes. Did CM treat its female characters rather poorly? For the most part, yes. Did the show resort to misogynistic tropes (such as the "damsel in distress") too much? Yes. However, I can't see the answer to all this being "overdose on male victims" and hand the reins to the show to someone without the acting chops, just because the person in question has breasts- there are so many other ways we can make CM "feminist". For one, CM ought to have listened to its female fans and realized that, hey, Reid's a pretty big draw. So too is Morgan (maybe less so on this forum but I have a friend at work who is absolutely obsessed with Shemar Moore). Hotch too seems to be a pretty big draw. Having males who are central isn't a detriment, especially if you're careful- as CM did in the past- to make these characters less "manly" men and make them people capable of empathy and compassion as well as having vulnerabilities. Furthermore, the men of CM did their utmost to treat women with dignity and respect- even Morgan- and I think CM ought to be commended for doing that. Far too often you get men who do nothing but have perverted thoughts and get dismissive about their female colleagues, but you don't see that about the CM men. Think about it- when have you ever heard someone in the BAU get shocked the detective or the sheriff they're dealing with is a woman? I've never seen it. Sure, it might be idealized- as I understand, misogyny is still a big problem in law enforcement ranks- but I think it's an ideal that needs to be done, because it shows that men can still be tough and desirable and still have a healthy view of women, and in today's world we don't seem to have enough men like that. Second of all, why can't the show use the opportunity to deconstruct why serial killers tend to be men hunting women? I used to like how in the first season you'd get Elle and Gideon make numerous references to how the men who did this stuff viewed themselves as powerful yet, deep down inside, they were really weak. It really helped put things in perspective, because it reinforced the idea that serial killers targetting women is a social problem, thus giving the show a valid reason to populate its victim pool with XX chromosomes. I think the show really could have built upon stuff like this, and expanded upon other themes such as suggesting that societal pressures on men to be "macho and dominant" creates hunters like serial killers, as well as the idea that, more often than not, life failures lead people to lash out against the world. Of course, I'm just barely scratching the surface, but you get the idea- there's millions of individual motivations and millions of societal pressures, yet we don't get much of the latter. The show seems to have started out like this but dropped the ball, seeming to forget that you don't need to sacrifice the cerebral elements just to have action. As a corollary, I wonder why a character couldn't be a "card-carrying feminist"...I would imagine real feminists would be drawn to the topic of serial killers just because of their nature, so why wouldn't one join the BAU? I do wonder if the writers would be able to portray one well enough, but I do think having a feminist on the team would underscore the idea that the show can be about social commentary too. Furthermore, it would be worth having a team member that understands women's issues, since those things should crop up every now and then and I don't think the show does a good service to these issues. Everything seems to be done from a "male" perspective and I think this needs to be balanced out. Thirdly, and I think most importantly, the victims ought to matter. They shouldn't be used as pawns to show us how depraved the UnSub of the Week is- these should be people that we get to know on at least a superficial level and thus care that they're being hurt. I also believe that the gender of the victims should be based purely on creative reasons and nothing else. It's one of the reasons why I think "Burn" could have been a good episode, because at least the male victims served as an exposition into the UnSub's mind- those victims mattered, if for nothing else that you couldn't change their genders without impacting the story. "Boxed In"? Why just boys? Don't girls also go out and egg houses too? Then there was "The Itch" where the first two victims, both male, were shown only as instruments of the UnSub's methods of torture, and if even one of them was a woman, the story wouldn't have changed at all. Lastly, if we're going to have female leads, give us some good actresses that can carry the load. Throughout CM's entire history, I can only think of three that seemed capable of the challenge- Lola Glaudini (Elle), Paget Brewster (Prentiss) and Jennifer Love Hewitt (Callahan). I know Hewitt is new but she's impressed me so far. It's why I'm not so skittish about this direction because I think Hewitt would do a great job as CM's star- I just don't want her flanked by two actresses (Cook and Kirsten Vangsness, who, despite her comedic abilities just doesn't seem to have the flair for more emotional, "dramatic" work) that can't hold a candle to her. If CM replaces its males with toothless characters that have no business being with Hewitt then I'm out. CM is and always will be an ensemble- the showrunners should never mess with that, and should always pick the best actors for any role- regardless of their gender.

I guess I'd have to watch it again and see if her right side is "larger" than her left- indicating a prosthetic mask. She was wearing a tank top, so it's not like her clothing could conceivably cover her arm- thus it would have to be a good prosthetic. Meaning that, for once, someone on the CM set got something right. :P

Well, I did like the episode, although I think it has more to do with the acting than the writing, because I think a lot of this episode just didn't make any sense. I need to echo what others have said about "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". Season 1 was an absolute gem because every character seemed to have their own layers and personal struggles and yet they interacted and weaved in together seamlessly. The writers had a central goal- crafting a redemption story for Sherlock- and it worked out masterfully in the end, with Holmes bettering his archnemesis Moriarty in the end. It was wonderful, all of it, making the season as classic a season of TV as there ever was one. Then it seems like they wanted S2 to be more of a procedural than a story. This might not have been a bad idea in principle, and I think we had quite a few "classic" cases, but doing that contrasted with the character-based stuff we got last year. Especially considering what happened in this episode, what could have happened in S2 was make it the story of Watson's growth as a detective- sure they paid quite a bit of lip service to it last year but I don't think they did enough. They just haphazardly put that story together in between other haphazard stories (the ones with the Commissioner and Mycroft), providing no coherence and kind of just pulling an independent Watson out of their behinds without really properly establishing it. So then we get to this episode, and it's pretty clear from the outset they've stylized it so that we know that Watson still needs Holmes, without actually saying so. Last year, Watson and Holmes solved the most elaborate and impossible of cases in mere days yet here Watson seemingly can get no leads in months. Seriously? Where did all of her skills go? Hunting lizards? Then Holmes solves the case so easily...how come Watson didn't come up with any of those clues? It seems like to me they want us to know that Watson is just as arrogant as Holmes is only that she's overconfident on her own abilities, the implications of which I'm not sure I would enjoy. However, if this comes with some growth for the characters where they're both able to check their egos and aren't afraid to ask each other for help I'll be okay with it, since arrogance is a very human trait and if it's written well, Watson's arrogance can be a good story. I just need to see how it would play out first. (Corollary...kind of rolled my eyes at the "stick fight" between Watson and Kitty, since I wondered how long it would take for "martial arts" Lucy Liu to show up...although it was a nice way to reveal who Kitty was really working for) Kitty...she was cute, and tougher than she looked. I also think it's obvious what kind of "dark secret" she's hiding- she's a former junkie, and Holmes took her in to help her get clean. Why else would Sherlock take an interest? He wouldn't gain a sense of selflessness in six months, would he? No, Kitty reminded him of himself, so he took her in. I see no other explanation. The case was strange- I wondered about the mechanics, and I think the show has gone from "somewhat plausible" to pure science fiction. Really? Super magnets behind an elevator? With bullets that get released at the press of a button? In an elevator car that has no wireless reception to speak of? I get that the guy transported the magnet in pieces, but I kind of doubt he'd be able to fit the magnet in two suitcases and then carry them (even if they're wheeled, one ton is a lot to wheel). Not to mention the other implausibility, that no one noticed some guy putting together a magnet inside the elevator well. The thing weighed one ton, it's not exactly something you can haul and build discreetly. Wouldn't it take at least an hour to build? I'm also surprised no one noticed him hiding bullets inside the elevator itself...even if he was careful not to do his work with others in the elevator, he'd have been in that elevator for a while and someone would have noticed. ...and one other thing...what hotel has only one elevator? That's an awful amount of luck that the intended target hit the elevator the assassin needed her to hit. Oh, and that she wouldn't go in said elevator with bodyguards surrounding her...too many coincidences to be believable. Main thing, though, is how this show will play Sherlock/Kitty and Watson...I think it's a dangerous proposition to have two cases on the show each week, because then neither will get the development it deserves, and I'd hate for the show to prefer one side over the other. Why can't Sherlock and Watson just be equals, working together? Makes more sense than to have some contrived separation that we know won't last.

I saw it as an adrenaline kick- survival tends to make the human body do strange things. I just think she would have collapsed in Rossi's arms, not at the ambulance, since once she got to Rossi she knew she was safe...but I let that go. I also let go the fact that Steven Parkett didn't chop off her arm right at the shoulder- I presume the actress herself is missing her arm past the point where it was chopped off on the show, and I suspect given the time constraints in producing an episode, you gotta take what you can get in the actor/actress world. Normasm, good point about the legs, although it does make me wonder why he doesn't just chop off all the limbs at once. Surely he could sedate them enough to get rid of all of their limbs in one go- plus he works with horses, and everyone knows that ketamine is a horse sedative. I still can't get out of my head that the sequence was contrived to allow for an escape.

I was thinking of this episode and a thought came to me- why did the UnSub decide to cut off her arm first? I would think, especially considering it's not his first victim, that he'd cut off a leg first, which would make it harder for the victim to escape. It just seemed like the writer contrived things to make it easier for the intended ending- she escapes- without thinking of the implications. It could have been so easy to fix too- he could have reviewed an E-Mail that said “One arm, ship tomorrow” or something- at least then it wouldn't look so contrived.

Essen said at the end “you can't just take them!” but I don't recall how the other cops would have reacted. I wonder- does Gotham PD have a Union?

Thank you. Most illuminating...so I guess you'd need surgery to get those things out? Who wants to take bets that next week Ressler's ear won't sport any scarring or holes at all? I guess they gave him that degree to make up for the fact Dembe hardly ever talks. *shrugs*

I agree, sounds pretty strange. Perhaps if he had led eggings and other Hallowe'en mischief for years and then his fiance left him because he went too far one year, I could buy why he'd decide to punish the kids, since the kids were responsible for his breakup.

I see it as something more along the lines of when Gordon had to "kill" Oswald- sometimes, Kean would have to accept certain deals and transactions that, while illegal, would at least maintain order in Gotham. What if the deal to divide Arkham between Falcone and Maroni happened at her gallery with her influence? I could buy that.

As much as I hate angsty storylines, I think it might actually be nice to have an episode where, one day, JJ comes home and sees Will gone having taken Henry with him. JJ suffers from no adversity, so this would be a nice change of pace, and Will would be given something substantive to do. I would agree that these two would likely end up settling things amicably. This is because they're not the combative types and a fight would drag out the storyline longer than it needs to.

He probably would get shared custody, perhaps with some language saying that it can vary with JJ's work schedule. Unless he's how I've written him in my fics (a perpetual drunk), Will doesn't seem bad enough to lose custody entirely.

Yeah. Her parties could have the reputation of being the place where "all the deals go down", thus allowing her to influence them herself.

So is Lizzie going rogue? Might actually be a fun angle.

I think when it comes to JJ, it may be worth asking how many “important” scenes she gets. Sure, someone could time each character and assert everyone's got equal time, but if one character has two scenes where they just talk with a witness and presents a point at a team pow-wow while another winds up finding the vital clue that breaks the case and interrogates the UnSub, then the other character will “feel” like they have more time than the other character just on the basis that their scenes were more vital to the episode and thus more memorable. Now, I'm of the opinion that JJ isn't as dominant as some like to believe (I don't think she's in *every* vital scene), but she does seem to get more favourable on-screen treatment than what the other characters get (she's in almost every single arrest, and Morgan has only been in one this year), and “Boxed In” was pretty egregious case of overdominance.

If Cobblepot emerges as the “new leader”, I don't know how thrilled I'll be by it. It feels way too soon for Cobblepot to become “The Penguin”...I would like to think they'd wait until at least the end of the season for that.

Has the show actually established that she owns a gallery? I don't recalll that line anywhere so far. Even so, owning a gallery still wouldn't stop her from being a volunteer at city events, organizing them herself, being friends with councilors, being a consultant at City Hall, being Gotham's leading activist, etc. Just because she doesn't have the technical authority to influence decisions doesn't mean that she can't.

I'd say, to be fair to Virgil, he likely doesn't have much time to check, double-check and triple-check that he's got his details right, since writers have a lot of demands placed upon them. The showrunner, though, should be doing those things...and it's clear she doesn't.

Considering how long it took for the show to remember that Hotch had a brother, I'm not really surprised Haley's mom has been MIA. In fact, not even I was aware of her existence...I'm guessing they only referenced her in throwaway lines?

That is true, and corruption should always be the theme of the show. However, the Mayor gets very little to do and I think if we saw the inner workings on the council, we can see just how deep the corruption runs. Kean could be council herself, trying valiantly to overrule the voices of councilors who are too willing or afraid to bend to the needs of Maroni or Falcone, without having much success.

Zannej, on planes nowadays you can get airline wifi...so you're now told to keep your wireless receivers off only on landing and takeoff.

I still think they've conveniently sidestepped answering a lot of questions by not bringing Will and Henry around a lot because, at the end of the day, JJ's marriage is horribly one-sided. Will has done everything to maintain the relationship, sacrificing his original home, his original job and eventually his life outside of his family just so he could be with JJ. What sacrifices has JJ made? She got to keep her job, stay where she lives and gets to work whenever she likes and forget her home life. Granted, there are legitimate reasons for this setup...but why would we expect Will to always be happy about this?

I agree that Jada Pinkett-Smith goes too far with her campiness sometimes, but she seems obsessed with what's between her legs...it's so one-dimensional. As for Essen, what bugs me more about her character is that it's a cliche. Hollywood seems to love putting a woman as the "overall leader" of the operation the protagonist's team is a part of, without making the character do anything except be a thorn in the protagonist's side. It's purely done for political correctness and it's so tiring. Showrunners think they're being inclusive when really, they're just lazy.

Maybe. At the very least, she could have been the "civilian Gordon" and been the good citizen that lobbies and tries to do things the right way only to see the city get in her way all the time. Would give the show the opportunity to see another side of the city and give it more layers than just "the criminal underworld".

Yawn. Could this...episode...go...a...n...y...s....s...l...o...w...w...e...r...r...r? It was only an hour but it felt like 12. Oh, and what was with Morgan and Reid appearing in the first half of the episode and then taking the rest of the night off at about 9:25PM? Did they retire early to set the terms of Prank War II? Kate was also strangely absent for most of the show too, and she's got a kid...why does Super Mom get the screentime? Actually, this felt like a vanity project for Thomas Gibson, because we were hit over the head again and again about how just great a father Hotch is. Mind you, getting an authetic Darth Vader costume is pretty cool, but I think I could fill a jelly doughnut with the amount of syrup they put in the Hotchner family scenes. I'll give the show this much credit though- at least the UnSub's motives made sense. It was pretty straightforward, didn't require too much thinking. Of course, it required making a leap larger than the Mariana Trench for the BAU to get there, but I'm pretty sure the show's forgotten that it was once a show that actually profiled, not played psychic. (How odd a psychic appeared...I guess the writers do realize they've basically assembled a team of psychics...Patrick Jane would be so proud...) (Did appreciate that, this time, the UnSub had a reason for not killing the kid, sparing us the fake drama of the team having to 'rescue the kid before it's too late though it's never too late') I did think the actors who played the UnSub's parents did a marvellous job. The writing was absolutely horrendous and rote, but they elevated it to make their scenes extremely compelling. I actually felt just how scary the father was and just how helpless the mother was, and just how much she had to struggle to summon the courage to face the man. If you wanted to talk about rotten childhoods, you got it perfectly in that scene. It's probably the best scene CM has delivered all season...pity it didn't feature a regular, although, in fairness, Hotch acting like the UnSub's father was pretty fun to watch, because Gibson nailed it. (I also admit the UnSub's childhood scene kind of reminded me of my own childhood...minus the whole being locked in a trunk part...but I won't blame the show for that, since I believe in freedom of expression and I refuse to let the past dictate my present) The last thing I want to say is that I'm getting tired of the show deciding to use, essentially, for four of five weeks to victimize primarily males. I know the only reason why the show is doing it is political correctness, and it's getting ridiculous. Although I do think next week might have the potential to be interesting, but...who knows what you'll get with CM these days. (Speaking of political correctness...didn't we have a human trafficking ring operating this season? What happened to that?) Overall...poor episode. Dull. Easily Season 10's worst. Hope next week will be better.

Kind of get the impression the women on this show weren't very thought out. They've got no agency on this show except for being tied to male characters (even Fish, whose storyline is essentially getting rid of Carmine Falcone) and they're either written with an idealistic male version in mind (Fish, Lizzie) or given very little to do (Kean, Montoya, Essen). I get that the show is based on stories written at a time when female characters weren't used for much other than as wish fulfilment or decoration, but we're in 2014...independent women exist now, I think it's time we got one on the show.