S03.E07: True Crime

[WendyCR72]

Airing on February 28, 2021:

The team gets the true crime docuseries treatment when they analyze a recent case featuring a former child actor whose adult life has garnered him a cult following.

[MrWhyt]

well that was interesting

[shapeshifter]

I hope the writers don’t ruin the mentor–mentee banter between Chen and Bradford. It’s the best thing since season one Hawaii Five-0 McGarrett–Dano “carguments.”

[preeya]

Bullshit episode.

[Court]

It was different but I enjoyed it. It also answered the question about Jackson's boyfriend. Was this supposed to air at some other time? It's very clearly a filler episode. 

[preeya]

26 minutes ago, Court said:

It was different but I enjoyed it. It also answered the question about Jackson's boyfriend. Was this supposed to air at some other time? It's very clearly a filler episode. 

Probably; Lopez was still in uniform.

[Raja]

1 hour ago, Court said:

It was different but I enjoyed it. It also answered the question about Jackson's boyfriend. Was this supposed to air at some other time? It's very clearly a filler episode. 

I was thinking COVID protocol episode clip show at first. As an "actual documentary" it could air at anytime.

The show did retcon Officer Nolan's professor placing the show in 2021 by placing the Corey caper in 2019.

[Msample]

Obvious bottle episode. 

[zoey1996]

I liked it, and Mr. Zoey, who likes the show but doesn’t always stay up to watch, watched it all. He commented that it was different, and he found it interesting to watch. 

[sempervivum]

I admit I like this show best when it's funny, so this one was fine for me. The only thing I questioned was why they cast such an un-charismatic person as the cult leader, although maybe that was supposed to be part of the joke?

[shapeshifter]

2 hours ago, Msample said:

Obvious bottle episode. 

I like "bottle" episodes in general.
For instance, I loved Breaking Bad's "Fly."
I don't know if I'd like a steady diet of bottle episodes; maybe it's just the break in the routine, and a break from the soap opera-y drama arcs.

[Whimsy]

51 minutes ago, sempervivum said:

I admit I like this show best when it's funny, so this one was fine for me. The only thing I questioned was why they cast such an un-charismatic person as the cult leader, although maybe that was supposed to be part of the joke?

It was a part of the joke since Frankie Muniz (the actor playing Corey) broke out as a child star of Malcolm in the Middle. He’s been working, but he definitely lost a lot of star power when he grew up. 

[BlakesMomma]

12 hours ago, Court said:

It was different but I enjoyed it. It also answered the question about Jackson's boyfriend. Was this supposed to air at some other time? It's very clearly a filler episode. 

I agree that they may have moved this episode. It probably was meant to air before the one where Titus met the cop on horseback. They may have moved it to last night because it would be up against the Golden Globes. That might explain the inconsequential episode production numbers in the ABC press releases.

The cost of Covid protocols and longer production schedules for each episode due to those Covid protocols can be covered a bit with one of these "bottle" episodes. I really enjoyed it! Some great humor in that episode. I like when they occasionally change things up. I was expecting more of a "clip" episode but there were very few clips, mostly newly filmed scenes which improved it in my opinion.

Edited March 1, 2021 by BlakesMomma

[HurricaneVal]

I liked it.  It seems every police procedural has a COPS episode where they artificially break the "fourth wall" and even if not done well, the episodes still usually provide humor and insight.  It was just weird how out of sequence this was, Lopez was still in uniform, West was still with his Hollywood boyfriend... 

I cracked the hell up when Bradford, being all officious said "Well, you know, it's like the old saying 'Those that can't teach'" and Chen completely called him out on it "Aren't you literally my training officer?"

I thought it was pretty cool that they used plot points from past episodes to build this one, that was clever, and shows how these ongoing sagas kind of weave in and out of police officer's professional lives.

[luckyroll3]

3 hours ago, sempervivum said:

I admit I like this show best when it's funny, so this one was fine for me. The only thing I questioned was why they cast such an un-charismatic person as the cult leader, although maybe that was supposed to be part of the joke?

Let me introduce you to Keith Raniere, founder and leader of NXIVM. Nothing about him is charismatic, yet he was able to convince all these women to join his sex-slave ring. Actually both the case and the style of "documentary" reminded me of NXIVM and the 2 most recent docs about it: The Vow (HBO) and Seduced: Inside the NXIVM Cult (Starz). 

I really enjoyed this episode though. It had a good mx of funny and dark parts that is very in line with what the show normally does. And it was nice to get a different storytelling style.

[zoey1996]

6 hours ago, Msample said:

Obvious bottle episode. 

What’s a bottle episode?

[amarante]

20 minutes ago, zoey1996 said:

What’s a bottle episode?

an episode of a television show that is written so that it requires only one set or scene and a limited number of cast members.

You see them on shows where they have a very expensive episode so they produce an episode that is much less expensive to produce - no special effects; not a lot of location scenes etc.

As others have posted, producing shows with the pandemic restrictions is extremely expensive so a lot of the shows have been cutting down on costs in others ways.

[zoey1996]

Thanks, @amarante.

[MrWhyt]

3 hours ago, amarante said:

an episode of a television show that is written so that it requires only one set or scene and a limited number of cast members.

this was bottle-ish as traditional bottle episodes are limited to existing sets. They went on location and had a few new sets for cult house. And while i'm sure Frankie Muniz's quote has decreased since his glory days he was probably more expensive than a regular guest. Rainn Wilson probably just showed up for the chance to steal chaplins mummy.

[paigow]

Were the fake mummies sold completely artificial? Or are there now unsolved murders of dudes that were the same size as Charlie Chaplin?

[Netfoot]

I think I can say that in three seasons, this is absolutely the worst episode they have aired to date.

[LizDC]

I remember an episode with cult members dressed in white on a roof. I’m thinking it was from season 1 (or maybe another show entirely).  If what I’m remembering was actually from The Rookie, I’m wondering if it was the same cult. 

[Raja]

33 minutes ago, LizDC said:

I remember an episode with cult members dressed in white on a roof. I’m thinking it was from season 1 (or maybe another show entirely).  If what I’m remembering was actually from The Rookie, I’m wondering if it was the same cult. 

I think that it was a minor part of the nuclear attack false alarm episode.

[chaifan]

10 hours ago, LizDC said:

I remember an episode with cult members dressed in white on a roof. I’m thinking it was from season 1 (or maybe another show entirely).  If what I’m remembering was actually from The Rookie, I’m wondering if it was the same cult. 

Yes, it was the same cult.  They continued the story line to this episode.

I think this was a love it or hate it episode for fans.  I actually loved it.  It was very Nathan Fillion to me, and I honestly expected him to be among the writers (he wasn't, to my surprise).  The banter between Chen and Bradford, Chen's social media "addiction" working to their favor, the circling back to Sterling, um, I mean Skipper (or whatever his "real" name was), the burn back to Bradford from the producer about doing something serious, the absurdity of it all.  Also, relatively minimum Fillion - this was very much an ensemble show.  All this is very NF to me.  Wondering where the Sergeant was in all of this, though...

I agree with others, this was obviously meant to air earlier in the season.  I wonder if it was one of the first covid shoots - it did lend itself to social distancing quite a bit, much more so than other shows.  This would have been a good episode to ease back into filming while getting used to all the new protocols, and then plop it in where/when ever they want. 

Pretty much every show has one filler episode each season.  And as far as fillers, go I think this was a good way to do it.  But just to nit pick a bit, it was not a bottle episode.  Doesn't meet that definition at all.

 

[HurricaneVal]

I get the definition offered above of a "bottle" episode, I've only ever heard episodes referred to as such, but never knew the real definition.  I think it makes sense for sure. 

But since I never knew the official definition, I made up my own, just based on empirical data.  My definition of a "bottle" episode (which is admittedly wrong) is an episode that is perfectly encapsulated within itself.  There's little continuation of a story arc--perhaps references, but no actual action along the arc--and the episode stands alone.  There's usually some gimmick that allows for that, like this "True Crime" documentary format, or a fantasy musical episode taking place in someone's fever dream.  Episodes like this are usually fun episodes that look like they're fun for the actors as well as the viewers.  Sometimes they're vanity episodes, an "I've always wanted to do this, and now I can because I'm rich and influential" kind of thing.  A "bottle" episode can be produced, then put up on a shelf until they just drop it in.  Because it is freestanding, and not stringing along an overall story arc, it shouldn't matter where it gets dropped in.

In my cockeyed made-up definition, I would consider this episode of The Rookie, the fever-dream musical episode of Bull, the "OMG, COVID!" all-Zoom episode of All Rise, the very similar "Savannah Walker Show" episode of Hawaii Five-0, the fantastic musical episode of Buffy, etc. to be "bottle" episodes.  They all break the official definition though as being expensive.  However, this episode of The Rookie kind of straddles the line.  Yes, there was new footage, sets, and guest stars, but they also used old footage, and those "talking head" interview scenes were certainly cheap to film.  I'm thinking this episode was fairly cheap to film.  Maybe they had to pay Frankie Muniz big bucks, so they had to cheap out on the rest of the show?  😆

So, my made-up definition of "bottle" episode is wrong, but all those gimmick shows must have some sort of label.  Vanity episode?  Gimmick episode?

 

[madmax]

23 minutes ago, HurricaneVal said:

So, my made-up definition of "bottle" episode is wrong, but all those gimmick shows must have some sort of label.  Vanity episode?  Gimmick episode?

 

I've always heard them referred to as gimmick episodes.  Musical ones, dream ones, "It's a Wonderful Life" ones, in the future ones, etc. - all are gimmicks that the writers/actors just wanted to try.  Once a show is successful enough, you can do any and all.  And there are some shows that have.

True bottle episodes, as stated above, take place in one set location, like the apartment on "Friends" or the squad room on "Brooklyn 99."

[chaifan]

@HurricaneVal to be honest, your definition of "bottle episode" actually makes more sense.  Not the gimmick part, but an episode that isn't part of any greater plot line and can stand alone.  I like your words "perfectly encapsulated within itself".  That makes sense.  It does need it's own term... 

OK, the mods are going to give  us an "stay on topic" warning sometime soon...  😉 

 

[DanaK]

This was fairly nuts, but fun

[momo]

I liked it, and maybe someone will explain the timeline to me?  They find all this blood and Frankie Muniz is missing, then they go in at night and there he is.

[jabRI]

I totally enjoyed it, but being a FIREFLY super fan, I totally get nathon fillion's extremely tounge in cheek humor where it makes sense. without being over the top.

Edited March 3, 2021 by jabRI

[bros402]

This episode was okay.

 

On 3/1/2021 at 12:08 PM, Whimsy said:

It was a part of the joke since Frankie Muniz (the actor playing Corey) broke out as a child star of Malcolm in the Middle. He’s been working, but he definitely lost a lot of star power when he grew up. 

Sadly, Frankie Muniz doesn't even really remember Malcolm in the Middle due to a few strokes.

9 hours ago, momo said:

I liked it, and maybe someone will explain the timeline to me?  They find all this blood and Frankie Muniz is missing, then they go in at night and there he is.

The blood was the other woman who led the cult

[amarante]

20 hours ago, madmax said:

 

True bottle episodes, as stated above, take place in one set location, like the apartment on "Friends" or the squad room on "Brooklyn 99."

Not to belabor, but sit-coms are generally always "bottle episodes" because they are filmed on a stage before a live audience and they use the same few sets like a live play - e.g. the office and the main characters' home. You can generally get a ticket to watch them being filmed. 

One hour dramas are produced like mini-movies with location shots and are generally shot over a longer period of time. Even their sets tend to be much more elaborate and are filmed on a soundstage or the equivalent. 

Edited March 3, 2021 by amarante

[jabRI]

I'm also a sucker for Karina Logue (the crazy mother), to me she elevates everything she's in.  Loved her in Terriers that she did with her brother.

[Orbert]

I liked how they followed up on stories we'd seen earlier in the series, and how they kept the comedy for the faux-interview show, and kept the serious for the actual police work.  The interview segments were in character, but were lampooning those types of shows that try to sensationalize everything.  The cast were all in character, but due to the format, we got a glimpse at what they're "really" like.

The "Prophet Jedediah" story with Frankie Muniz was played straight, but I found it funny in a meta way because it was a former child star playing a former child star.

I tell you, though, the show "Paul's Place" did not look funny at all.  It looked horrible.  I've never been a sitcom guy, though.  Is a kid dumping an entire milkshake on his head, for any reason, ever funny?

[Netfoot]

1 hour ago, Orbert said:

I tell you, though, the show "Paul's Place" did not look funny at all.  It looked horrible.  I've never been a sitcom guy, though.  Is a kid dumping an entire milkshake on his head, for any reason, ever funny?

When I was a kid, if I'd done that, it would only be the once. Because my parents would have made sure I never saw another milkshake again until I was 40. Plus other discouragements of a more immediate sort.

[bros402]

8 hours ago, Orbert said:

I tell you, though, the show "Paul's Place" did not look funny at all.  It looked horrible.  I've never been a sitcom guy, though.  Is a kid dumping an entire milkshake on his head, for any reason, ever funny?

It felt like something you'd see in a 90s family sitcom

[chaifan]

17 hours ago, Orbert said:

I tell you, though, the show "Paul's Place" did not look funny at all.  It looked horrible.  I've never been a sitcom guy, though.  Is a kid dumping an entire milkshake on his head, for any reason, ever funny?

Sure, it would be funny to small kids.  But my first thought on seeing that, is that there's no way that would be a recurring sight gag on a kid's show.  (Something Nolan said made it sound like this was this kid's thing to do, not a one off thing.)  Parents would not allow their kids to watch it, because they'd be trying to imitate that little brat.  So ratings would plummet and it would go off the air. 

That said, I think they were going for stupid and horrible and not funny in portraying "Paul's Place".  So they succeeded.  🙂  

[SnarkySheep]

On 2/28/2021 at 11:09 PM, shapeshifter said:

I hope the writers don’t ruin the mentor–mentee banter between Chen and Bradford.

I LOVED the part where Bradford made that snippy comment about those who can't do, teach, and Chen was like, dude, you are literally my teacher...

 

On 3/5/2021 at 5:00 PM, Orbert said:

 

I tell you, though, the show "Paul's Place" did not look funny at all.  It looked horrible.  I've never been a sitcom guy, though.  Is a kid dumping an entire milkshake on his head, for any reason, ever funny?

Growing up on '80s and early '90s sitcoms, I can totally imagine this happening, though - complete with the laugh track in the background. I've never seen anyone dump a milkshake on their head, but I DO recall numerous scenes in various shows where angry characters tossed drinks in other characters' faces, dumped a pie or plate of food in their lap, etc. So it's not too far-fetched.