Season 1, Episode 4
A twist-filled episode manages to clear up little, yet still give ample time for characterization
The facts were these:
· It was Sterling, not Rosie, who was raped (or was it just sex?) on the video
· Rosie would skip school to take the 108 bus (to the end of the line) to a community center, where there is a picture of a young Richmond being coached by a young Creepy English Teacher
· Among Rosie’s possessions was a pair of shoes and a key to safety deposit box, neither of which her parents recognized
· In Rosie’s room, Sarah finds what appear to be love notes from a “Bennet”
I guess the first question is whether or not I should eat my words over my remarks last week concerning the show turning a rape video into a McGuffin. I still stand by the principle – using rape as a means to move a story forward still seems as if one is making light of the subject, even if it ends up not being rape. The positive here (for lack of a better word) is that subject of this degradation someone who is still alive, which means that the ramifications of act won’t be so easily forgotten in the wake of the murder investigation.
Unfortunately, I just wish that person wasn’t Sterling. Or that Sterling was completely different character. The way she is portrayed – through both the script and the acting – casts her as a pushover, an outcast who seems a bit eager to please. And this characterization combined with Sterling’s dialogue (“No one is nice to me. Not like they are to Rosie.”) almost makes it seem as if the show is trying to place some blame for what happened in the video onto Sterling. I’m not saying that I believe this to be the case, just that I sense the show is pushing this angle.
And that’s not only misogynistic way to take things, but it also ruins my enjoyment of the scenes where Sterling is forced to deal with the aftermath. It was a great group of scenes, and it was a great growing moment for the character. But be it rape or (technically) consensual sex, there is still this sense that Sterling was talked/coerced into it, and watching her go through the undeserved sexual harassment from other classmates makes me feel…hinky.
However, as to the actual case – once again, the developments seem too easy. Though I had fingered Bennet – that’s the English teacher’s name, in less I interpreted those scenes wrong, or the show is playing tricks with us – for the killer for most the hour, the closing minutes know made it clear it can’t be him, because that would now be too obvious. So I’m sure that next episode Sarah and Holder will drag his ass down to the police station, and he’ll tell them something – probably how they were in love/he loved her, but definitely not in a violent, psychopathic kind of way – and the crime-fighting duo will move on to the next suspect, and we’ll continue this pattern ad naseum.
I’m not sure how much more of this I can take. I get why the show would want to have a cliffhanger every week, but does it always have to concern Rosie? (You know, that Stan plot seems to be picking up some momentum, how about we have the episode end on him next week?) I just fear that the show will burn out its audience by doing the same thing week in, week out, so that people will tune out until the finale, because honestly, I’m not sure how much of this week’s case stuff is going to matter come the next few weeks. (Except for maybe the fact that Bennet coached Richmond in basketball. That could be something.)
Meanwhile, on the campaign trail less traveled:
· The Richmond campaign is strapped for cash, so Darren sucks up to ex-basketball star Tom Drexler, who may or may not expect favors in return.
· Gwen gains access to Drexler through her father, Senator Edin (played by Lost’s Alan Dale), who may or may not be invested in the Richmond campaign.
· Jamie receives a job offer from Adams; but it turns out Jamie was never the mole – he’s doing a double cross on Adams to find out who the real mole is.
As the week’s go by, it seems as if the Richmond campaign continues to have less and less to do with Rosie’s case - again, minus the development at the community center, though even that isn’t really about the campaign so much as the man running it. Admittedly, the show pulled a “Holy Shit!” out of me with the reveal that Jamie is now doing a double cross, and I always enjoy seeing Alan Dale on my TV screen. But really, I just want the show to reveal that Gwen is the mole – and whatever interest her father has in the campaign – and get it done with.
Surprisingly, the Drexler stuff ended up being more interesting than expected. Not really the visit to his place, nor the man himself – that shit was boring – but there was something about that closing moment, watching Darren watching his new billboard sing being assembled, and the look on his face. Here was a man, his moral code clearly, broken, and I couldn’t help but feel sorry for him. Looks like the show’s commitment to its characters even extends to the plots I don’t care about. (Take that, Twin Peaks!)
Even better, this development seems to bode well for the future. Not only will we probably see Darren get broken even more – and if tonight’s one scene was any indication, that’ll make for some fantastic viewing – but, and maybe this is just me, it’s seems as if the show is trying to make the city of Seattle into a character of sorts. Think about it. We are asked to care about this mayoral election, and now there’s a man who may or may not want to have part of the city bulldozed over in order to create a giant sport center. Stayed tuned….
Character Development:
Up until this point, the Stan/Mitch stuff was the most interesting part of the show, at least character wise, and though that was probably the case tonight, I can’t help but feel that the quality might be slipping away from us. Yes, Mitch’s struggle with faith and God over her daughter’s death was powerful, but Mitch’s stare down with the Jesus statue just reminded me of the Louie episode “God” which handled all of this religious struggle much better, and that kind of took me out of the storyline.
I was far more interested in the new developments in Stan’s story – he increasing debts, his family connections (or is that “family”?) – and I think it will be interesting to watch how he deals with all of this. My only fear is that he starts to break away from Mitch (story-wise), that his plot, what with all of illegal activity, might begin to overshadow hers, and she’ll be left in something trite/borderline misogynistic. Honestly, I’m not sure I can take her as “grieving mother” for nine more weeks, even if it is the realistic way to go.
Elsewhere, Rick comes back into town, and boy howdy, is he a douche. He wants to spend time with his beloved, and he goes about it in perhaps the most passive-aggressive way possible. Now I can understand how being engaged to someone as married to her job as Sarah is can be frustrating, and I would respect the show for going there if they could actually pull it off. The problem is for such a story to work, we would have to believe that Sarah is in some way a selfish person, but the show has spent so much time building her up as good, saintly person, that we automatically side with her in any of their squabbles. The show can keep trying to make this interesting, but I’m just writing it off as a lost cause.
Finally, we see Holder resenting the current power dynamic with his Sarah, which should get more interesting as the weeks (or in the show’s timeline, days) go by and he gets more and more frustrated. More interesting is the development that Holder is a drug addict himself – at least according to Kris, whose word I’m pretty sure we’re supposed to accept as gospel truth in this instance – and though I’m not sure what this means for the story – can a drug using officer be a reason a case gets thrown out, or whatever? – much like his partner-based frustration, this seems to be one of those things that will wear on him as the season goes on.
What did everybody else think?
Additional Thoughts:
Killer theory of the week: Well, since it’s clearly not Bennet, let’s say either Adams or Edin. (I really want this campaign subplot to be worth my time)
This week in Twin Peaks parallels: A formerly powerful man seeks financial assistance from a wealthy acquaintance. (God did those TP episodes with Billy Zane suck.)
This week in shoddy police work: Leaving the evidence room door open so that the victim’s parents see pictures of their daughter’s mangled corpse. Way to go guys.
“I’m not making a deal with a man whose patron saint is Ayn Rand.”
“Yes, everybody lied to you – it’s called a surprise.”
C’mon, Rick can’t eat all that cake by himself.
No comments:
Post a Comment