Here is the discussion topic for Law & Order “12 Seconds” which aired on Thursday, October 27, 2022. Please feel free to add any feedback you have about this episode in the comments!
Well... it wasn't bad? Wasn't great either, but borderline okay, maybe good at some parts.
I am disappointed we didn't get any kind of name-drop as to why Bernard left. I mean, if there was ever a time Cosgrove could have said, "my previous partner and I, we argued the merits of words before and..." with Shaw following up on asking what happened, that would have been nice?
I will admit, though, that the writers did kind of keep me guessing as to WHO EXACTLY did it.
The cops: No real complaints here. They did their jobs, seemed very standard. No added familial drama. Discussion of social issues was fine, throwback to earlier days. However, there's an oversight here that irks me that gets played up during the trial phase that I'll mention.
Lawyers: This is the first time since the revival where I felt both the prosecution and defense lawyers were borderline incompetent. You all have heard my criticisms of Price, I'll sum it up quickly: YOU'RE A FORMER DEFENSE ATTORNEY: COULD YOU PLEASE COME UP WITH A REAL ARGUMENT AND NOT FALLBACK TO, "MOCKERY OF THE SYSTEM!" The actual defense lawyer, at times, had good strategy and then had strategies that clearly made me go, "Uh... what?" When Nichols confessed on the stand? Even if he believed his client did not do it, you cannot offer up a blatantly false testimony. The judge going along with it... what? Then again... given how things really are, maybe I'm the wrong one here.
I did, however, appreciate the strategy of him going after Cosgrove on the stand like that. It made me think of that episode from Season 10 or 11 (one of Jesse L. Martin's early seasons) where Briscoe was accused of racial bias. That was compelling writing.
However, the oversight: No one thought to check the kid's alibi? Or the phone logs for everyone in the family? Really? No one thought to nail down everyone's whereabouts as best they could so they could prove a case? I felt like this is something the cops should have figured out in the first half.
Overall: This kind of feels like the show is legitimately trying to find its footing. We're back to the seasons 18-20 CI-style cold opening, which is a damn sight better than the last two episodes.
Still liking Shaw though, writers seem to know what they're doing with him. Jeffrey Donovan also seems to have really eased into the role enough that I might checkout Burn Notice as a result.
Writers continue to do a disservice to Hugh Dancy.
I liked it and agree with @Valens Hawke, it wasn't great though. I strong "okay" in my book. Law & Order is a long time favorite of mine and I'm more forgiving when it comes to episodes that don't bowl me over. The chemistry between characters is very good and that's what makes me feel comfortable with the show.
Well... it wasn't bad? Wasn't great either, but borderline okay, maybe good at some parts.
ReplyDeleteI am disappointed we didn't get any kind of name-drop as to why Bernard left. I mean, if there was ever a time Cosgrove could have said, "my previous partner and I, we argued the merits of words before and..." with Shaw following up on asking what happened, that would have been nice?
I will admit, though, that the writers did kind of keep me guessing as to WHO EXACTLY did it.
The cops: No real complaints here. They did their jobs, seemed very standard. No added familial drama. Discussion of social issues was fine, throwback to earlier days. However, there's an oversight here that irks me that gets played up during the trial phase that I'll mention.
Lawyers: This is the first time since the revival where I felt both the prosecution and defense lawyers were borderline incompetent. You all have heard my criticisms of Price, I'll sum it up quickly: YOU'RE A FORMER DEFENSE ATTORNEY: COULD YOU PLEASE COME UP WITH A REAL ARGUMENT AND NOT FALLBACK TO, "MOCKERY OF THE SYSTEM!" The actual defense lawyer, at times, had good strategy and then had strategies that clearly made me go, "Uh... what?" When Nichols confessed on the stand? Even if he believed his client did not do it, you cannot offer up a blatantly false testimony. The judge going along with it... what? Then again... given how things really are, maybe I'm the wrong one here.
I did, however, appreciate the strategy of him going after Cosgrove on the stand like that. It made me think of that episode from Season 10 or 11 (one of Jesse L. Martin's early seasons) where Briscoe was accused of racial bias. That was compelling writing.
However, the oversight: No one thought to check the kid's alibi? Or the phone logs for everyone in the family? Really? No one thought to nail down everyone's whereabouts as best they could so they could prove a case? I felt like this is something the cops should have figured out in the first half.
Overall: This kind of feels like the show is legitimately trying to find its footing. We're back to the seasons 18-20 CI-style cold opening, which is a damn sight better than the last two episodes.
Still liking Shaw though, writers seem to know what they're doing with him. Jeffrey Donovan also seems to have really eased into the role enough that I might checkout Burn Notice as a result.
Writers continue to do a disservice to Hugh Dancy.
I liked it and agree with @Valens Hawke, it wasn't great though. I strong "okay" in my book. Law & Order is a long time favorite of mine and I'm more forgiving when it comes to episodes that don't bowl me over. The chemistry between characters is very good and that's what makes me feel comfortable with the show.
ReplyDeleteWTF?? Did they seriously name a character "Michelle Nichols"??? First "Jerry Ryan," and now this? What do they have against Star Trek actors?
ReplyDelete