Heh. I haven't even watched WaT in forever. Well actually I kinda skimmed thru the Jackie Mackenzie ep. Because I like the 4400. How terrible a reason is that?
"Hey I'm watching your show because there's a guest star from another show that I like way better."
As for the OMGSAM'S SECRET!!! episode(s)? Well. Hmm, I've gotten more from your review than anywhere else so I kinda can piece together what's going on. Meh Jack. He's a pompous ass.... but I try and justify it by saying he's trying to get Sam to learn from his mistakes.... I dunno. I HOPE that's what they were going for and not just Jack telling Sam off about her personal choices with absolutely no regard to continuity to his character's history.
*sigh*
And yeah, having "Karen" guest star on BL was weird. But unlike most of the season so far I really REALLY enjoyed this one because it was actually LEGALLY resolved and the arguments in trial were LEGAL ones. It seems like most of the season the arguments for CP&S have been moral, ethical or plain opinion. This one was fully solved on legal grounds... even if it did kinda remind me of Primal Fear a little bit... to the point where when Alan suggested changing the plea to insanity, i was like "YOU CAN'T DO THAT MID-TRIAL!!!" Primal Fear taught me that.
And although I love Brad and Denise, I've found that Brad's been a complete dickwad all season so I'd rather have little/no Brad/Denise than anything else that can screw over my ship anymore.
Yeah, I don't know why I still watch it every goddamn week. It's never any good.
But there can be no justifying Jack to me. Nonononono. Let me break down the dumb scene for you:
Earlier in the episode, when Sam found out her sister was missing (local PD called her because the sister had Sam's card, not knowing they were family) she called Jack's office and left a message for him that she had a "family emergency" and needed a few personal days. Then Viv finds out about the APB and Jack sees THAT as a perfectly good reason to stick his nose in, so he goes to the police station, where Sam is questioning her brother-in-law. Jack gives her a lecture on what defines a "family emergency" because clearly she doesn't know, so she tells him the team "already has their plate full." Jack: "That doesn't explain why you didn't tell ME." Sam: "Because I don't want my private life in the office." (Very annoyed.) Jack: "Ugh! You know what, SAMANTHA, in the personal arena I would have to say that you consistently make the WORST choices." Sam: "Present company included?" (In that annoying 'Poppy wants to look sad about it but the director won't let her so she just gives half an expression that isn't really anything at all'-way.) Jack: "Definitely." And then they go back to talking about the case.
Please, make Jack look good for saying this. ;)
It seems like most of the season the arguments for CP&S have been moral, ethical or plain opinion.
Yeah, I think my ignorance of US law has made me just not care so much about that. Instead I'm completely fascinated by how they can get almost any jury to say pretty much what they want them to, just by appealing to their sense of morality. We have very few real jury cases in Denmark, and in the one recent one that I remember, the judge overturned the verdict. (He TOLD them they couldn't legally find three of the four people on charge guilty, but they did that anyway. LOL.) I always wonder why judges on BL don't do that. They can, can't they?
American courtroom dramas just amuse me so much because it's so bizarre. Heh.
Oh, I'm so glad you don't like Brad either this season. I was worried it was just me being weird. :)
"Hey I'm watching your show because there's a guest star from another show that I like way better."
As for the OMGSAM'S SECRET!!! episode(s)? Well. Hmm, I've gotten more from your review than anywhere else so I kinda can piece together what's going on. Meh Jack. He's a pompous ass.... but I try and justify it by saying he's trying to get Sam to learn from his mistakes.... I dunno. I HOPE that's what they were going for and not just Jack telling Sam off about her personal choices with absolutely no regard to continuity to his character's history.
*sigh*
And yeah, having "Karen" guest star on BL was weird. But unlike most of the season so far I really REALLY enjoyed this one because it was actually LEGALLY resolved and the arguments in trial were LEGAL ones. It seems like most of the season the arguments for CP&S have been moral, ethical or plain opinion. This one was fully solved on legal grounds... even if it did kinda remind me of Primal Fear a little bit... to the point where when Alan suggested changing the plea to insanity, i was like "YOU CAN'T DO THAT MID-TRIAL!!!" Primal Fear taught me that.
And although I love Brad and Denise, I've found that Brad's been a complete dickwad all season so I'd rather have little/no Brad/Denise than anything else that can screw over my ship anymore.
Reply
But there can be no justifying Jack to me. Nonononono. Let me break down the dumb scene for you:
Earlier in the episode, when Sam found out her sister was missing (local PD called her because the sister had Sam's card, not knowing they were family) she called Jack's office and left a message for him that she had a "family emergency" and needed a few personal days. Then Viv finds out about the APB and Jack sees THAT as a perfectly good reason to stick his nose in, so he goes to the police station, where Sam is questioning her brother-in-law. Jack gives her a lecture on what defines a "family emergency" because clearly she doesn't know, so she tells him the team "already has their plate full."
Jack: "That doesn't explain why you didn't tell ME."
Sam: "Because I don't want my private life in the office." (Very annoyed.)
Jack: "Ugh! You know what, SAMANTHA, in the personal arena I would have to say that you consistently make the WORST choices."
Sam: "Present company included?" (In that annoying 'Poppy wants to look sad about it but the director won't let her so she just gives half an expression that isn't really anything at all'-way.)
Jack: "Definitely."
And then they go back to talking about the case.
Please, make Jack look good for saying this. ;)
It seems like most of the season the arguments for CP&S have been moral, ethical or plain opinion.
Yeah, I think my ignorance of US law has made me just not care so much about that. Instead I'm completely fascinated by how they can get almost any jury to say pretty much what they want them to, just by appealing to their sense of morality. We have very few real jury cases in Denmark, and in the one recent one that I remember, the judge overturned the verdict. (He TOLD them they couldn't legally find three of the four people on charge guilty, but they did that anyway. LOL.) I always wonder why judges on BL don't do that. They can, can't they?
American courtroom dramas just amuse me so much because it's so bizarre. Heh.
Oh, I'm so glad you don't like Brad either this season. I was worried it was just me being weird. :)
Reply
Leave a comment