PAS DE DEUX: EOTW

[Patcat]

Will air August 16, 2010, at 4pm (EST) on the USA Network. The thirteenth episode of Season Three. First aired March 13, 2004

Written by Warren Leight and Rene Balcer. Directed by Frank Prinzi

Guest Actors:

Charles Rocket as Donald DePalma (This was Mr. Rocket’s last TV role before his suicide in October, 2005. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Rocket )

Enid Graham as Marjorie Timmons

Synopsis: Goren and Eames investigate a bank robber who blows away his partners.

Ripped from the headlines: Based on the Brian Wells incident of August, 2003. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Douglas_Wells

Quotes:

Eames: “It’s so nice to be back.”

Eames: “He recycles. What a good boy.”

Eames: “He should’ve worn a clip-on bomb.”

Eames: “This is where the Marley floor gets laid.”

DePalma: “Must’ve got lost on a doughnut run.” Goren: “I heard that.”

Goren (about Marjorie): “And she follows wherever you lead her.”

Goren: “Who are you waiting for, Prince Charming or Valiant?”

Eames (to Carver): “You were watching the wrong detective.”

Notes: Nicole Wallace’s innocent verdict is revealed in this episode. This is also one of the first episodes marking Eames’ (and Kathryn Erbe’s) return from pregnancy leave.

Queries:

Many people liked the dance between Goren and Marjorie in this episode. (Heck, what’s not to like about that?) Some speculated this might have been a reference to Mr. D’Onofrio’s role in the film NAKED TANGO (a weird, strange, dark movie. I liked it.) Some particularly good comments from Dominica, Trisha, and Catbird.

Did the interjection of Nicole Wallace detract from this story?

How did the verdict affect the detectives and Carver?

And how believable is that verdict?

This is the first episode where Eames returns from her pregnancy leave. What is the state of the Goren/Eames relationship?

Do Goren and Eames act ethically in this episode?

Was the depiction of the bomb explosion too explicit?

How realistic is Marjorie’s behavior?

How much does Marjorie know about Donnie’s past?

Is her husband to blame for Marjorie’s depression?

How much jail time will Marjorie receive? Can she plead diminished capacity?

Will Donnie live long enough to spend time in jail? How should terminally ill prisoners be treated?

Will Carver ever trust Eames again?

And queries/comments about Carver: This is an episode where he seems almost obsessed with making sure the detectives walk the straight and narrow. Shouldn’t he know by now that Goren and Eames are exceptionally ethicial and effective? In short, shouldn’t he trust them by now? Carver also seems more than willing to accept their actions if it results in a victory for him. At times, he even encourages their “tricks”, even when they argue it’s wrong. Is Carver a hypocrite? Is he written consistently? It seems to me that Goren and Eames are consistently ethical—that they have moral boundaries. But perhaps I’m giving them too much credit?

Comments:

In some ways, this is a standard LOCI episode. Take a ripped from the headlines story—here, the particularly gruesome story of a pizza delivery man with a bomb around his neck apparently forced to take part in a robbery (the real story is almost as strange as this fiction)—add not one but two unusually motivated criminals; mix in some Eames snark, some Carver objections, Deakins’ exasperation, and a terrific final confrontation—this one as physical as it is verbal—and you’ve got a solid LOCI story.

It’s the external factors that raise interest in this episode. We learn what happened to Nicole Wallace (unbelievable as that verdict was to me. Just how good is Carver in court anyway?); it’s one of Eames and Kathryn Erbe’s first episodes back since both character and actress were on maternity leave. But the episode does have its moments—Goren’s dance with Marjorie and Eames’ pocketing of the tablets chief among them.

Presented, as always, for your comments, criticisms, and queries.

And, yes, I know this episode is scheduled on the same day as last week’s EOTW (DIAMOND DOGS). The cutoff for EOTW is obviously (at least this time) noon on Monday (g). Blame the scheduling powers that be.

Patcat

[idget]

For the most part I like this episode, but for a details oriented person like me there are two things that get on my nerves, the first is the Donnie/Johnny conundrum. Half the time people refer to him clearly as Johnny and other times Donnie. Obviously for some reason they decided to change his name, how hard would it have been to dub over Johnny? The other is that the bank confrontation takes place in mid January, but their is clearly a big Christmas tree in the middle of the street. Does NYC leave their Christmas decorations up that long? Most places have them down by New Years. I know I am probably nitpicking but I have always been impressed with the effort LOCI goes to to keep up with continuity so these are really glaring to me. I think part of the reason I do like this episode is the performances of Charles Rocket and Enid Graham. I find both believable and fill acutely sorry for Marjorie, especially after meeting her husband. She is so lost and looking for anything that will make her feel alive. As for Carver I think the bottom line for him is his conviction rate and he really doesn't care one way or the other how he gets them or even if they are guilty. In the Pardoners Tale he was willing to go back on his word and put the wife in jail in order to get her husband. In Malignant he was willing to prosecute the poor widower if it meant convicting the pharmacist. And in Vacancy he was more than willing to prosecute the annoying murder victim's traveling companion even though he most assuredly knew she must have been innocent. (after having recently watched this episode again, as I was viewing my season 5 DVDs to make sure they were all ok, I am now of the opinion that this episode is even worse than the View From Up Here).

[alliehalliwell]

I thought I was the only one who heard that Johnny/Donnie slip. I thought I was imagining things. Good to know I'm not crazy - the writers are.

[Patcat]

I didn't catch the Johnny/Donny slip, but I can be pretty oblivious to these things.

One of the problems I have with Carver--or how Carver is written--is that it's usually not explained why he takes the stands he takes. For example, in MALIGNANT, my understanding is that if he knows a crime has taken place, Carver has to report it. If he didn't, he could be in danger of being disbarred. (Yes, yes, I know, lawyers do shady things all the time when they're not supposed to.) But, as idget ably demonstrated, there are many times when Carver doesn't live up to his standards. Prosecutors aren't supposed to pursue and convict people they know to be innocent either.

Patcat

[DonnaJo]

I think Carver's zeal in having a high conviction rating is very realistic in that is mirrors how the actual DA's office functions. The numbers do matter. I think the mothership does a better job in showing that.

I thought that "Johnny" was the floor salesman's real name, and that "Donnie" was the name he used as a criminal. Changing it up a bit, like an alter ego thing.

I have nothing but disdain for Margie, who had a very easy life and a loving husband. Sure he was a bore, but so was she. I hope she pays for her crime, but Goren always has such sympathy for women who are weak and vulnerable that I doubt it.

One thing I always found odd was why Goren chose to enter the ladies dressing room and confront Margie, leaving Eames to handle "Donnie." It would have made more sense for the female cop to arrest the female perp - especially if it requires going into a ladies changing room.

[jeffan]

Good point about numbers and the DA's Office Donnajo. Made me think what Jack McCoy would have done in The Pardoner's Tale.

I think Margie will be charged given Carver's track-record.

Goren went into the ladies' room because that's what he does - the unexpected. I did think it fitted into the characterization nicely - Goren would have been aware that any female perp would have been thrown totally off-guard to see a male standing there. But, as you wrote, he seems to have sympathy for the weaker woman, so, maybe, he thought he could stop her from taking the step of no return.

[Patcat]

Perhaps Goren also thought that since he'd danced with Marjorie he'd made a connection with her that would help him talk to her? The show, and Goren, also seem to enjoy letting Eames take down big, bad guys. But a good point, DonnaJo.

Patcat