|
Post by Observer2 on Mar 29, 2005 1:04:07 GMT -5
Goren is logic, Stabler is emotion. There are incomparable... ...Stabler is of course more emotional than Goren but, that does not make him less of a detective... ...Stabler instead takes the hard emotional road to catch a "perp" where Goren takes a cooler, more logical approach. ...I rarely see emotion from Goren. That is because emotion is not Goren's MO, it's Stablers... Whoa! We really will have to agree to disagree! If you rarely see emotion from Goren, then that explains a lot of our disagreement. Because Goren is one of the most deeply emotional, and emotionally complex, characters I’ve ever seen portrayed on television. It’s true that his expression of emotions is often more subtle than Stabler’s, but he still strikes me as a very expressive guy. In any case, don’t worry too much about holding a minority opinion on these boards. I’ve done that plenty of times myself. If nothing else, it keeps the people with opposing views on their toes, and challenges them to see things from a different perspective. And besides, if Nikki has seen every episode of SVU, then I clearly have been too quick to dismiss the series. Or else she’s just more tolerant of men who have the kinds of emotional defenses that Stabler has – something I tend to be a bit impatient with. In either case, if she likes the show too, then you’re in good company.
|
|
|
Post by Techguy on Mar 29, 2005 5:13:52 GMT -5
Observer, I do want to clarify that not all the specific details are identical in the BTK case and BBJ in "Shibboleth." The real BTK's victims ranged from a 9 year old boy to a 62 year old woman. Frank the BBJ in "Shibboleth" focused exclusively on slender young women. Also, some of the BTK victims were stabbed or suffocated; not all were exclusively strangled.
I also want to add that I have not researched the strangulation method used by BTK so I don't know if it corresponds to what was depicted in "Shibboleth."
Here is the link to an article about BTK by MSNBC analyst Clint Van Zandt, a former FBI profiler: www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7052887/
There is a second link within the article to a timeline of BTK's crimes. The December 8, 1977 entry says on this date BTK's voice is heard for the first time when he calls a dispatcher to report his murder of Nancy Fox. The March 19, 2004 entry says on this date BTK sends a letter to a newspaper, along with a photocopy of the drivers license plus three photos of one of his victims.
|
|
|
Post by Metella on Mar 29, 2005 9:08:28 GMT -5
NM- I also have been in the minority many many times; so handle like you have been, just without feeling bad.
I Totally enjoyed this episode; it was profiling the criminal - and oh, I like it like that.
I didn't really find the episode so graphic or creepy - it just had more of the scenes than we usually see - not just a quick glimpse in the ME's office, but a long scene; not just one pic of the vic -but I think they were shown 3 times; so the repetative nature my have lent to a more graphic feeling.
|
|
|
Post by LOCIfan on Mar 29, 2005 9:44:43 GMT -5
NicoleMarie, I'm pretty sure every single one of us has been on the unpopular end of a discussion on this board at one time or another. Don't feel bad at all. In fact, wear your dissention with pride! Your perspective may not be shared by others, but that doesn't mean we're not interested in understanding it. Techguy, Thanks for the link to the real BTK stuff. For those who want more, a quick Google search turns up tons of stuff on BTK. It's true that BTK did strangle some of his victims, however none of them were strangled in the manner depicted in SHIBBOLETH. But SHIBBOLETH was clearly based, at least in part, on BTK. One of the most striking similarities between the episodes is the long silence. BTK contacted police and the media (with a note) in March, 2004 after a silence of 25 years! That long silence hasn't been explained since BTK's arrest. BBJ called in his kill of Phoebe after a 15 year silence. Also, BTK's most recent murder was in 1987. When he contacted authorities in 2004, he took credit for the 1987 kill (which had not, at the time, been attributed to BTK b/c it took place 8 years after the last BTK killing for which he took credit -- another similarity to BBJ). After BTK's arrest, they attributed two additional murders to him (he confessed to them), but they took place before 1987. BBJ actually kills again when he resumes contacting police. Nothing I turned up on BTK mentioned anything about his son, or a child, having been "imprinted" by seeing a photo or anything like that. So, that may have been ripped from a different headline (or possibly was ripped from the writers' imaginations)... Anyway, there's a LOT of stuff on BTK out there, so for those who're interested, do a Google search and read to your heart's content. LOCIfan
|
|
|
Post by NicoleMarie on Mar 29, 2005 13:00:21 GMT -5
Whoa! We really will have to agree to disagree! If you rarely see emotion from Goren, then that explains a lot of our disagreement. Because Goren is one of the most deeply emotional, and emotionally complex, characters I’ve ever seen portrayed on television. It’s true that his expression of emotions is often more subtle than Stabler’s, but he still strikes me as a very expressive guy. In any case, don’t worry too much about holding a minority opinion on these boards. I’ve done that plenty of times myself. If nothing else, it keeps the people with opposing views on their toes, and challenges them to see things from a different perspective. And besides, if Nikki has seen every episode of SVU, then I clearly have been too quick to dismiss the series. Or else she’s just more tolerant of men who have the kinds of emotional defenses that Stabler has – something I tend to be a bit impatient with. In either case, if she likes the show too, then you’re in good company. To clarify: I did not mean to imply Goren has the emotional depth of Star Trek's "Data". hehehehe Goren simply is much more cool and aloof in his actions and his emotions, just more subtle. (To me anyway.) I'm not critisizing Goren for this, as it works for him on CI, it makes Goren who he is. I can appreciate Goren's calmness just as much as I can appreciate Stabler's sometimes illogical emotions. Stabler's emotions are as perfect for SVU as Goren's are for CI. Goren could never function on SVU, just as Stabler could not function in CI. (Hmmm...that's part of my problem with Logan on CI too but I won't kick that horse again! hehehe) As I said before, Goren is logic, Stabler is emotion. And thanks for the kind words! And Metella, LOCIFan, and Nikki too! I found myself in an odd spot and thought "Why me?!" I am just relieved to know I am not ticking anybody off and know it's ok to go against the flow. (I really am too paranoid at times!)
|
|
|
Post by Sirenna on Mar 29, 2005 14:10:20 GMT -5
Sirenna, I find it interesting (and rather baffling) that you found THIS episode's subject matter more suited to SVU, but didn't feel that way about last week's episode. Because they are so different, it seems difficult to suggest that this one "would've been better as an SVU episode." Rather like suggesting da Vinci's Mona Lisa would've been better if Picasso had painted it. So I guess I've got two questions for you. First, why do you believe SHIBBOLETH would've been better as an SVU episode? Second, why DIDN'T you feel similarly about DEATH ROE (where there was a living incest victim)? LOCIfan Well, briefly put (because I have to go to work now) I saw this as an episode predicated and constructed on the sexual nature of the crime. With Death Roe, I've always maintained that was not the focus. As for comparing the episode between the two series, they would interprate the same story two different ways. The elements in this one reminded more of SVU style than cerebral clinical intent style. PS. Maybe Mona would have looked better as a cube. We'll never know, will we? But at least the end result, the way it stands, is pretty good.
|
|
|
Post by Patcat on Mar 29, 2005 15:45:04 GMT -5
On a general LAW AND ORDER group that I peruse (never contribute--not quite as civil as us--gosh, that sounded snobbish, didn't it-oh well), there's a discussion that this episode and DEATH ROE would've fit better on SVU as well. And one poster made the typo of SVU for SUV (hey, we've all done it), leading another to write, "I wish Major Case would leave those auto cases alone." Thus leading to another post: "The cases of auto theft and damage are investigated by the dedicated members of the Sports Utility Vehicles. These are their stories. Cha Ching!"
Patcat (who realizes this may have been funnier when I first read it)
|
|
|
Post by LOCIfan on Mar 29, 2005 17:27:59 GMT -5
PS. Maybe Mona would have looked better as a cube. We'll never know, will we? But at least the end result, the way it stands, is pretty good. Better? Well, no. Different, certainly; but my clumsy point was that it'd be so different that a comparison would, for me, be apples-n-oranges.
|
|
|
Post by LOCIfan on Mar 29, 2005 21:31:03 GMT -5
NicoleMarie & Sirenna, I wanted to add my general thoughts about your views that SHIBBOLETH would've been better as an SVU episode. As I've mentioned earlier, I'm not an avid fan of that show (for much of the reasons Observer detailed), but I have watched many of the shows. And I like it -- don't love it, but like it. It strikes me that both of you have touched on the notion that Goren and/or LOCI in general is less emotional (NicoleMarie) or more "clinical" (Sirenna) than SVU. This, actually, may be the point of departure for me. I DO think Goren and LOCI's emotion is more subtle than that of SVU, but I don't see it as any less deep. The ways in which emotion is expressed and dealt with in each series is very different, but I don't find LOCI less emotional than SVU. I find it less histrionic than SVU, but that's just a shade of emotion and, to me, not necessarily a yard-stick of its depth. For me, this is why I found SHIBBOLETH a story particularly well-suited to LOCI. Because the crimes are those of a serial killer whose murders span more than a decade, and whose horrible influence on his son dates back to the late seventies. There is something removed about the horror in what Frank has done to his son -- simply by virtue of time -- that doesn't lend itself well to a more histrionic, on the surface, kind of anger. Additionally, because SVU "goes home" with its characters, there's an effort to tie the emotional elements of the crimes to the personal lives of Stabler, Benson, etc... (at least in the episodes I've seen) that I don't think would've worked well with the story material of SHIBBOLETH. Of course, as we all know, both SVU and LOCI take liberties with the types of cases both shows deal with. In real life, the "Special Victims Unit" deals only with living victims of sex crimes (that's why they're "special" victims -- if they were dead, they'd be homicides, and would have nothing whatsoever to do with the "Special Victims Unit"). And LOCI, which represents the Major Case Squad ONLY deals with homicides that the Chief of Detectives assigns to it. In reality, that only includes homicides that become "press cases" -- this, I know from experience as a former ADA in Manhattan. The Chief of Detectives assigns such cases to MCS because they're used to dealing with the media, as well as the heightened scrutiny feuled by public opinion. No doubt, I may be wrong. I may be blind to the wonders of the Picasso Mona Lisa because I haven't seen it, and lack the imagination to conjure it. But, with my limited vision, these are my thoughts on the topic. Thanks to both of you for sharing your views.
|
|
|
Post by Summerfield on Mar 29, 2005 22:38:33 GMT -5
I've read several comments about how "creepy" this episode was. Tell me, what isn't creepy about a murder?
Maybe DW could produce...Law & Order: Simple Assault & I'll Take Probation
|
|
|
Post by NicoleMarie on Mar 29, 2005 23:11:06 GMT -5
There is a creepy and then there is graphic creepy.
Imagine the difference bewteen "Psycho" And "Silence of the Lambs". There is a world of difference in the "creep" factor..
|
|
|
Post by NicoleMarie on Mar 29, 2005 23:30:57 GMT -5
NicoleMarie & Sirenna, It strikes me that both of you have touched on the notion that Goren and/or LOCI in general is less emotional (NicoleMarie) or more "clinical" (Sirenna) than SVU. This, actually, may be the point of departure for me. I DO think Goren and LOCI's emotion is more subtle than that of SVU, but I don't see it as any less deep. The ways in which emotion is expressed and dealt with in each series is very different, but I don't find LOCI less emotional than SVU. I find it less histrionic than SVU, but that's just a shade of emotion and, to me, not necessarily a yard-stick of its depth. For me, this is why I found SHIBBOLETH a story particularly well-suited to LOCI. Because the crimes are those of a serial killer whose murders span more than a decade, and whose horrible influence on his son dates back to the late seventies. There is something removed about the horror in what Frank has done to his son -- simply by virtue of time -- that doesn't lend itself well to a more histrionic, on the surface, kind of anger. Additionally, because SVU "goes home" with its characters, there's an effort to tie the emotional elements of the crimes to the personal lives of Stabler, Benson, etc... (at least in the episodes I've seen) that I don't think would've worked well with the story material of SHIBBOLETH. Thanks to both of you for sharing your views. I think I may have given the wrong impression about my views on Goren's emotions. I wasn't implying Goren's emotions weren't deep, or that he is incapable of feeling deeply. When I was talking about the difference in emotion in Goren and Stabler, I wasn't implying that was why Death Roe and Shibboleth would have made better SVU shows. The emotional levels are completely different on CI and SVU but, that's not the basis for my views. CI did not delve into the sexual based storylines like SVU woulld have. In Death Roe, Beatrice was portrayed in miscontrued light. SVU would hasve duelved in her actions and why she behaved the way she did. CI did not do any of this. Instead, they chose to make the incest subtle, which in turn confused and angered people. Death Roe is a perfect example of why it should have been a SVU show. Shibboleth, on the other hand, was very graphic, usually graphic for CI. Also I felt this show did not duelve deeply enough into the storyline. It was much too simplified. I, of course, am in the minority in my views. hehehehe And I'm sorry if I just repeated myself, I tried not to. And a note: SVU does deal with live victims.
|
|
|
Post by LOCIfan on Mar 30, 2005 0:09:08 GMT -5
And a note: SVU does deal with live victims. Yes, and Criminal Intent does deal with "press case" homicides. But not exclusively. More often than not, SVU begins with a so-called "sexually-based" homicide which, in reality, would not be the province of the Special Victims Unit in New York. In New York, Special Victims Units do not handle homicides of any kind. They deal exclusively with LIVE rape and other sexual assault victims. New York recognizes that the victims of rape and other sexual assaults experience trauma that's distinct from the trauma resulting from other violent crimes. Hence, the designation "Special" victims. Dead victims are not "special" because, being dead, they don't require any special victims services. . They don't need to testify for juries in order to get a conviction. Homicides, whether sexual in nature or not, go either to the Homicide Unit or to Major Case (if the Chief of Detectives orders it). And, yes, I think I understand the basis of your views on the subject. I was simply explaining why I disagree. There's no meeting of the minds on this issue. It's a matter of agreeing to disagree.
|
|
|
Post by NicoleMarie on Mar 30, 2005 10:40:55 GMT -5
And, yes, I think I understand the basis of your views on the subject. I was simply explaining why I disagree. There's no meeting of the minds on this issue. It's a matter of agreeing to disagree. I thought you thought my views were based soley on the emotional differences between CI and SVU. I just wanted to make sure that wasn't the case. Sorry to have repeated myself to you. hehehehe both SVU and LOCI take liberties with the types of cases both shows deal with And I think that's why viewers of both shows (like me) tend to merge the methods of SVU and CI together when watching either show. Sometimes I watch CI like and SVU show, sometimes I watch SVU like a CI show. To me, sometimes it seems the only difference (in terms of cases and methods used to solve them) between CI and SVU is emotion!
|
|
|
Post by Sirenna on Mar 30, 2005 11:38:12 GMT -5
NicoleMarie & Sirenna, And I like it -- don't love it, but like it. It strikes me that both of you have touched on the notion that Goren and/or LOCI in general is less emotional (NicoleMarie) or more "clinical" (Sirenna) than SVU. Whoa! Really don't know where you're getting this one from LOCI fan. I've never said Goren is clinical in the sense he is unemotianal (which seems to be the main thrust of your post). In fact I've often been on the lonely side of the debate saying he is a comprehensively emotional round character! I was referring to the 'ambience' if you will of the two shows. Nicolemarie summed it up well when she made the distinction between graphic creepy and just creepy. This one was definately closer to the first for me which is often the case with SVU and why I don't like SVU and rarely watch it. (Mariska Hargity rocks though!) At the end of the story I still don't really understand the connection between the son and the father other than supposedly the father wrought a great influence over the son but how, why is still a mystery. Usually LOCI works to answer that part which is the part that interests me. Why I watch LOCI and for what I suspect most people on this board criticise LOCI is that it looks at crimes at a distance (That is absolutely not the same as saying Goren and Eames are unemotional characters!) We see the deconstruction of the crime including why it was committed but we always stay somewhat removed from the criminals and the officers. The most involved we, the viewers get, is by watching Goren and Eames and their reactions. But their reactions are always highly subject to interpretation. Is Goren rushing off, in the opthamologist episode because he's worried about his mum or because he has a date? We. Never. Know. for sure. But this allows us to follow the story from all its human nature angles without spoonfed distractions. From I've read the directors, writers and actors do this diliberately. SVU on the other hand wrings out too much as you say histrionics for crimes. We know too much emotional character detail about the villains and the main cast to leave room or time to flesh out a good story. I can read SVUs take in the papers and on CNN. YUCK! No doubt, I may be wrong. I may be blind to the wonders of the Picasso Mona Lisa because I haven't seen it, and lack the imagination to conjure it. But, with my limited vision, these are my thoughts on the topic. That could be true for you and for all of us. As for your comparison above, I afraid I just don't understand why it is important to you to delineate the two. Why compare the two at all, either the paintings or the series? Why not just be open to the fact that time and space and opportunity give rise to different, (some might say, better or worse I guess) interpretations?!
|
|