|
Post by mikeyrocks on Oct 15, 2006 2:55:56 GMT -5
WOW - janethyland ;D - I'm always so excited when I see that you have posted.
You look at things from such an intense and deep perspective - I just find it so wonderful and informative to read your posts.
I will have to go back now and watch this one with fresh eyes.
You are so right about the young fellow who played Keith - he did bare a remarkable resemblance to Leonardo Whitings Romeo. Uncanny as you said : )
As always it has been wonderful reading your thoughts !
I can't wait to hear your perspective on future episodes.
|
|
|
Post by Sirenna on Oct 15, 2006 10:11:09 GMT -5
There are some really interesting insights here, Janet!
|
|
|
Post by LOCIfan on Oct 15, 2006 13:04:35 GMT -5
janethyland, your insights amaze me!
In fact, your deconstruction of the episode is far more interesting to me than the episode itself. I believe that your interpretation of the episode may possibly be what was intended by the creators, however, the execution of that vision was lacking, particularly in the abrupt change of Danielle's character.
What we know of this real life phenomenon, where adult female teachers couple with their underage, male students is much more abstruse than what you've described. They rarely, if ever, actually turn that corner of insight to a point where self-sacrifice for the good of the young lover takes precedence, and that's kind of a big deal to me in this episode. The other issue that was ignored is the fact that most of these women have been diagnosed as bi-polar, and that seems to be pertinent to the psychology of the phenomenon. Meaty territory for the astute CI writers! A trip through a playground and then to a nasty jail just doesn't cut it. Not on this show, where the Criminal's Intent is supposed to be elucidated.
But, again, thank you for your insights!
|
|
|
Post by Techguy on Oct 15, 2006 17:34:24 GMT -5
your deconstruction of the episode is far more interesting to me than the episode itself. I believe that your interpretation of the episode may possibly be what was intended by the creators, however, the execution of that vision was lacking, particularly in the abrupt change of Danielle's character. That comment pretty much sums it up for me too. Thanks for sharing your thoughtful insights Janethyland.
|
|
|
Post by Cassie on Oct 16, 2006 14:35:28 GMT -5
Thanks Janet As always, you give me reason to go back and review the show one more time!!
|
|
|
Post by LOCIfan on Oct 16, 2006 17:28:15 GMT -5
Are you saying all older women who have sex with underage students are bi-polar,and that there is a statistical analysis done on it to make that connection,LOCIfan? No, nothing so scientific as all that. This is just something I've picked up from watching true crime documentaries on court tv about the four or five women who've been arrested for it. It may not be enough for a statistical sample, but it is striking that all of them, post-arrest, have been diagnosed as unmedicated bi-polars. And since this crime is clearly ripped from those headlines, why wouldn't CI explore that angle of psychological pathology for dramatic purposes? Seemed like a missed opportunity by the writers. Lots of ways they could've gone with it. Or not. I guess I found the episode dramatically unsatisfying because I ended up not caring about any of the characters, and even worse, not understanding them. I thought it was a weak script.
|
|
|
Post by ragincajun on May 27, 2007 16:05:56 GMT -5
When Ross and Logan are looking at Keith thru the interogation glass. Did Logan say he admired Keith? I think after that Ross said something like you don't have kids do you? Wish I would have taped it.
|
|
|
Post by deathroe on May 25, 2008 0:39:45 GMT -5
This is admittedly the kind of thing you only post at 1:41 AM--when the television is keeping you up--but how does Wheeler have a nephew, as she tells the Mary Kay Letourneau type in this episode? Isn't it just her and her mom (and the absentee father)? Perhaps I am over-reaching here ...
On a side note, I couldn't search the title to find this thread, not exactly, because of the "Tru" in "Tru Love" being under three letters *g*
|
|
|
Post by maherjunkie on May 25, 2008 10:13:19 GMT -5
She could have an uncle.
|
|
|
Post by deathroe on May 25, 2008 14:02:32 GMT -5
So this would be a grand-nephew ... who loves his sneakers Or she was lying to Danielle. Can't ever quite establish when they're lying and when they're not ... part of the game, I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by maherjunkie on May 25, 2008 21:34:56 GMT -5
Ya got me, my chain of family is rusty when I have been online too long.
|
|