|
Post by Techguy on Oct 11, 2006 20:48:15 GMT -5
Just because violence is everywhere these days doesn't mean I have to like it or accept it. Maybe it's time TV shows show some backbone and resist the siren song of meting out what's considered acceptable entertainment these days. At one time gladiatorial combat and feeding human beings to lions in publc arenas was considered family entertainment. We're not there yet, but let's put a lid on the carnage...please.
Which reminds me of a scene in "Tru Love" that bothered me a lot, the one LOCIfan mentions--the violence isn't sexual but certainly is gratuitous. What was the purpose of showing the body skewered on fence posts after the motorcycle accident? It's totally unnecessary for plot purposes; I think its intent was purely to titillate those in the viewing audience who seek out graphic images like that.
What's also very troublesome for me about the introduction of graphic violence is, CI never had to do this sort of thing before to tell compelling stories. So as others have asked--Why now all of a sudden? I can only conclude that the change is somehow linked to the desire to boost the ratings in the demographic most likely to seek out images of graphic violence--males in the 18-49 age group, and most especially the younger half that has grown up on violent movies and video games. If CI is pandering to this crowd with the in-your-face violence, double shame on them for doing it.
|
|
|
Post by sarahlee on Oct 11, 2006 20:53:31 GMT -5
. And for sure I don't buy into the excuse that she's of small stature, a WOMAN? Well, haven't we advanced farther than that outdated notion? She screwed up, plain and simple, and her lapse should have been addressed with some acknowledgement between her and Logan. The hospital scene would have been the ideal time.Just to clarify: I was being sarcastic @ size/gender. The whole situation didn't ring true to me. Logan as I know him, would have called her on it, and he didn't.
|
|
Ronni
Silver Shield Investigator
Posts: 99
|
Post by Ronni on Oct 11, 2006 21:03:57 GMT -5
Maybe I just did not explain myself very well. I guess there's really no point in dragging this out.
|
|
|
Post by Techguy on Oct 11, 2006 21:18:22 GMT -5
. And for sure I don't buy into the excuse that she's of small stature, a WOMAN? Well, haven't we advanced farther than that outdated notion? She screwed up, plain and simple, and her lapse should have been addressed with some acknowledgement between her and Logan. The hospital scene would have been the ideal time.Just to clarify: I was being sarcastic @ size/gender. The whole situation didn't ring true to me. Logan as I know him, would have called her on it, and he didn't. OK, now I get your meaning--I missed the sarcasm initially. Another downside of posting on Internet boards is you can't always tell what someone is getting at.
Bottom line: I find Wheeler's inaction impossible to explain or defend. Logan should be po'd and I agree, he should have been shown reacting to what Wheeler failed to do.
|
|
|
Post by LOCIfan on Oct 11, 2006 21:32:14 GMT -5
Maybe I just did not explain myself very well. I guess there's really no point in dragging this out. Ronni, I didn't mean to suggest that at all. I am actually interested in your perspective. Previously, you posted: Can anyone tell me where all the sexualized violence was in Siren Call? The girl was killed by her father, there was nothing sexual about it at all. And when the father killed himself, you really hardly saw anything but some blood go flying. Not graphic at all. It was more needed in this story than the violence in the Maltese one. Seems kinda like a double standard. Then you again asked for clarification: Yes, I know it was the stepfather. And I still don't see the difference, camera angle, gratutious or not. I think you've been inundated with replies about how some viewers felt the violence in Siren Call was sexualized, and then clarification was posted about other instances where the violence was graphic, and where they felt it was gratuitous. My question has to do with your statement that there was a "double standard" going on somehow. I find that interesting and would like to know what you meant by it. I'm also interested in your take on whether or not you see a difference in the way violence is being used this season on CI. I don't see how asking you to clarify that is dragging anything out, since this is a forum where we discuss this kind of thing. If you'd just prefer not to articulate your position, of course, that's your prerogative. But I hope you're not backing off just because there are others who disagree. Feel free to express, clarify and defend your opinion here!
|
|
|
Post by Cassie on Oct 11, 2006 21:37:38 GMT -5
I agree with SarahIvy, this is the best Logan episode ever. But I wonder is it because just like Blind Spot we are brought into the story to care more for the detectives, seeing them vulnerable. I liked the idea that this incident happened at the beginning of the show, instead of the end. I didn’t go to bed all stressed out by the main characters being harmed. I felt closure for this episode on a semi-happy note. I liked that show was shown in flashback, that was a nice change. When Ross is talking about the murdered man, to Logan and Wheeler, He makes the comment “Gay Rage: “The strength of a man with the hysteria of woman” It just got me wondering what really is the difference between Gay Rage and Gay Bashing? Sounds to me, like Gay Rage is a gay guy committing a murder and Gay Bashing is a straight guy attempting murdering a gay guy. I feel there is a little bit of hysteria going on in both incidents. From what I understand about the military, police force and I would assume the Fire Department. Its not wise to come out of the closet. Gays are not welcome. Its too close of quarters for the locker rooms. When the episode started Logan and Wheeler where at the Fire Department, a week after the murder of their fellow firefighter Hayden. When Charlie said “screw you” and Logan responded “I don’t know about you, but I don’t go that way” the fight broke out. Charlie swinging the first punch. And all of the firemen came to the aid of Charlie. Wouldn’t it make more sense for the firemen, to pull their buddy Charlie off of Logan? I kind of wonder since it was a week into the investigation, where the facts about Hayden starting to surface in the Firemen’s lunch room. Where the firemen starting to get uncomfortable with each other. Wondering about who else could be gay? And the firemen didnt want to answer anymore questions. I believe their was some hysteria brewing there. When Charlie the macho firefighter was willing to pretended he was gay for his fallen gay friend. I feel it took courage. Not all, but most men who aren’t gay get rather nervous at the thought of anyone considering them to be gay. And I feel Charlie is one of those kind of guys. He stood up for Hayden Hayden’s wife made the comment that their child would know everything about their father, and that he was a hero. I thought that was cool, Heck her husband had an affair, and sounds like many a one night stands at the bar he frequented. I would have been furious at discovering that my man was doing another woman, let alone another man. Hurt beyond belief. But she was strong, in wanting her unborn child to know his or her dad was a hero. Not too many LOCI shows end on a positive note, and last night show was a little different. Charlie and Haydens wife, gave me hope. Oh and I liked how Logan and Wheeler were not going to rat Charlie out as the guy who threw the first punch. r. And I think we're referring to the gratutious "in your face" camera angle visual violence. I'm reminded of a scene from "Stray" when the ME took a sample from the nose of the dead victim. The camera honed in on that particular movement and focused on the "slow motion" of the gesture. I think, or would hope, when we complain about the violence, we're reacting to the production/camera shots of said. Didn't Goren want to go in the nose first? but she wouldn't let him? She screwed up, plain and simple, and her lapse should have been addressed with some acknowledgement between her and Logan. The hospital scene would have been the ideal time.I saw her throw a punch, actually the first viewing of the show I thought she had swung at Logan. and she pulled some guy down. But since she wasn't on the floor with Logan, while all the firemen where piled highon him. I guess she does have some explaining to do. She did call for assistance twice. I also wonder if what transpired on their second case together is going to cause friction between the two of them down the road. I remember once on SVU Stabler yelling back at Benson, he didnt like having her as a partner cause he felt he always had to watch her back because she was a woman. The look on her face was WTF, I take care of myself. Logan and Wheeler may have some issues. They might not run as smooth as Goren and Eames. and that will be interesting.
|
|
|
Post by sarahlee on Oct 11, 2006 22:02:51 GMT -5
Well, I've never been in a fist fight, but I have been angry and scared enough to defend myself a few times. It wasn't a fair fight, I'm not much of a threat physically, but I did try. Perhaps Wheeler got scared. It was a scary situation. Logan should be scared, because he can't count on her.
|
|
|
Post by Summerfield on Oct 11, 2006 22:06:09 GMT -5
You're suddenly suprised by the violence? "One" the perp killed the two teenagers home for the weekend. An entire family was killed in "Badge" and a woman tried to blow herself up along with the kids in "Magificant" I don't even want to go down the road with "Want." Now the show becomes violent?
|
|
|
Post by LOCIfan on Oct 11, 2006 22:23:19 GMT -5
No, Summerfield, not "surpised by the violence" Surprised by the way the violence is being depicted. Big difference to me, and that's what this conversation has been about. The way CI is using violence to tell these stories is different now. In "Want" we didn't watch as Tagman got all hot for a sexily clad girl, with camera lingering on her cleavage. We didn't see him then get his sexual release by drilling a hole in her skull and lobotomizing her with drano. It wasn't shown that way. The horror of what he did was made quite plain. The sexual nature of his violence against women was made quite plain. But it was not shown in a graphic, sexualized way so as to allow or encourage the audience to get off on it. There's a difference. What we saw was the awful aftermath of what he'd done to his victim as well as the psychological toll it took on the killer. That was powerful storytelling without resorting to cheap, sexualized violence.
Of course there's violence in the show. It's about murders. Really heinous, evil murders. But what they show and how they show it and what we see and the conclusions we can draw from it are very different this season.
Do you really not see a difference in the way the violence is being portrayed this season? Because, if so, I find THAT very interesting!
|
|
|
Post by SarahIvy on Oct 11, 2006 22:24:02 GMT -5
Eh, it's not so much the violence itself, it's the portrayal/style of it they're suddenly using this season. Which is *very* different from how it has been portrayed in the past. I don't think anyone has claimed that CI has never dealt with violence before...every single episode has violence and crime.
I feel this new style of portraying violence is a cop out for a show like CI, that has always been able to function without the glossy gratuitous tricks of CSI.
Mind you, I say that as a gal who can and DOES watch some intensely violent stuff. But even though my tolerance is particularly high, I find the tactics CI is using this year to be going against the artistic vision it had in previous years. I think it's dumbing down for a broader audience that likes/needs sexualized and gratuitous violence to hold their attention. I guess I'm finding that sticks in my craw. I've enjoyed all the other changes in lighting, style, and personal details about the detectives.
I suspect this is just one of those things that we could all go in circles trying to explain to each other, but if the other doesn't see it, they just don't see it. It's all good.
|
|
|
Post by sarahlee on Oct 11, 2006 22:30:41 GMT -5
You're suddenlt suprised by the violence? "One" the perp killed the two teenagers home for the weekend. An entire family was killed in "Badge" and a woman tried to blow herself up along with the kids in "Magificant" I don't even want to go down the road with "Want." Now the show becomes violent? We didn't see the teenagers killed, the family murdered, the children in bits--not actively on the screen. The violence was suggested to us and completed in our minds. There is a difference; repeated images of violence inures us to it, de-values it even. You know this.
|
|
|
Post by Cassie on Oct 11, 2006 22:36:34 GMT -5
I think its the music, that is making it look more graphic to everyone. The music intensifies the scene
|
|
|
Post by sarahlee on Oct 11, 2006 22:40:46 GMT -5
And the blood. And the brains.
|
|
|
Post by LOCIfan on Oct 11, 2006 22:54:49 GMT -5
I'll even go one step further and say I found the offered psychological reason for the cop killing his step-daughter to be bizarre and not nearly as carefully explored or integrated into the story as the titillation of the violence in the teaser.
The cop kills his step-daughter because she's a wild child and making it even more difficult for her sick mom to deal with her cancer, and because she exposed the cop's biological child to her wayward and dangerous lifestyle. Huh?
The mother, when talking about her eldest child's death is stone cold and simply says, "I lost her a long time ago." Well, okay. Then why'd the stepfather have to murder her? Why not just kick her out of the house or something far less drastic? Why not explain that big sis is a bad influence on little sis and something needs to be done? Why murder her and frame Brooke's husband?
Then, kind of late in the game, his pathology is loosely tied to some form of post-traumatic stress syndrome he's suffering from due to the incident where a bad guy stole his gun? Again, huh? What? How does that get at the heart of what he did to his step-daughter? It makes for a nice symmetry when he steals another cop's gun and shoots his brains out, but what does it have to do with the murder he committed?
Maybe something powerful and profound, but if so, it wasn't told in the story.
"Want" is a very good example of a horrifically, violent and sexual crime against women that was dealt with in a way that offered a mystery, a pathology and an explanation for that pathology that made the victims and the criminal seem actually human, and all without the benefit of gratuitous or sexualized violence.
|
|
|
Post by sobergal95 on Oct 11, 2006 23:42:33 GMT -5
I don't think Charlie the homophobic firefighter reason to agree to pretend to be the dead guy's lover were so altruistic to help out his "brother" firefighter. He did it because the police chief wanted to file charges against whoever through the first punch, but Logan "didnt remember" who it was. He most likely bullied/blackmailed Charlie into it when they pulled over on the way back to the office.
Also when I watched it again, it looks to me like Wheeler DOES get back into the melee after she called for back-up. It may have been too little, too late, but it seemed to get way out of hand pretty quickly so I think her actions were reasonable. Also, not to say Logan "deserved" it in any way, didn't the captian suggest that Wheeler do the talking? It wouldn't be the first time Logan's mouth has gotten him into trouble. Someone else already mentioned the size of their files on the table, I thought that was funny. She did try to apologize to him at the hospital.
I like Logan, he's not Goren; but he is acting more like the Logan we met years ago. We like Goren because he's mature, sensitive and respectful to women. Logan is more a macho male chauvinist pig. I think he couldnt get away with that last season with Barek or Deakins, but Ross is similar. (his remark on this episode about the hysteria of a woman, and his comment in Tru Love about porn never losing its charm) And Wheeler gets in some man slamming comments too (the nearest doughnut theory, men are lazy). I think Logan likes being the more senior partner, but I think Wheeler isn't quite as green as we think. Ross said something about three years of different undercover work in Tru Love. I think it will be fun to watch how their relationship will develop over the season. They seem to be off on a better foot than he was with Barek.
I caught the re-run of the first episode with Barek in season 5 and she rubbed me the wrong way from the get-go. I think it was dead wrong of her to manipulate Logan into sharing personal information about his childhood when they were talking to the suspect. I know I'd be pissed. I don't mind sharing my personal stuff with someone if I feel there is reason to do so, but for someone else to say "hey, my partner knows about this, tell him...." I think that alone contributed to the tension in that partnership right off the bat.
I was apprehensive about how this season was going to go, but overall I liked this episode the best (even over the first two Goren/Eames episodes). The "circular" story was something we haven't seen on CI before and I think it worked very well for this episode. It also had more of the CI twist I respect and expect from this show. Bring me more like this one please.
|
|