|
Post by Patcat on Oct 15, 2007 23:00:01 GMT -5
I still like Wheeler better as Logan's partner, but then we've only seen one episode with Falacci. I like the actress just fine. I remember her as the weird child in David Lynch's very weird interpretation of DUNE. Alicia Witt was actually one of the saner and believable things in that.
I didn't think this episode was as bad as the worst of the Logan/Wheeler episodes of last season--and let's be honest, a couple of those were not good.
I've liked Michael O'Keefe since he played the kid in CADDYSHACK and the son in THE GREAT SANTINI (for which he got an Oscar nomination). His film career got stuck in some unfortunate films (THE SLUGGER'S WIFE for example), but his various performances on television have been terrific. I've never seen him play such a thoroughly loathsome individual as the doctor, but I thought he was terrific.
Patcat
|
|
|
Post by mikeyrocks on Oct 18, 2007 11:41:09 GMT -5
First I must say that this episode strongly highlighted one of the main reasons that I have always so appreciated the Law and Order Franchise.
Law and Order has always been way ahead of the pack when it comes to taking on very complicated and often very controversial topics. Not only do I find this very commendable but I further applaud the fact that the shows tend to accomplish this with wit, dignity and intelligence.
In my opinion Criminal Intent has always been the most successful in this persuit as it delves so much deeper into its chosen quarry - especially in the more abstract and psychological aspects of said subject.
***************************************************
Talk about a heated topic - SEEDS bravely attempts to make a statement on the very contentious subject of Donor ( Sperm ) Insemination. Although no bones are made about where exactly they stand on this controversial issue - we still must commend our crew at CI for taking on such divided and intense subject matter.
If at times the episode came across as a little scattered or confusing its no wonder - as D.I encompasses so many different arguments and viewpoints - infertility, human rights, the rights of children, genetic manipulation - the list could go on. This somewhat overwhelming parade of issues and images is thrown at the viewer before the credits have even run. With no fewer than seven scenes rolling out - fast and furious - one after the other. The effect is at first a little unnerving.
The murder weapon - the family photo cube - an potent instrument in foreshadowing. One side of the battle that rages on throughout the episode.
Almost instantly we can see what we the viewers will be in for with Nola Falacci - literally forcing her way into the foreground / walking ahead of Logan in almost every scene. She is brash and pushy but it is also made quite clear that she is also very bright and driven. Her youthful appearance and attire emphasize yet another important aspect of her character - as smart and efficient as she is - Falacci is still very inexperienced.
If this episode is any indication it seems as if Falacci’s rather extreme personality traits could be either extremely detrimental or rather beneficial to her - I guess it depends on how one looks at it. Certainly her abrasive and disrespectful attitudes towards her colleagues may come back to bite her eventually. But her youthful and rather sexual appearance may actually benefit her with some suspects - knocking them off guard so to speak - causing them to trip themselves up.
The only person that Falacci didn’t seem to ruffle is her partner Logan. The two seem to share a fairly relaxed and easy chemistry - rather impressive as this is the first time we have seen them together and we haven’t yet been made privy to their first meeting.
However it is our guest star in SEEDS that steals the show. What an incredible job by Michael O’Keefe - who plays our villian Eli Rush with absolute relish. A character who at times seems almost comically over the top - but that was in and of itself the brilliance of it.
One scene in particular comes to mind - Where Eli is holed away in this office with the sample. The background music, the darkened and tiny room, the steaming canister - all combined giving the effect of a sci fi b movie - I LOVED IT. Perfect I thought - as in this piece it is Eli Rush the symbolizes Science ( cold, impersonal ) or rather the technology made possible by science. Rather brilliantly his biological son Tom Pittano represents the other side of the coin on this issue - Tom and his brother Ralph - symbolize family or rather the importance of family - of connection and caring relationships. Issues that are often not taken into account in the process of Donor Insemination.
With this group of characters - SEEDS quite effectively illustrates and represents those most directly involved in the storm that this issue creates. The donor - with no legal, social, financial or moral obligation to a human being that in a real sense they helped to create AND the offspring ( SEEDS ) of this transaction - effectively and legally cut off from a part of themselves. A huge part of their person - essentially a puzzle.
Although the ending of the episode was in ways unrealistic and would probably never fly in the real world - I still found it fit perfectly into the statement that was trying to be made. That an act that so directly affects another life must have some consequences.
|
|
|
Post by deathroe on May 30, 2008 19:01:04 GMT -5
This one is on USA as I type, and it strikes me that it's an interesting, serious effort. One of the things I think they're working out is the idea of a "God complex." When the sperm-bank donor doctor says "I don't owe them anything--I gave them life," he is using the language of a God-figure ("I gave them life.") He is also highlighting what, for a Judaeo-Christian perspective at least, is a major difference between humans and the Divine. God is viewed as having a kind of involvement in human affairs that humans do not/cannot have. The character points out that, if he gave away something to all the children that he had "created," there would be nothing left of him. Again, he's a human, so despite his God complex, he can't be God toward the humans that he has helped to "create." Last summer (I think), I was reading Keeping Faith by Jodi Picoult, and I found some possibly deliberate parallels with "Brother's Keeper." (Here's the original post, in case anyone's interested). I know that Picoult has another book, My Sister's Keeper, about this very issue: the impact of a bone marrow transplant on the donor. I've not read it, though, so maybe somebody who has can comment. I don't recall who wrote each CI episode (I really should keep track of that more than I do), but the connections really are interesting to think about [edit: "Brother's Keeper" was written by Marsha Norman and "Seeds 'by Peter Blauner, but it's still an interesting connection.]
|
|
|
Post by dragonsback on Jul 10, 2008 6:58:18 GMT -5
First of all, I am sorry to bump up this thread when all eyes are on Kissinger, but I just saw Seeds for the first time on our Channel Ten. It was 'starred' viewing on the TV schedule, even (independent reviewers liked this one) I'll be brief. No depth or substantiating examples. Pure visceral stuff from me. I liked this ep so much. Perhaps I'm more relaxed around CN than VDO these days, because I expect so much more from, and am invariably disappointed by the grey, draggy Goren of Season 7. Wading-pool shallow stuff follows. Noth looked terrific, Falacci character shone (and yes, seemed to me as if she were a latter day Mikey, as others have shrewdly observed here), Ross had some fabulously droll lines, and the cast acted and reacted deliciously, from stars to extras. I see that this ep has serious pro and con reviews here. Michael O'Keefe didn't satisfy everyone. For myself, I thought Michael O'Keefe did a superb job. Elegant villain worthy of the series's best, almost. As a priest he was a sympathetic character. As an unsympathetic character, I personally found him compelling. The Plot: Nothing like 'Seed', except the premise of a sperm-donor narcissist. 'Seed; was probably more complex and sophisticated as a teleplay, but this LOCI ep was no disgrace. Plot holes: so what's new? From earliest days, the series has been cratered with 'em. If I want a seamlessly smooth ride, I'll rent a Daimler-Benz. (yeah, as if they grow on trees and my Visa could stand the strain Enough drivel. Sorry to hijack the Discussion section and take it back to ancient history. PS: The camera work on this one beat (IMO) the sloppy, rushed camera work and editing on Betrayed by a mile/1.3 kilometres.
|
|
|
Post by tjara on Feb 17, 2009 5:40:06 GMT -5
And I'll be doing it again.
First: Logan sniffing the bleach at the crime scene. Absolutely hilarious!! But now back to our regular scheduled "criticism" ;D
I walked away a little unsatisfied at the end. As if there was a scene or two missing. Mabye as someone suggested, this was intentional, because there will not be a resolution for everyone in this story, too...
The reason for the murder seemed a little thin, though come to think of it, that really is a case of "He's a chip of the old block" or "Like father, like son"... there seems to be an odd parallel between father and son as both incorporate dishonest methods to reach their goals. Now their goals are different, but still...
The sperm donor story is quite creepy, and thinking that this actually did happen really irks me. I actually knew who was the father and who was the murderer from the time that third DNA sample turned up - yet that didn't inhibit my pleasure in watching that show. Sometimes it's nice to be smarter than our detectives...
Like Mikeyrocks, I thought that many issues were raised in this episode, but there was no intention to solve them or state an opinion on them (abortion, abortion of fetuses with serious illnesses, sperm donation and repsonsibility of sperm donors, bone marrow transplants, does the end justify the means? ). It was merely questions asked, which could be another reason why I walked away unsatisfied from the ep. Though I think it was a good tactic to raise questions but not anwer them.
The end did seem like "wow, that'd never be possible in real life" - but Goren's pulled those things a couple of times, too...
As for Falacci... I know she'll be gone before too long, and while I found her attitude a little unnerving, I also thought it was interesting. She's pushy, she's in your face, but she's also smart. A little too smart, mabye, but I think that was the whole idea. I thought she treated Ross badly (he shouldn't have tolerated that), yet she seemd to work fine with Logan. It almost seemed as if Logan enjoyed being parntered with someone that'd not take his word for granted and would argue with him.
Now I don't know anything about her background besides what I read on here - but from her comments in the ep I didn't gather she had kids? She said something about her neighbours birthday party or whatever... I'm definitely curious about how she'll evolve in the few episodes she has. To bad they didn't spice up Wheeler a little (and I definitely think they have to if she's to work opposite of Nichols, but that's a completely different topic).
I think though that Alicia Witt was cast a little too young. They still could've hired her ( I like her and her acting), but change her hair and dress a little, to make her look a little older and more experienced. It would've fitted better, I think. The acting seemed a little wooden at times (so did CN and EB) - I don't really know why, but I guess they were just settling into new dynamics.
Just one thing I don't understand about this ep... why did the bratty son take off his shirt?
|
|
|
Post by maherjunkie on Feb 17, 2009 13:20:26 GMT -5
I remember thinking he was just an arrogant jerk. I think the mothership ep that did this theme did it better, with a young Logan being more harsh ("Women are allowed to have other priorities!") (You'd think they'd get the hint!"). I love it when he says to Fallaci "You'll know when we're partners is when we don't have to ask each other a lot of questions." when she asks him if he wants kids. You could take that two ways.
She has 3 kids. And Logan in those shades! Damn!
|
|
|
Post by tjara on Feb 17, 2009 15:23:50 GMT -5
Aw, I was just about to ask what he said at that point. We lost it due to dubbing...
|
|