|
Post by Patcat on Jul 3, 2009 11:30:13 GMT -5
Irene--I respect your reasoning regardin Eames' response to the "Did you sleep with him" question, but I can't agree that Eames did sleep with Kevin.
She's not in the habit of lying to Bobby. She's stressed to him how much it upsets her when he hides things from her, so I think she'd feel tremendous guilt if she were to be so hypocritical as to lie to him when she's called him on similar behavior.
My take is that she feels guilty for just wanting to sleep with Muldooney, partly because she realizes what a lousy person he is, parly because she's ashamed that she was willing to take comfort with anyone, but especially someone like Muldooney, and partly because she was ashamed to almost use someone--even someone as lousy as Muldooney--in that way.
While she's initially angered by Bobby's question, I also think Eames realizes why it has to be asked, and that's why she answers it later.
Patcat
|
|
Irene
Rookie
"You blew your chance."
Posts: 48
|
Post by Irene on Jul 3, 2009 13:23:03 GMT -5
Jeffan said: You raise the question of using "ambiguity" as a writer's technique -- yet how much of this will be due to the editing of the finished product?
In a production as long-running and tight as LOCI, the producers, writer, director and editor of each episode would all be on the same page. Editors, as a species, are probably the second most focused on storytelling, after the writer. They can affect the final product more than anyone else. For example, if the consensus is: this is our “relationship” episode for the season-- "keep it ambiguous for the sake of maintaining sexual tension", then that editor is going to splice more red herrings than the Fulton Fish Market into the cut. Things like an extra glance that wasn’t on the page, or extending a pause before someone answers, to make it look more tentative. Just know that everything is well-thought out and considered. In a production at this level, it is rare that there would be a single word, gesture, or blocking that was not absolutely intentional.
Patcat said: She's not in the habit of lying to Bobby. She's stressed to him how much it upsets her when he hides things from her, so I think she'd feel tremendous guilt if she were to be so hypocritical as to lie to him when she's called him on similar behavior.
Exactly. She’s NOT in the habit. That’s why she’s so conflicted. And, Goren is not in the habit of interrogating Eames like any common perp. Which is why when he does it, she reacts so strongly. As far as being hypocritical, no one likes dishonesty in others. That doesn’t mean one is honest all the time. Goren, the paragon of principles, “lied” to Eames in “Purgatory.” (Sure, to protect her. Now, I argue, Eames is protecting him.)
Ypomoni said: I really hope Eames wasn't lying to Goren.
Really? I think it makes her infinitely more interesting if she was. It’s one thing if Eames is righteous and dutiful and wants to catch the bad guys over everything else. I don’t need her to be goody two-shoes on top of that. I like my characters flawed.
I especially liked her reaction to Bobby's comment about being concerned. "For ME?" By the look on her face, it seemed that it was the first time during this episode that she figured out Bobby wasn't just trying to catch a killer no matter what, but he was in fact trying to do his best to make sure she too was alright.
Same here. That was lovely.
Ya know, these two can talk about labia and scrotums, semen and pubic hair, ejaculate and erotic asphyxiation, yet they can barely discuss the thought of either one of them having sex. It’s hilarious. Any normal working colleagues would’ve had this conversation:
Goren: You date him or something? Eames: Eeeyyeaah… It didn’t go down so well. Goren: Anything to do with the case? Eames: He blames me for losing. When I wouldn’t lie in deposition, he dumped me. Goren: A real stand-up guy. Eames: You’re telling me? I thought he’d be over it by now. Goren: I dunno. Something’s not quite right…with him. Eames: Yeah… (nodding) There is a weird vibe. Goren: …should keep an eye on that.
What a snooze-fest that would have been.
|
|
|
Post by ypomoni on Jul 3, 2009 13:45:31 GMT -5
They do indeed find it difficult to speak to each other about personal matters. It's hard to talk to someone about such matters when that someone rarely touches the subject (of their own personal life). Irene, you say it makes for a more interesting character if Eames was lying. I can see your reasoning. My angle is slightly twisted in this matter - I would find it more interesting if Bobby confront her about "her lying" in the future, only to realise she, once again, trusted him and told him the truth! Like I said, "twisted"....
|
|
|
Post by jeffan on Jul 3, 2009 18:45:45 GMT -5
Thank you for the response to my question Irene. Here's another!
Given the attention to detail in each episode, why, in your opinion, does USA air them out of the order in which they were written and filmed, thereby creating obvious discontunity?
|
|
|
Post by Patcat on Jul 3, 2009 20:31:27 GMT -5
Could someone clear up a point for me--Everyone seems to think that Muldooney was in Eames' home and went through her things. I thought he got her red blouse by stealing some of her laundry, but that he wasn't in her home. Could someone clarify that point?
My apologies for interrupting such a great discussion.
And if I could again gently (always gently, 'cause you may be right!) Irene--I don't think LOCI has that strong of a bible right now. Maybe during Balcer's reign, but much of it got thrown out during Leight's tenure.
Patcat
|
|
|
Post by mwendyr on Jul 3, 2009 20:40:59 GMT -5
Patcat, I believe that comes from the scene where you see someone take some undergarment from her drawer and pick up her wedding photo. It's clearly not Eames doing it -- painted nails, masculine fingers -- and that leads most to believe it was Mulrooney.
|
|
|
Post by jeffan on Jul 4, 2009 3:26:21 GMT -5
If I recall correctly Patcat -- he went to the cleaners dressed as a woman and collected Eames' clothing. His identity was not questioned.
|
|
|
Post by DonnaJo on Jul 4, 2009 6:54:05 GMT -5
If I recall correctly Patcat -- he went to the cleaners dressed as a woman and collected Eames' clothing. His identity was not questioned. I tend to agree with this assumption, but I wonder how he would only be allowed to retrieve the red silk blouse, and not the rest of her order, which she herself did pick up? Hmmm.... Another confusing thing was that according to Ross, the DA's office wanted Eames to withdraw from the case. Ross tells her that during their meeting. Having Eames withdraw would foil Mulrooney's quest for vengeance, so him asking that doesn't make any sense. And that scene when Mulrooney is dressing up in his black "Gabby" get up - other than maybe the face & hands, they definitely used a woman for that scene. Since we mostly see "Gabby" through the mirror, is it through Kevin's eyes? Is that how Kevin "thinks" he looks in his black vamp outfit?
|
|
|
Post by Patcat on Jul 4, 2009 14:24:51 GMT -5
I watched the episode again last night, and there is a scene where Mulrooney/Gaby is going through Eames' stuff. Which leads us to the question of how he got in there...
I can't blame the DA's office wanting Eames off the case. I also don't envy Ross having to tell the DA's office that one of their ADAs is a crossdressing, corpse desecrating, obsessed murderer.
Patcat
|
|
|
Post by anchoress on Jul 4, 2009 21:21:44 GMT -5
Hi all - first post.
Examining the topic of shippiness or not in this - or any other - episode, I wondered something when I read the (excellent) critical analysis in post number 27 that mentioned what the author viewed as a 'turning point' in season 4: I wonder to what degree the perceived arc of the entire series influences the inclination to insert shippiness, either by the writers, actors or editors. If the end of the series is up in the air, it makes the process of moving along canon relationships without jumping the shark much more challenging.
Wasn't there doubt during season four whether or not VDO would be returning for another season? And isn't there an interview with KE and VDO where they both basically say that they never expected the series to last 8 seasons? If there was doubt in season 4 whether the series would be continuing, the actors, writers etc might have felt free to explore shippiness a bit, then back off when the series was extended.
It reminds me of the '30 Rock' shippiness discussions: after season 1, head writer/lead actress Tina Fey (and others) said NO WAY NEVER to her and Alec Baldwin's character having even the slightest romantic involvement. After season 2, they both admitted that there was 'chemistry', but no way would anything happen on the show. This season they said "maybe, but if you see them kissing you know the show's been cancelled."
|
|
|
Post by tere on Jul 5, 2009 19:31:08 GMT -5
I watched the episode again last night, and there is a scene where Mulrooney/Gaby is going through Eames' stuff. Which leads us to the question of how he got in there... I definitely have to watch again . . . on first viewing, I saw the scene as the photo being in Mulrooney's house, not that he was in Eames' house. Of course, that raises some of the same questions.
|
|
|
Post by idget on Jul 5, 2009 20:05:09 GMT -5
Wow Irene I love your in depth analysis! Please keep it up. I am not a shipper, but I do look forward to watching Silver Linings again after reading your take on it. I, like some others have to disagree with your take on Eames' response to Bobby about did she sleep with him. I have a whole other take on it, something I'm surprised after being gone for a week someone else didn't already mention, because I think it explains a lot. I totally believed her when she said she would have, but I think she lied about the reason they didn't. I think she was embarrassed because they tried, but how can I put this, he was unable to perform. I think this, along with her unwillingness to lie about the witness' testimony soured their relationship. I think as the years went by and he was unable to be sexually aroused unless he was dressed in women's clothing increased his hatred of her. I think it also explains why he emasculated the victim. Here the victim was coming out of ice cold water and seeing what he thought was a woman aroused the victim and after "Gabby" killed him "Gabby" looked down and saw the victim's little man standing at attention it enraged him and he viciously cut it off with what was available, a broken bottle. Just some other comments on what has been written, I didn't have any problem with Bobby shoving the guy at the end, actually I am surprised after what he said about Eames and her mourning he didn't shove the guy sooner. What I found to be outside of Bobby's character was his comment, when He, Eames and Ross was watching the murder victim's TV segment and the murdered man said he would have more next week, Bobby commented sarcastically "I don't think so". I don't ever remember Bobby making fun of a murder victim, no matter how low down the victim was. I found that comment totally out of character for Bobby. I enjoyed Faith Yancy's appearance but I was surprised they didn't utilize her more. I could picture her on her TV show complaining about the police not trying to find the murderer because of the victims past. I was surprised she didn't try to get info out Goren and Eames when they were interviewing her. I can picture her using the murder for her own exposure and milking it for all it was worth. I also loved the humor in this episode. This goes to show that even with serious subjects you can still inject some appropriate humor. I think this is my favorite episode so far this season
|
|
|
Post by tjara on Jul 6, 2009 6:34:51 GMT -5
I don't think Eames was lying, either. Usually, when a TV character is lying, they do make it more obvious that they are, especially on topics like this. Now CI may be subtle, but even being subtle doesn't mean you don't get the idea. Remember when in "Badge" Goren said that he could vouch for the secretary? Well, we all got the idea why he could...
I think Eames hurt over the whole situation, Mulrooney came along at a time in his life when she was hurting, and Bobby's question caught her off guard.
I would also think that's it's a difference to talk about a personal life and to talk about past relationships, especially if they ended very sour. And it makes a difference if you're asked about it or if you start talking about it yourself.
It would be interesting to now what Kathryn Erbe thought when playing that scene.
|
|
|
Post by DonnaJo on Jul 6, 2009 7:53:19 GMT -5
I think as the years went by and he was unable to be sexually aroused unless he was dressed in women's clothing increased his hatred of her. I think it also explains why he emasculated the victim. Here the victim was coming out of ice cold water and seeing what he thought was a woman aroused the victim and after "Gabby" killed him "Gabby" looked down and saw the victim's little man standing at attention it enraged him and he viciously cut it off with what was available, a broken bottle. Very interesting, idget! I'm just not sure that if it were true (about Mulrooney's inability to perform sexually with Eames), that Eames would have lied about it to Goren? I guess I view her as brutally honest when confronted, even if it is totally embarrassing to her. Ummm.....as far as Boz being aroused when confronted with "Gabby," doesn't ice cold water prevent male arousal, and actually result in male "shrinkage" for a few minutes? And would Boz get immediately turned on by a fully dressed woman that looked like a guy in drag? Unless...does death, or the sudden fear of death, bring on an erection? That I wouldn't know. Either way, his genitals were exposed and seeing them enraged "Gabby." Another thing. When Mulrooney sees the mutilated genitals, he truly acts horrified. Does this mean that as Gabby, Mulrooney forgets what he did? Or was it just an act?
|
|
|
Post by Patcat on Jul 6, 2009 8:23:14 GMT -5
Idget;
What an interesting theory. I suppose technically if Muldooney couldn't perform, Alex didn't really "sleep with him". But I had the impression Muldooney suffered some sort of breakdown after this case, not during it.
My understanding is that death results in an erection sometimes, but Muldooney/Gabby might not know that.
And I'm not sure Muldooney was completely lost in his persona of Gabby. If he was, he's got a good case for an insanity plea.
If this case goes to trial, it's not going to be pleasant for Eames.
Patcat
|
|