There are 2 messages totalling 111 lines in this issue. Topics of the day: 1. Episode Discussion: Capital Offense (2) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 23:13:35 -0800 From: "Amy R." <akr@l.......> Subject: Re: Episode Discussion: Capital Offense In Friday's digest, Deborah Clarke <deb121clarke@r.......> wrote: > >>That little bit ruined the whole episode for me.<< Nick getting away with breaking lots of procedures and perhaps contributing negligently to homicide is just a "little bit"? ;-) Well, yes, in "Capitol Offense," it is, because, as we know, the bigger reality-defying problem in this episode is that Canada would never extradite someone who faces the death penalty. It's against the law. If "Capitol Offense" had happened in the real Toronto, Laura Garfield would probably be behind bars in a Canadian prison to this day, as I understand it. They wouldn't ship her home until Texas gave up the death penalty -- which is to say, never. But despite that famous blunder nomination for the wall of shame, I really do love two things about "Capitol Offense." One is Nick and Natalie's chat in the morgue as she retrieves her scrunchie. In that scene, we learn that 1) Natalie and Nick canonically have all-night conversations, and 2) Nick opposes the death penalty, which is not only the "vampire against death" irony that Natalie points out, but also a dynamic setting him in opposition to Janette's favoring of eye-for-an-eye revenge, and also supporting his faith in the possibility of redemption through repentance for anyone -- even himself. This scene is a favorite. The other thing I've come to love about "Capitol Offense" over the years is Lacroix's almost schizophrenic contradiction over Marise. He tells Nick that Nick must trust Lacroix, that only Lacroix can be trusted, and then he immediately, blatantly, brutally breaks a promise and shows that he is _not_ to be trusted, that nothing he says can be trusted in the least, by murdering Marise. It's horrid, and I cringe away or argue back at the screen knowing it's coming, but it's also part of an important pattern. The "Capitol Offense" flashback fits smoothly with the flashback of "Father Figure," for example, where Lacroix's friend Thomas tricks Nick and murders his friend Helen Ruskin-Slater, or "Father's Day," where he slams Nick around, bullies Janette, and follows Nick to the ends of the earth. Flashbacks in this strain exhibit why Nick feels the way he does about Lacroix. Nick is not misguided to feel so; Lacroix has diligently taught Nick to feel that way. (I say "come to love about" CO, because I used to dismiss it, even dislike it. I used to find the contradictions hard to reconcile, and the errors hard to overlook. I've mellowed, maybe? I know I appreciate the cop plots of many episodes much more than I used to, even those more at odds with reality than the norm.) Just some thoughts. :-) I admit I haven't rewatched the episode yet for this discussion. Have I misremembered? Should I be looking from a different angle? Amy R. akr@l....... FK Site: http://users.LMI.net/akr/fk/ FK Blog: http://brightknightie.livejournal.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2008 02:16:16 -0700 From: Walt <wdoherty5@c.......> Subject: Re: Episode Discussion: Capital Offense ----- Original Message ----- From: "Amy R." <akr@l.......> > > Just some thoughts. :-) I admit I haven't rewatched the > episode yet for this discussion. Have I misremembered? Should I be > looking from a different angle? > No, I'd say your memory is pretty good. It kind of bugs me that police procedures are so blatantly ignored or run rough shod over. A woman as presumably dangerous as Laura would never be taken to the airport in Nick's open convertible. That she conked the police women over the head, got up to the guys apt. and shot him is, I think, directly attributable to Nick, and he would be held responsible for it. On the other hand, it's television, and it makes for a more dramatic story. Plus, we really are not watching it because of its police procuderal values. :-) In addition, I've discovered (having the DVDs and watching at least one story every night) that even the stories I don't care for will have some small paericular value: a scene between Schanke and Janette, Nick getting Merlin to update his computer files (and we find out Nick's birthday is Jan. 1 - well, at least, maybe). Walt Doherty Phoenix, AZ ------------------------------ End of FORKNI-L Digest - 1 Feb 2008 to 2 Feb 2008 (#2008-29) ************************************************************
Previous |
This month's list |
Next |