Wolfshades

Thank you Fay for your quite reasonable reaction. I think one can't really argue with audience effect - which you outlined so effectively. If you're bored with the presentation, you're bored, and there's just no arguing that - and writers are well advised to pay attention. I think some of the elements you mentioned - mostly about how the team dynamics have changed - have had a different effect for me as a spectator. The one thing I've been reading from so many people is that the show isn't what they're used to watching. It has changed. And maybe that's the attraction for me, because they're right: it has changed, no about about it. I like the new dynamic, but agree it's not the same show we're used to seeing. The sexual tension between Tony and Ziva is gone, and now there's no new target for Tony. He's also changed in that he's no longer the butt of jokes, and no longer the clown. His irreverent observations have matured into something we can respect, and we're now getting the full force of his love of movies. I had wanted him to become more of the strong silent agent we saw in "Shiva", but that's not what happened. It's a new show, for sure, and therefore a lot of folk don't like it. I do. I think maybe because I was getting bored with the old team dynamics in last season.

Wolfshades

That pompous doctor reminded me of a pathologist Canada, who was tried and convicted of doctoring all kinds of evidence in order to obtain convictions. His name (for those interested in googling him) is Charles Randal Smith. His "evidence" managed to put away all kinds of innocent men and women for the death of their children. The Blue Bloods doc seems patterned off of him, especially with his statement to Erin about being counted on to bring convictions. That should have set off warning bells right there.

Wolfshades
Criminal Minds Review: Killing Cousin

Thanks for that, Meaghan. I did a search for that kind of thing and couldn't find anything.

Wolfshades
NCIS Review: All Part of the Job

I would've said yes too. But that would be cheating, because I've already done it - so it wouldn't be a surprise. : )

Wolfshades
NCIS Round Table: "Monsters and Men"

Milton, as a supervisor I'm more concerned about results than I am about deportment. If she got the job done, regardless of her personal quirks, I have no problem.

Wolfshades
NCIS Review: Third Eye Dead

@MissUnderstood: likewise! : )

Wolfshades
NCIS Review: Third Eye Dead

I think real life is the only valid way of determining the believability of a situation or behaviour. When a show shows something that wouldn't happen in real life, the ability to suspend disbelief becomes strained.

Wolfshades
NCIS Review: Third Eye Dead

Historically, on the show, you're right. None of them would ever tell Gibbs to "hold up a minute" or suggest he might be wrong. In real life, it happens with various bosses - and so I guess that's where I'm coming from. I would avoid telling a micro-managing boss that he might be wrong, but I would tell someone like Gibbs that (although it wouldn't be "you're wrong" so much as "have you considered that this other way might work". Something politic.) Workplace dynamics are always so interesting to watch. I know others see it differently but I just don't see Gibbs losing any status at all by considering other options offered by Bishop. A good boss wouldn't be threatened by her behaviour but would learn how to channel it for the sake of the team, and more importantly, for the sake of getting the job done.

Wolfshades
NCIS Review: Third Eye Dead

Do you really think that's true? Gibbs never smacked Tony for stating a case-related bit of information - he always got the slap for offering smartass remarks. I don't recall Tony ever vehemently disagreeing with Gibbs about anything important though. (Maybe someone else here has - my memory's not that great sometimes). On a side note, I've noticed lately that Tony is getting away with making funny comments, without fear of Gibbs. Seems more grownup somehow.

Wolfshades
NCIS Review: Third Eye Dead

Hi Fay. I think you've stated your position quite well - and it's far and away a much better description of some of the problems with the new dynamic. And I especially appreciate what you're saying because for a long time I've been wondering why there seems to be such a strong reaction to Bishop. I guess the bottom line is: the writers are taking a decisive risk. They do so whenever they shake everything up as they have here. It seemed for a few years that the only background dynamic seemed to be about whether Tony and Ziva would ever acknowledge the romantic tension that the viewers all did - and the foreground was always about the case of the week. Now that tension is gone, and something has to take its place. Enter Bishop. I'm certain the show will lose viewers as a result, but I'm just as sure new ones will come along. But…that's me, gazing through my cloudy crystal ball. What I have to say and $5.00 will get you a coffee. : ) Stay tuned though: our Round Table on this episode will include some hard questions about Bishop. And thank you for commenting.

x Close Ad