Monsters of Television

“What could be more Darwinian?”

It’s a rerun for CBS (and for many watching), but it’s New To Me (TM Jamie Weinman at Macleans). Last week, I tuned into “Hi”, a seemingly pivotal episode for the narrative and the show’s highest rated episode yet. I enjoyed the episode enough to make it part of my regular viewing, so I eagerly awaited another episode, even if it be a rerun.

This was a little bit more what I was expecting from the show when I tuned in last week: bits of courtroom stuff and law firm stuff, the on-going B-plot with Peter, and C-plots with Alicia’s kids.

From a purely narrative point of view, the episode balances its plots very well. The struggle between Alicia and Kerry in the witness prep sessions was enjoyable and smart, showing the cutthroat nature of the position that both are in. It never felt like their scenes rested on gender politics, as a mutual respect, however grudging, existed between the two of them. It was refreshing to have that. Equally, the show provides a nice, possible end point for their relationship in Will and Diane, colleagues who have developed a trust and short-hand between one another.

The stuff with Peter’s bail hearing was interesting, if only for Chris Noth’s work in the scenes. Noth is a natural for a politician role, with that boyish smile and John Edwards-inspired hair (indeed, the role seems more Edwards than Spitzer). Peter’s confidence in his position seems awkward, but hopefully that plays out across the 5 episode gap I have between this and “Hi.” Wisely, even Peter’s story isn’t totally about him — it’s about Alicia. Her scene on the witlessness stand puts into better focus her uncertainty about having Peter return, something that came through in “Hi”, and I imagine will reach a head when the show returns.

The C-plot with the kids finding incriminating photos and videos of their father didn’t work as well for me. It allows the kids to be a part of the on-going arc of the show without having to write some sort of school or personal life crisis that Alicia must fix each week. It’s a lot of pressure on the writers to keep that material fresh, though by the end I was frustrated with the daughter’s insistence on turning over the evidence and the son’s still unshattered hero worship of his father. Perhaps is falls apart in the next episode?

From a procedural prospective, it’s nice watching a lawyer-centric one again. I’m consistently reminds of how non-cop-centric procedurals place people in the position of police to further the plot (the police should’ve checked that bit about the auditorium’s cell phone scrambling), and get the reveal of the true culprit. That the firm then pulls a semi-Plan B from The Practice (casting blame on an innocent person to create reasonable doubt), but here casting blame on the (unsuspecting) guilty person in court to fully exonerate their client. (It would’ve been simpler to turn this information over to the police.)

Margulies grew on me in leaps and bounds this episode. Admittedly, the juicy scene where she rips into the ADA on the witness stand is the kind of stuff actors in procedurals dream of (and that Criminal Intent is now built around), but the scene following it, with Alicia and her son in the car, balances that, softening her a bit from the battle-hardened wife/lawyer. It wasn’t a complete softening, thank goodness, but enough of one that it gives Alicia some range.

My final bit, and perhaps some fans can speak to this if they’ve noticed, but the show seems pretty interested in photography and digital video. I had hoped that much of the witness prep would’ve remained from the POV of the digital camera, though perhaps too much of a stylistic quirk fro the show. That being said, from the kids’ use of video to spy on their own door (good use of the new iPod Nano) to hiding incriminating photos in a picture frame to the use of photography with the show’s opening title cards (made to look like magazine photos) to the promo for the next new episode using flashbulbs and a corresponding sound effect makes me wonder what the show is trying to do with this. Daniel, at some point, says  “The truth can make it sound truer.” (or something like that), and I wonder what role photography plays in all that, if any at all.

FINAL THOUGHTS

• I sure hope Kalinda gets paid well. She’s a paralegal and P.I. for the firm.
• The show continues the stereotype that academics like to ramble on and on about inconsequential details, though this time the rambling is perhaps motivated out of guilt and a desire to bury people in information and…I’ve said more than 8 words, haven’t I?
• While the political aspect of the show with Peter is fascinating, I’m glad it’s not front and center, as I would get bored of guessing who would betray Peter next.
• More Will and Diane, please.