Criminal Law

 

By Hank 74

 

Joe-10/10

Ed-10/10

VB-10/10

Jack-10/10

Borgia-10/10

Arthur-9/10

Support-10/10

Plot-10/10

Performance-10/10

Value-10/10

 

Total-99/100

 

 

Notes:

 

Wow!!!  What a big, early feast for Thanksgiving!  This was a terrific episode and I can't wait for next week's with Van Buren front and center.  I feel about giving her a perfect 10 already in advance.

 

With regards to tonight's ep.  I was impressed by the tension throughout the hour wondering what is going to happen.  Will Jack get shot?  Will someone else get shot?  Will this creep Barnes get loose? 

 

Now I did mention in the SVU boards that I thought this might have been connected to Councilman Crossley from "Pride" since the actor for Crossley and Barnes was the same guy, Daniel Hugh Kelly.  I remember him from the mid 80's when he was on "Hardcastle and McCormick" with the late Brian Keith.  Kelly has been a terrific repeat offender on the franchise over the years and might now be right up there with David Groh as portraying the most creepiest and despised villains we've ever seen.  While I was teasing you with the possibility that this might be a continuation of the Crossley case, I didn't really think it was going to be like that for one main reason that I didn't mention.  Back then in "Pride", once the jury hung, Jack decided to not prosecute the case so as to not have homosexuality put back on trial.  So I though this was going to be a clean slate with Kelly playing a new person whom we can hate.

 

I loved the chemistry of the main actors and supporting cast throughout.  The reason why Arthur got a 9 was because he was on shortly, while probably raising more cane on SVU against Judge Donnelly and the like, and didn't say too much that stood out.  But I have to say this has to be the best ep right now for season 16 and who knows about next week.

 

The only missing thing that could have been added was having a shrink come in to see what kind of nut jobs we are dealing here with dad and Harlan.  Be it Olivet, Skoda, or Huang, someone with a PhD should have told everyone about what made this family snap and kill all these people, including Robert.  If I were Arthur, I would probably give him no more than man 2, 2 to 6 years, and a psych evaluation for killing his dad, considering all the hell he put his family through 9 years ago and what he tried to do now.  Heck, I might even do what he did two weeks ago and call the dogs off.  Arthur is a complexing figure.  Sometimes you like him, sometimes you don't.

 

I like to do comparisons with previous eps and in this case, the best one to mind is "American Dream" when Stone went after Phillip Swan in season 4.  In that one, it was Stone who was obsessed about keeping Swan in prison.  This time, it seemed that it was Barnes who was the more obsessed and wanted to get out of prison.  In both cases, you can see the clashes between the EADA and the perp that led to one blinking.   I also liked how the supporting members of the DA's team in both instances, played different roles.  Arthur and Adam didn't want their EADAs to get involved too much while Claire and Borgia were very supportive of their immediate supervisors.

 

I loved Jack with his hat and his "girlfriend"?  Oooh, should we be saying that?

 

Again, I can't wait to see next week's fireworks with Van Buren front and center.  Could this be a better performance than her classics like "Myth of Fingerprints" and "Competence"?

 

Back to Judicial Review

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1