AVS Forum banner

941 - 960 of 975 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,512 Posts
Did anyone else find the most recent episode (3/6) to be one of the stranger, confusing episodes they've ever done?

The situation with Jamie and his stolen vest. No one else was looking out for him, like he had the plague. I would think internal affairs would be more interested in finding out who stole the vest than trying to railroad Jamie.

I never got the interest between Erin and the perp looking to make some kind of deal. The whole dynamic of the story and how they shot the scenes were just weird.

Then there's Frank and Ed Asner's character. First, I hated seeing Asner look as bad as he did. It made Selleck look like a spring chicken. Second, I never got the intent of the story. As I understand it, some punk that robbed Asner was allowed to come back to his place to inspect something. I didn't get that, it made no sense unless I totally misunderstood. If there is such a law and they were trying to point out how stupid that is, they could have done a better job of explaining it.

The only storyline that made any sense was the one with Danny and I didn't like how it was written and I didn't like any of the characters.

The accused and his attorney are allowed to inspect the scene of his alleged crime - maybe to spot something that could help his case. It wouldn't have been an issue if Asner was able to leave the premises. But that being the case, the accused was taking advantage to intimidate him.



The lame thing about Danny's case was how the girl who always carried her dog left it on the sidewalk before conveniently stepping in front of the speeding car. Not really that tragic when you think about it - if she's that unaware of the dangers of NYC traffic how on earth did she survive as long as she did?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
804 Posts
Did anyone else find the most recent episode (3/6) to be one of the stranger, confusing episodes they've ever done?
Yep. It was if it was written and edited by the Blue Bloods 'C' team. Stories were hard to follow and then wrapped up in a hurry in the final 2 minutes.

Not one of their finer episodes.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
23,017 Posts
Discussion Starter #943
Did anyone else find the most recent episode (3/6) to be one of the stranger, confusing episodes they've ever done?

The situation with Jamie and his stolen vest. No one else was looking out for him, like he had the plague. I would think internal affairs would be more interested in finding out who stole the vest than trying to railroad Jamie.

I never got the interest between Erin and the perp looking to make some kind of deal. The whole dynamic of the story and how they shot the scenes were just weird.

Then there's Frank and Ed Asner's character. First, I hated seeing Asner look as bad as he did. It made Selleck look like a spring chicken. Second, I never got the intent of the story. As I understand it, some punk that robbed Asner was allowed to come back to his place to inspect something. I didn't get that, it made no sense unless I totally misunderstood. If there is such a law and they were trying to point out how stupid that is, they could have done a better job of explaining it.

The only storyline that made any sense was the one with Danny and I didn't like how it was written and I didn't like any of the characters.
It probably has something to do with this: https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion...0190603-7dczo26lu5fc7e46wvny4chfyy-story.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,606 Posts
Wife and I turned to each other after the episode and remarked that it was disjointed & confusing. We're aware of the NYC law. The episode was poorly written and directed. Sub-par.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
888 Posts
The show this week seemed rather "blah" to me. Jamie/Eddie get a dog. Frank manages to get more cops out of the mayor. Danny catches a kid that's been defacing cars. Erin gets Nicki back for a visit and unloads on her ex. Then, at the end, it appears she really likes him again.

IMO, it was a boring episode.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
888 Posts
So–there is a new, unknown (till now) grandson in the mix ("Joe"). Is he going to be a fixture at the dinner table now? Or, will he be referenced/shown only occasionally? What is your opinion?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,024 Posts
My guess is he will be in the mix. With Erin's daughter gone there's an empty chair at the dinner table. I still enjoy the show after all these years. My only problem is Jamie and Janko being assigned to the same precinct. I know it's for continuity but it does break the realism barrier.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,512 Posts
I must have missed something - Joe had a son?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
390 Posts
My guess is he will be in the mix. With Erin's daughter gone there's an empty chair at the dinner table. I still enjoy the show after all these years. My only problem is Jamie and Janko being assigned to the same precinct. I know it's for continuity but it does break the realism barrier.
I agree he will be in the mix. And, there are 3 who have left (Linda, Nicky, and Jack) and only one added (Eddie).

Joe will be a near regular.

Does anyone think his mother will eventually warm up and "join" the family from time to time?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
888 Posts
Wahlberg

It appears that "Danny" (Wahlberg) is wearing a hairpiece this last season. Has anybody else noticed this? Just curious.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
611 Posts
I don’t know what LIT is either (I’m acronym challenged), but I’ve been wondering too how they are going to address the obvious turmoil in NYC regarding the NYPD, the Commie mayor, the riots and the racial demands to hamstring the police. They cannot ignore it and their principals are whiter than white.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,148 Posts
It's Lit

An old slang word made new again

Lit has been used as slang for over a century, but it used to be slang for "drunk." Now, "lit" has taken on a new slang meaning describing something that is "exciting or excellent."

If you watched the Olympics and were on Twitter, you likely know that comedian Leslie Jones was posting her own commentary. The universal consensus: Leslie’s commentary was lit.

Older Slang Usage of Lit

The slang lit has a long history. Its earliest meaning is “intoxicated,” and that shows up in English as far back as the 1910s:

We walked into the vamp's house. We all got lit and had a hell of a time. —John McGavock Grider, War Birds: Diary of an Unknown Aviator, 1918

This particular use of lit comes from the original use of lit to refer to something that is illumined or has light shining on it (from the past tense of the verb light). It sounds like a semantic stretch, but it’s not: lit and lit up are often used to refer to the look on someone’s face when they are suddenly made happy by something, and there’s no denying that many people feel or look similarly happy when under the influence.

Though the “drunk” meaning of lit has a pedigree stretching back over a century, it is still considered slang: it doesn’t have the same sort of all-purpose use that drunk does, and it still shows up generally in very informal settings, like speech and rap lyrics. In fact, the “intoxicated” sense of lit has had a resurgence of use among a new generation of youth thanks in no small part to rap.

New Meaning of Lit

Rap has also given us a new meaning of lit. In the last ten or so years, lit has transitioned from being applied to the act of intoxicating ("gonna get lit") to the environment of those who are lit ("party's lit"). The wildness of such parties has led to lit gaining the meaning “exciting,” as well as a broader meaning along the lines of “excellent” (“Leslie Jones's commentary on the Olympics was lit"). We have evidence of the “exciting” and “excellent” meanings way back to 2004, and earlier use is likely—slang is often spoken long before it’s written down. This extended meaning of lit is a favorite on social media like Twitter:

Unlike the earlier “intoxicated sense,” this meaning is just starting to make the leap from personal messages to edited prose.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/lit-meaning-origin
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
888 Posts
The new season started this week. These are some observations I had.

"Garret" (Gregory Jbara) REALLY TONED UP! He has taken off more weight and appears more "physical" than he used to.

"Baker" (Abigail Hawk) looks MARVELOUS! I don't know if it is different makeup or something else. But, she appears (to me) to be MUCH more attractive now than she used to appear. And, she never (in the past) was unattractive to begin with.

I didn't see "Nicky" (Sami Gayle) at the dinner table and I did not notice her name in the credits. Maybe she is gone for good. IMO, she never added much to the show at any time--no loss.

Speaking of the dinner table--it sure looked empty. I was wondering how they were going to fill it up. Well, "Danny" (Donnie Wahlberg) took care of that. He brought "Baez" (Marisa Ramirez} with him to dinner. I was hoping that they would not get romantically involved. I would have rather seen them stay "just work partners".
And, to how they got close in this episode, they were obviously locked in a basement together. Why didn't Wahlberg use the two pistols they had between them (I believe this model can hold up to 15 rounds, for a total of 30 rounds) and BLOW A HOLE IN THE DOOR? But,logically, if he had done that, they would not have gotten "close".

I see they are working the "lost" grandson into the story.

And, has anybody else noticed that it is RARE to see "Frank" (Tom Selleck) walking in any scene? All the other characters are walking most of the time. He is now always seated in the different scenes. Is this by design or does Selleck have some sort of a physical problem?

And, personally, I wish they would quit having Whoopi Goldberg on the show. She grates on my nerves.

Anyway, these are just things I noticed. Anybody else have comments about this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,749 Posts
Yeah, I was against Baez being the love interest, as they have already done that on the show. Was hoping that he would get together with the woman who was a "seer" (ended up in a trunk) and guest starred for a few episodes. That mismatch of personalities would have been ripe with story lines ... but, alas, it appears that is not in the cards.

That said, Danny and Baez haven't done the deed yet, so there is still hope!

The whole "I have a gun, but I'm powerless" theme was just bad writing. If nothing else, when somebody rang the doorbell, a shot would have alerted them, instead of the stupid banging on a pipe scenario.

Baker looks pregnant to me, thus giving her a more robust figure. I could be wrong. IMO, she's been a hot commodity since the beginning.

Don't miss Nicky or the absent second son, either. Not much there to help the story lines or main character development.

Selleck is getting old, despite the hair dye ... no idea if he has leg issues. I guess we'll see over time.

Garrett is, indeed, looking fit (comparatively). His character seems to be more outspoken, as well (small sample size), so testosterone is certainly his acting partner!

Oh, and Whoopie is always an irritant. That's her shtick.
 
941 - 960 of 975 Posts
Top