Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Blue Bloods "Two of a Kind" 5/10/2024 (was: What Did You Watch?
 2024-05-10 (Friday))
Date: Sun, 12 May 2024 09:01:46 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 174
Message-ID: <20240512090146.0000220e@example.com>
References: <v1o3a0$23l1s$1@dont-email.me>
	<20240511152138.00003aaa@example.com>
	<v1orvj$29h0g$1@dont-email.me>
	<287142124.737173619.518782.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Injection-Date: Sun, 12 May 2024 15:01:50 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d6301b4750ccbd4f07f9dbb8bafed9cc";
	logging-data="2876659"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18MnKPYDlG3TRTvWL51WmUU93DcJvvJU5g="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:pnFGpFODpeK2fxpQGOHTkwPNU6w=
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 4.2.0 (GTK 3.24.41; x86_64-w64-mingw32)
X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 240511-6, 5/11/2024), Outbound message
Bytes: 9288

On Sat, 11 May 2024 19:53:22 -0700
anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:

> Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
> > Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
> >  =20
> >> Blue Bloods - the penultimate episode of season 14A. Season 14B
> >> will apparently be just 4 episodes unless the cast and producers
> >> of the show manage to convince CBS to un-cancel it. Frankly -
> >> forgive the inadvertent pun - if I was another network with some
> >> holes in my Friday night schedule, I'd look seriously at picking
> >> this up. Apparently, the ratings are still very strong (despite
> >> the ever-weaker writing) and everyone still wants to do it so why
> >> not?  =20
> >  =20
> >> As for plot, we see the first time in a very long time where
> >> Danny's plumper son finally got something to do but sit at the
> >> dinner table. After being robbed on campus, he and his dad set out
> >> to catch the robber. Also, Eddie and her partner untangle a
> >> landlord-tenant dispute that turns out to be more complicated than
> >> it appears. Erin discovers a legal aid attorney is not giving his
> >> client good advice and works to take down the attorney which has
> >> unexpected consequences for the client.  =20
>=20
> Even Erin says he=E2=80=99d have been better off rotting in prison withou=
t her
> help.
>=20
>=20
> Jamie and Joe Hill actually engage in some off-duty
> >> fisticuffs - with each other! - and Frank has to figure out how to
> >> make them get along.  =20
>=20
> Why are they even going to the same party anyway? Joe isn=E2=80=99t NYPD =
is
> he? How about assigning one of them to Staten Island?
>=20
>=20
> >=20
> > Gawd this was awful. None of the stories had anything resembling a
> > plot. Is Sean supposed to be at Columbia? The student robbery plot
> > was ridiculous. Danny tells Sean to wait till the next night, and
> > all he's going to have Sean do is wait at the police station for
> > the identity parade.  =20
>=20
> Note that Sean never saw the face of the guy who mugged him. It was
> the later guy who cut him that he could identify. So what good was he
> going to do at the first lineup?
>=20
At the time, I assumed that the mugger that cut Sean was the same one
who had mugged him, whose face Sean had not seen on that occasion. But
given the later revelation that the Security Chief apparently had
several accomplices, I am no longer confident that is right. If the
second mugger was a different guy, you're absolutely right: Sean would
not have been able to confirm that it was the guy who had mugged him.
In fact, if I'm right and Sean never saw his face during the first
mugging, Sean wouldn't have been much use at the lineup either,
although he might still have been able to identify the guy as someone
from the cafeteria.=20

Let's just agree that we've got some major plot holes in this episode!

Another thing they didn't even TRY to address is to explain why the
Security Chief would start his little crime ring. He was a retired cop
with 30 years on the job so presumably got a decent pension, plus the
salary and benefits on his new gig. Why would such an upstanding
citizen go to the Dark Side? Was he paying major alimony that he
couldn't keep up with? A drug or gambling problem? Or had he been dirty
even in his cop days and simply needed the thrill of getting away with
being crooked while in a uniform?=20

But of course there was a lot of plot in this episode and they needed
to focus on the Reagans so I can see them not having time for the
Security Chief's motivations.=20
>=20
> Instead Sean goes out that night, interferes with another
> > robbery in exactly the same spot, recognizes the robber as an
> > employee and gets stabbed. The victim thinks Sean saved her and he
> > gets a date. Fortunately for the purpose of Danny not having to do
> > any investigating, the perpetrator returns to work and gets
> > arrested. Based on the Law of Conservation of Characters, the
> > mastermind is the head of campus security who had recruited ex cons
> > for campus jobs then told them whom to rob. Not sure how he was
> > tracking student movement.
> >=20
> > Wow this script goes out of its way to make Edit massively stupid.
> > In the landlord-tenant dispute, once again, Edit immediately
> > sympathized with the landlady who claimed the tenant had threatened
> > her on several occassions but never once filed a complaint nor did
> > she try to force the tenant to move. She also lied to police about
> > her wherabouts. The case is blown wide open because Edit and
> > Badillo have found all of the stolen furniture and personal effects
> > in a storage locker rented by the tenants. This would have required
> > a moving truck that no one saw despite the florist across the
> > street watching every movement.
> >=20
> > I had no idea Edit had access to Penelope's couch database, now
> > updated to include storage space rental agreements.
> >=20
> > The wife was setting up the landlady out of revenge for the affair
> > she had with her husband, wrecking their marriage. Edit helpfully
> > opines that the husband, only, was at fault. Last I looked, it took
> > two to cheat. The only thing they can think of to charge the wife
> > with is making a false police report.
> >=20
> > Erin's story is beyond awful. She completely sympathizes with a
> > criminal who is facing numerous "possession of" charges as a
> > getaway driver, and offers the guy a ridiculous plea bargain, which
> > he rejects. Erin raises an objection at arraignment to the failure
> > to plead guilty.
> >=20
> > Can she do that? Obviously the defendant has a right to trial.
> >  =20
>=20
> When she first objected, I assumed the guy had taken the deal and
> recanted, but noooooooo
>=20
>=20
> > The defendant keeps insisting that he's innocent, that he had no
> > idea what his co-conspirator was going to put into his car. Well,
> > he KNEW it was a burglarly, so whatever was going to be put into
> > his car would be stolen goods. That's kind of how burglarly works.
> >=20
> > The defense lawyer is representing both conspirators but this
> > defendant is unaware of the enormous ethical conflict. Somehow his
> > fighting his own charges is better for the other defendant? It
> > makes no sense.
> >=20
> > Surely the two men would have been tried simultaneously and the
> > lawyer representing both couldn't have been hidden. Even if both
> > defendants waived conflict, the judge sure as hell would have said
> > something.
> >=20
> > For no particular reason, Joe Hill and Jamie get into a stupid
> > fight. Jamie is being such an ass that Joe is less unsympathetic.  =20
>=20
> Yes. And Jamie has taken another step back from becoming police
> commissioner.
>=20
> Why are two people who don=E2=80=99t like each other sitting together at =
the
> bar in a party anyway?
>=20
> Franks
> > threatens to make them ride together in uniform in the highest crime
> > beat at night but they end up walking during daylight on a street
> > without crime.
> >=20
> > I think I hit the lowlights. Was Baez even on episode? I don't
> > recall.=20
>=20
> She has a walk on when Danny is chasing the mugger through the
> kitchen and she blocks his exit. She=E2=80=99s back in the hallway and th=
ey
> didn=E2=80=99t even bother to light her.
>=20
> Let=E2=80=99s point out the Danny sees the guy (I don=E2=80=99t know how =
he knows
> what he looks like.) working in the dining hall. The guy has never
> seen Danny. Danny could=E2=80=99ve walked right up and hit him over the h=
ead
> with a frying pan. Instead, he starts shouting, his name across the
> room so they can have a chase. Yawn.
>=20
> You hit all the right points, but it=E2=80=99s almost as if you hadn=E2=
=80=99t read my
> review at all!
>=20
Sorry, I hadn't seen it when I wrote mine.


--=20
Rhino