Kim tells Jimmy she does not want to follow through on blackmailing Kevin and wants to reach a settlement between Mesa Verde and Everett Acker. Jimmy agrees, but at the meeting to finalize the settlement, he stuns everyone by asking for $4 million. Kim's insight into Sobchak's photos is that Mesa Verde's logo was inspired by a photograph the bank never obtained permission to use. Jimmy pressures Kevin by threatening an injunction against displaying the logo and threatening to run TV ads seeking plaintiffs for class action suits against the bank which negatively depict Kevin's father. Kevin meets privately with Jimmy and accepts a deal to pay Acker and the photographer. Kim angrily confronts Jimmy, upset that he made her the \"sucker\" for his con. However, she suggests they get married. Gus, Victor, and Mike meet with Nacho, who reports Lalo's plan to reveal the locations of Gus's street dealers to the DEA. Gus directs Victor to give up low-level employees while ensuring nothing leads back to Gus. Mike secretly points the police to Lalo's involvement in the murder of Fred, the money wire clerk, and they converge on Lalo while he is driving. (\"Wexler v. Goodman\")
Unfortunately, Noah misses the mark with the wire and that causes Larry to give up, intentionally stopping the treadmill so he collapses for a second time. April helps her brother unstick the wire and get it placed properly, bringing Larry back to consciousness. They get him to the hospital, and the show skips over the rest of his story. At least Chicago Med gives us a reference to Dr. Isidore Latham when telling Noah, April and the audience that Larry will be fine.
Out here in what they call Kentuckiana--just above the border in Indiana--we find Maker's Mark quite effective with IKEA furniture, too.As always, great analysis. And I think you may be right about romanticizing the previous seasons. I tended to watch each season all at once--thank you, DVD--but the fifth season didn't seem too rushed to me. I'd have liked a little more room for some stories, but in terms of the pacing of the actual here-is-the-main-story plot, I thought it stood up pretty well with the rest of the series.
I knew this would happen. I watched episode 1 on the Thursday night before the first review post. Now...I'm on the final episode of season 2! I just can't stop. I'm going to be done re-watching the SERIES before Alan is done reviewing season 1.Nevertheless, I love the reviews. Nice work!
I have been re-watching from the start, as well -- just about to start season 3 again. And while watching the early seasons, I also re-evaluated season 5 to see if I'd been fair on it.The thing is, I think they painted themselves into a corner with the story they wanted to tell. The plot with Marlo was fine, most people liked it a great deal. But the newspaper bit, which was so widely loathed, mostly seemed to fail because the story they THOUGHT they were telling (about how even the noblest newspapermen were missing the real stories of Baltimore, how disconnected the news media was from the lives of the people in the streets) wasn't the story most of us saw (an oversimplified conflict between a near-perfect editor and the boo-hiss lying reporter, a cliche story we've seen before).But take out the lying reporter, and you lose the great black comedy of the way his lies connect with McNulty's. Take out McNulty's lies, and you lose the story they really wanted to tell, which was the meta-story about what the public expects from cops, from the news, and what it will listen to and what it won't. Ultimately, they decided that season 5 would be a little more self-aware and a little less \"realistic\" so they could ruminate on what kinds of things we watch and what kinds of things we don't. It was worth doing, and I guess they felt after 4 seasons they'd already said enough about the inner-city street life in and of itself. It was a neat idea -- just didn't quite come together...
I too started watching Season One when Alan started these recaps and whipped right through. Haven't go on to 2 yet, but will soon.I'm looking forward to rewatching Season 5 on DVD. I suspect that watching it on DVD (as I initially watched all the previous seasons) will be much more satisfying than seeing i unfold every week. Did anyone else see that the Wire made it to the semi-final list of the Emmy nominations Promising.
Avon's paranoia reminds me of an article I read long ago by a Washington, DC psychiatrist. Among the shrink's patients were a number of members of the intelligence community who'd come to him to be treated for paranoia. He diagnosed them with actual, clinical paranoia, but found it difficult to treat them in the usual way. This would be via the \"talking cure,\" reasoning with them at length over months.The problem was that he couldn't convince them that they were not being followed everywhere because, in fact, they *were* being followed everywhere. He created a new clinical classification he called \"justified paranoia.\" The act of being under constant surveillance can trigger latent paranoia in them, a paranoia almost impossible to treat.I'm greatly enjoying the insight of Alan and the commenters, but I'm afraid that I, too, can't wait for one episode a week. I want to run through all five seasons right way. I want to read the novel.Going back and starting over makes for a much richer viewing experience (for me). I know who everyone is and can appreciate the inter-character interplay far more.spb
re: Marlo's paranoia. Other than talking outdoors, he didn't really show much paranoia about the police at first. Remember, he and Monk were still using cell phones at the beginning of season 4 It was Prop Joe that taught Marlo how to be properly paranoid.
Bunk's \"searing critique\" was a frustrated response to Omar's pointing out to him that the institution he chooses to serve doesn't even count Tosha's death as significant; there was no victim to speak of. Bunk's fulmination about violence rippling out and destroying communities is history. The destruction of communities wrought by the violence associated with the drug trade and the war on drugs was already done. Now the two symbiotic institutions, the drug trade and the police, play out their destructive games and nothing ever really changes. That is the reality Omar inhabits. The glorification of violence is an effect, not a cause.Omar isn't involved in the preservation of an institution that participates in perpetuating the cycles of violence and despair. Bunk is. He serves the BPD and so the aptness of Omar's response to Bunk's outburst: the return of Dozerman's gun. Tosha isn't a taxpayer so she doesn't count. The gun is what the BPD is concerned about, as Landsman reminds Bunk: \"she's still dead in a zip code that does not fucking matter and you still owe me a departmental-issue nine.\" Omar proves his point with his \"gift\" and I think the searing critique really comes from Bunk for Bunk via the returned gun: Bunk's look of misery as he and Dozerman are puppetted on stage by their masters who thank the citizens of Baltimore for their help in the critically important achievement of the recovery of the gun. \"Bunk, shame on you, lad.\" No strings on Omar's arms. And that's the point. All freedom is relative and in the thematic world of \"The Wire\", freedom is relative to the controlling institutions. Because Omar is not beholden to these institutions he is free to construct his own morality and bind himself to it by choice. \"The ties that bind him down were of his own making and his own personal way of being,\" as Ed Burns put it. That doesn't mean he doesn't live in the world, nor does it mean he can walk away from the world he lives in. It's a question of how he chooses to live in that world, and he's chosen to live as a rebel. As David Simon said, Omar's life was one of rebellion against the forces controlling his world and \"that's a hard way to live.\" Omar is not tied to the drug trade he rebels against. He could stickup much easier targets. He chooses to go after drug dealers and the bigger, and therefore harder, the target the more he enjoys his triumphs. He religiously observes a boundary between drug-related activities (The Game) and legitimate business activities, to the point of comedy in his dealings with Old Face Andre and Proposition Joe and their business fronts in season 4. He takes care to avoid risk to \"taxpayers\". Nobody makes him do any of this. The ties that bind him are not of any institution. They reflect who he is and how he chooses to be. In that he is free.Dante and Brandon were not soft. They were two tough, courageous young men. It wasn't sugar-water running through their veins. Omar expected and respected courage, as Renaldo found out when Omar suggested he wear a full-body bunny suit if he was scared of being made. But given the life he led, Omar couldn't choose to partner personally with someone he felt couldn't handle the concomitant \"professional\" life. As he told McNulty and Kima, \"Look, in my game you take some kid, you play it the safest way you can, but it ain't about no hiding forever.\" If Brandon and Dante wanted the thrill of danger, in their world it's around every corner. I would think a couple of young gay men might be attracted rather by Omar's strength, loyalty, tenderness, respectfulness, humor ... a lot of things, including his heroism. They might even be, ghast, sexually attracted to him. Trying to tie up Brandon and Dante with a little boy playing the local version of Cowboys and Indians seems to me well off the mark.
Bosch: Legacy is streaming now on Amazon Freevee and Prime Video. Season 1 continues some plot lines from season 7 of Bosch, and pulls main plotlines from The Wrong Side Of Goodbye. Bosch: Legacy has been renewed for season 2 and will use The Crossing (2015) as the main storyline. 1e1e36bf2d