Jump to content

S01.E03: See Something 2017.03.07

A special Tuesday airing this week (apart from the regular Sunday slot) which airs at 10:00 p.m. ET:

When a Muslim grad student is brutally murdered, Stone and the team arrest his friend, another Muslim student, who claims he committed murder to prevent a terrorist attack. The jury must decide whether he's a killer or a hero.

0

Share Post


Link to post

Best episode so far. Loved the courtroom scenes, very good trial, the case was very reminiscent to me of an original L&O episode called Patriot, if anyone remembers it I'm sure you noticed the similarities, about a defendant who kills a Muslim guy who is apparently a terrorist. The closing argument from McCoy in that one  was very similar to Stone's in this one. Very strong episode overall, I liked the defense lawyer a lot as well, he was entertaining and very good. I was in suspense the whole way through, and I was unsure of whether I wanted the defendant to be found guilty or not. Very good, unbiased writing IMO, it took a good look at issues surrounding Muslims and political correctness and terrorism that are prominent issues today but without being preachy or picking a side really, the original L&O was always great at that and this episode was as well. 

Of course we still got a Voight appearance, which was totally unnecessary, but it least there was no tie in to PD and it was just pretrial hearing testimony. Hopefully this will be the end of PD appearances for a while, this show can definitely stand on its own. 

I would like a little more of the head DA, he is good but I would like more characterization and scenes with him, he doesn't quite have the personality of his counterparts from L&O but I hope we get more of him. 

1

Share Post


Link to post

I really liked it, definitely the best episode so far and also the most like classic Law & Order in style and structure (with a touch of Trial by Jury as well, I thought). The plot kept me guessing and I too think it did a good job of tackling controversial subjects without being either preachy or sensationalist.

The main characters are starting to come into their own, too, and making for an interesting team. The only one I'm not really keen on yet at all is Anna; she's a little too cardboard pretty assistant, like they want her to be a Claire or Abbie and I don't see any personality there yet for it (the next episode looks like it focuses more on her, so, I guess that will be the test for me.

Overall this show has me excited right now. It satisfies that jones I get for a good police/legal procedural like L&O, and is certainly outshining the current state of SVU in the writing department.

1

Share Post


Link to post
1 hour ago, sockii said:

 The only one I'm not really keen on yet at all is Anna; she's a little too cardboard pretty assistant, like they want her to be a Claire or Abbie and I don't see any personality there yet for it (the next episode looks like it focuses more on her, so, I guess that will be the test for me.

The "inexperienced padewan" anvil has been dropped a few times so her "growth" should be gradual...Hopefully, Stone Jr is not a spiritual son of McCoy and avoids "getting involved" with subordinates....

1

Share Post


Link to post
2 hours ago, sockii said:

I really liked it, definitely the best episode so far and also the most like classic Law & Order in style and structure (with a touch of Trial by Jury as well, I thought). The plot kept me guessing and I too think it did a good job of tackling controversial subjects without being either preachy or sensationalist.

The main characters are starting to come into their own, too, and making for an interesting team. The only one I'm not really keen on yet at all is Anna; she's a little too cardboard pretty assistant, like they want her to be a Claire or Abbie and I don't see any personality there yet for it (the next episode looks like it focuses more on her, so, I guess that will be the test for me.

Overall this show has me excited right now. It satisfies that jones I get for a good police/legal procedural like L&O, and is certainly outshining the current state of SVU in the writing department.

I totally agree.  I was a bit on the fence after the first 2 episodes, but this one was very good.  I liked that they got political, but it was still subtle, and addresses tough issues in a way that made me go, "huh... they have a point here..."  

I'm not too keen on either of the two women right now, but they aren't bad.  They just don't stand out in any way.  I'm sure they'll get better stories soon.

1

Share Post


Link to post

I'm not really sure why there has to be two investigators for the State's Attorney's office. We know from The Good Wife that one sufficiently badass investigator can solve a case all on his or her own. :-)

But seriously, I care about Antonio because I know him from Chicago PD. I've got no sense at all on the female investigator.

If I had it my way, this show wouldn't just be about murder all the time just like Chicago Med isn't all about traumatic injuries or Chicago Fire isn't all about fires. There are a lot of things that the State's Attorney's office does besides murder. The story surrounding the Baltimore City Detention Center would make an excellent episode.

But this isn't my show, so I'll just have to get used to the idea that every case is going to be a murder case. And as such things go, I thought it was pretty good. I don't know what a Muslim would have thought upon seeing it. The writers definitely went out on a limb and took on risky, controversial subjects. I have to do a lot of thinking before I decide whether or not they did it well, but I would rather have a show that takes risks than have one that plays it safe all the time.

0

Share Post


Link to post

Not there yet for me. The two crack SA investigators couldn't find evidence on the victim before the trial that he was a budding terrorist vs the award-winning student that someone did manage to dig up, so obviously the victim had been investigated (or defendant lied about that and Baby Stone just dropped it vs refute it? What?). IMO third fail in a row. I don't really want this show to be L&O: Chicago--I can watch the original and the best several hours a week (just last night I saw the Holocaust insurance scam episode--everyone so good, the writing amazing). Personally I would much prefer the focus to be only on the legal system and ditch the SA investigators--they aren't going to get any good story lines as the writers will send the crime-solving fun to PD. 

Plus 1000 on Anna's weak character, but at least I won't be upset that she never gets her own cases, as I was with the L&O women--I think Abby got to argue before the judge in her first episode (sick adopted Russian orphan baby) and then had a very long stretch before that happened again.

I do hope this show makes it, though. 

1

Share Post


Link to post

I only watched this cause it was on after This Is Us. In fact, I was actively avoiding another Chicago show, cause I've not liked them thus far.

I was pleasantly surprised and actually liked it! It did very much remind me of the original L&O which was a show I adored, so that worked in it's favor. Am I right that the DA Stone is supposed to be L&O Ben Stone's son? That's a nice connection. I'll try another episode next week to see if I'll add this is the viewing rotation. I could do without too many drop-ins from the other Chicago shows but I'm guessing that's inevitable.

0

Share Post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Xantar said:

But seriously, I care about Antonio because I know him from Chicago PD. I've got no sense at all on the female investigator.

I think they could stand to develop her character more, but I know her as Ava Crowder. I guess you could say I'm already in the tank for her, just would like to see more of her character on this show.

1

Share Post


Link to post

I liked this episode a lot and it's funny they called Hermann to get the phone.

I do think they could develop the females a bit more for the DA and investigator's office. What are their names again? lol  

0

Share Post


Link to post

Yeah Stone and the investigator that used to be on PD seem to be the only characters that are fully fleshed out. I hope for more development for the two females and the DA. 

This episode was really good, like I said, outstanding writing and handling of timely and difficult issues without being preachy or biased, and it reminds me a lot of the original L&O and Trial By Jury, for example the scenes with Stone and Valdez eating and then Stone and the defense lawyer having a drink and discussing the case, those scenes were very reminiscent of original L&O scenes. 

1

Share Post


Link to post

So, they're basically remaking "Law and Order: Trial By Jury", right? Anyone remember that one? A brief spinoff that starred Lilith from "Frasier" and Jerry Orback for 2 episodes before he died? Which itself was a remake of the Order half of the Mothership. Makes sense. The original show WAS incredibly successful and the only reason it was cancelled after a basically-unheard-of 20 seasons was because NBC cut Dick Wolf's budget thinking he's make up the shortfall out of his pocket and he called their bluff. 

I thought the episode was sloppy. I got what they were trying to do with showing all sides of Are Muslims Dangerous and What's the Line Between Multiculturalism and Racism but none of the points landed because each random character got one line about it, or characters contradicted themselves later in the episode, and all the twists meant it made no sense who was arguing for what.  WTF was with that War and Peace-length speech about niqabs and Vitamin D? Who cares? If the show wants to debate the issue of Islamic garb: valid cultural expression or sexist and patriarchal, there were a million better ways to do it. 

The dumbest thing, though, was Jafar's motivation. Remember when Melanie (blonde ponytail with bicycle) said Danny had accused Jafar of plagiarism? And then we forget about it in Stone's big cross examination where it's all about jealousy? What the hell? It's a way better motive to kill someone because he knows you plagiarized his work and can get him kicked out of school and destroy his career, than just being jealous because someone is a better scientist than you? 

2

Share Post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, Tetraneutron said:

....WTF was with that War and Peace-length speech about niqabs and Vitamin D? Who cares?... 

 

When Stone had bailiff? Doorman? Whoever? hold up three fingers all the way at the door and asked the witness how many fingers she saw? I thought I accidentally changed the channel to My Cousin Vinnie. That was some good lawyerin'! 

1

Share Post


Link to post

I didn't catch the first two episodes. If this is the best Chicago Justice has to offer, I'll pass. The whole thing seemed very heavy handed, and both lawyers seemed to be going for shock value rather than following through on the more logical aspects of the case. I like Phillip Winchester, Joelle Carter, and Law and Order, but this wasn't doing it for me.

Did I hear correctly that the Stone character is supposed to be an ex-MLB player??

0

Share Post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, dargosmydaddy said:

Did I hear correctly that the Stone character is supposed to be an ex-MLB player??

It sounded like that to me. He said he used to be a pitcher, and I assumed it was for his HS or college, then he said he was pitching for the Cubs against the Sox (assuming he meant White)

2

Share Post


Link to post

Yeah, that's what I thought I heard, which seemed totally random... You would think if he was in the majors, even if just briefly, he would have a certain amount of fame in Chicago that would make working there as a DA kind of awkward.

I don't know why they couldn't have just said he played in the minors or something... his baseball metaphor would've worked just as well.

0

Share Post


Link to post
1 hour ago, MakeMeLaugh said:

When Stone had bailiff? Doorman? Whoever? hold up three fingers all the way at the door and asked the witness how many fingers she saw? I thought I accidentally changed the channel to My Cousin Vinnie. That was some good lawyerin'! 

The topper would have been for the judge to answer before the witness could......

0

Share Post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Tetraneutron said:

 WTF was with that War and Peace-length speech about niqabs and Vitamin D? Who cares? If the show wants to debate the issue of Islamic garb: valid cultural expression or sexist and patriarchal, there were a million better ways to do it. 

He was trying to link her lack of Vitamin D to bad vision in a roundabout way to her required wardrobe...which might have swung a couple of votes...luckily Stone Jr knew the difference between Type 1 & 2 diabetes.

0

Share Post


Link to post
19 hours ago, paigow said:

He was trying to link her lack of Vitamin D to bad vision in a roundabout way to her required wardrobe...which might have swung a couple of votes...luckily Stone Jr knew the difference between Type 1 & 2 diabetes.

Yeah, I got that. But it was stupid. Not all niqab wearers have diabetes, not all diabetics have vision problems. I get why the show did that - they wanted to do the "covering your face in court for religious reasons" controversy. But it was dumb. Stone "proving" (using the My Cousin Vinny courtroom stunt) her vision is fine and she has the other diabetes doesn't change anything. People still hate the niqab for reasons that have nothing to do with the reasons presented. And the show didn't get into it at all. They talked about it without there being any kind of controversy, dramatic tension, or point.

The script seemed like it was designed to suck drama out of every scene by having the moral arguments people were making be illogical. Like Valdez talking about how Jafar was killing baby Hitler. He wasn't. Jafar's argument was that by killing Danny, he was killing adult Hitler in 1932. Danny, according to him, was fully radicalized, had purchased bomb-making materials and was planning to deploy them. If that had indeed happened, Jafar WOULD, 100%, no ambiguity, be a hero and Islamophobia vs multiculuralism or whatever would have had nothing to do with anything. 

Again, if the script were remotely coherent, the dramatic turn would have been that our society, protestations and cries of "Islamaphobia" to the contrary, are so ready to believe all Muslims are terrorists that we condemn innocent men on no evidence at all. (Worth noting all the Muslims depicted in the show were fully Westernized and not different from any of the white characters except for their names, unless you could Adi's unseen strict religious dad and one woman who wears a niqab but that's it). 

20 hours ago, J0nas3 said:

It sounded like that to me. He said he used to be a pitcher, and I assumed it was for his HS or college, then he said he was pitching for the Cubs against the Sox (assuming he meant White)

Yup. The actor is 35, assume Peter is the same age. I assumed when he talked about his ballplaying past he was in the minors briefly or something, but he was in the majors? College + law school = 7 years. We're supposed to buy he had a whole second career as a pro ballplayer before being the lead prosecutor in a major city, a job people have when they're 50? And it's not like Peter just got the job either. Normally stuff like this doesn't bother me, but if they're going to spend EVERY EPISODE talking about his baseball past, to the point where it's the only biographical detail we have on anyone? Make it not dumb. 

0

Share Post


Link to post

Not only a former MLB player, but for the Cubs. And a pitcher, for God's sake. A minor leaguer playing right field, say, for a less popular team, even a collegiate All-American would have been enough to add a layer to Stone's character, but no, Show has to go all out unbelievable. Maybe Anna can have American Idol winner on her resume, sure, why not. 

3

Share Post


Link to post

Not all MLB players are famous or rich. I take it Stone was a relief pitcher in the MLB for a little while but was never a big star or anything and a lot of players like him only major MLB fans would remember. I don't find it unbelievable that someone like him would become a prosecutor in his second career, plenty of athletes who weren't superstars have successful second careers in unrelated fields, and especially with Stone's dad being an ADA he probably had a lifelong interest in the law. I think his background is interesting and Stone is by far the shows best character right now.

1

Share Post


Link to post

I'm not saying it's impossible, just that it's an odd character choice, particularly one to just randomly drop into a conversation. They could develop it more later, I guess, but it took me out of the show, like, "Wait, did I just hear that?" It also seems odd for him to have gotten to where he is at such a relatively young age as a second career... He seems to be a big deal in the DA's office (he gets high profile cases and has an underling); how long has he been there? Assuming he went to college while playing baseball, and maybe he made the majors shortly out of college (which is a bit of a stretch), so let's say he was 24-25... and then got hurt right away? Or fizzled out right away? In both cases, you'd think he'd want to rehab/ stick it out in the minors awhile longer, especially after having had a taste of the majors at a relatively young age. Regardless, after retiring from baseball, he'd have to go to law school, and then work his way up through the DA's office... I mean, I guess the timeline could work, but it's pretty tight.

And while yes, having a cup of coffee in the majors doesn't earn him instant fame, the fact that he's now working in the same city where he played... I think there might be enough rabid Cubs fans who might at least recognize him/ make the connection. I'd love to see an opposing attorney use that while questioning prospective jurors. ("Are you a Cubs fan? Do you recognize this man?") Or it could work against Stone, too. Didn't it sound like he kind of blew a game (and against the White Sox, no less) when he was telling his story?

Anyway, I'm clearly overthinking all of this, particularly for a show I really don't intend to watch much...

0

Share Post


Link to post

I think the reason it bugs people is that it's related to that everyone on TV has to be young and pretty now. Want to know one of the reasons the original "Law & Order" was so good? It had some of the best actors in America delivering the lines. Michael Moriarty, Steven Hill and Jerry Orbach could do anything, acting-wise. Same with all the NY theatre actors they had playing the guest star roles. It made the show better than a formulaic, didactic, procedural had any right to be. Now we'd never see that, because Moriarty and Hill and Orbach aren't underwear models and they'd never get cast today. And I think that's a shame. And making Peter Stone a baseball player when it doesn't work out timelinewise changes what the show is, to just another show where pretty people wear inappropriate clothes to the office and have sex with each other.

It's far from my biggest problem with the show. Just saying. And hopefully the writers develop the rest of the characters soon.

2

Share Post


Link to post

The actor who plays Stone is only 35 ??? Holy cow. I thought he was 50. I do like him so far though. Not crazy about his assistant. And I want more Apollo Creed !

I could have done without Mr. O'Boyle's exaggerated Chgo accent. No one under the age of 75 talks like that around here...

0

Share Post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Tetraneutron said:

... Michael Moriarty, Steven Hill and Jerry Orbach could do anything, acting-wise. Same with all the NY theatre actors they had playing the guest star roles. It made the show better than a formulaic, didactic, procedural had any right to be. Now we'd never see that, because Moriarty and Hill and Orbach aren't underwear models and they'd never get cast today...l

Yes to the talent in L&O--and another thing, they weren't playing to be likeable. Even the relatively few playful moments and Lenny's wisecracks helped carry the story. But now I must pause to fan myself as I imagine Mike Logan in his skivvies....

5 hours ago, Xeliou66 said:

Not all MLB players are famous or rich. I take it Stone was a relief pitcher in the MLB for a little while but was never a big star or anything and a lot of players like him only major MLB fans would remember. I don't find it unbelievable that someone like him would become a prosecutor in his second career, plenty of athletes who weren't superstars have successful second careers in unrelated fields, and especially with Stone's dad being an ADA he probably had a lifelong interest in the law. I think his background is interesting and Stone is by far the shows best character right now.

It's still unnecessary overkill.  

Edited by MakeMeLaugh.
0

Share Post


Link to post
6 hours ago, dargosmydaddy said:

I'm not saying it's impossible, just that it's an odd character choice, particularly one to just randomly drop into a conversation. They could develop it more later, I guess, but it took me out of the show, like, "Wait, did I just hear that?" It also seems odd for him to have gotten to where he is at such a relatively young age as a second career... He seems to be a big deal in the DA's office (he gets high profile cases and has an underling); how long has he been there? Assuming he went to college while playing baseball, and maybe he made the majors shortly out of college (which is a bit of a stretch), so let's say he was 24-25... and then got hurt right away? Or fizzled out right away? In both cases, you'd think he'd want to rehab/ stick it out in the minors awhile longer, especially after having had a taste of the majors at a relatively young age. Regardless, after retiring from baseball, he'd have to go to law school, and then work his way up through the DA's office... I mean, I guess the timeline could work, but it's pretty tight.

And while yes, having a cup of coffee in the majors doesn't earn him instant fame, the fact that he's now working in the same city where he played... I think there might be enough rabid Cubs fans who might at least recognize him/ make the connection. I'd love to see an opposing attorney use that while questioning prospective jurors. ("Are you a Cubs fan? Do you recognize this man?") Or it could work against Stone, too. Didn't it sound like he kind of blew a game (and against the White Sox, no less) when he was telling his story?

Anyway, I'm clearly overthinking all of this, particularly for a show I really don't intend to watch much...

Stone's baseball career has been mentioned a few times, not just that one time. Robinette I know mentioned how Ben Stone would talk about Peter's baseball talent. We don't really know when Stone was born or how long he pitched for, I would assume Stone was born sometime in the mid-late 70's, it is very surprising that the actor who portrays him is only 35. We don't know when exactly Stone got his law degree or when he stopped pitching. It's a tight window but it is plausible IMO.

I think that it would be a very interesting story if there was a situation where a big Cubs fan was on the jury and recognized him, that would be an interesting spin on the jury tampering story that the original L&O did a few times in its run and I would like to see them take advantage of that as I'm sure some Cubs fans would know Stone. That would be a very interesting story. 

0

Share Post


Link to post
On 3/8/2017 at 8:03 AM, Xantar said:

I'm not really sure why there has to be two investigators for the State's Attorney's office. We know from The Good Wife that one sufficiently badass investigator can solve a case all on his or her own. :-)

But seriously, I care about Antonio because I know him from Chicago PD. I've got no sense at all on the female investigator.

If I had it my way, this show wouldn't just be about murder all the time just like Chicago Med isn't all about traumatic injuries or Chicago Fire isn't all about fires. There are a lot of things that the State's Attorney's office does besides murder. The story surrounding the Baltimore City Detention Center would make an excellent episode.

 

I was thinking, what no time for back up when the two went to arrest a murder suspect. The Law & Order mothership played it straight they normally had uniformed cops with the detective team or ESU (NYPD's SWAT team) actually kick the door and go in first. Seeing Mr Stone playing his father it seems it just may be all murder. Maybe cost cutting is in effect but you think they could give some Chicago PD extras some additional work.

On 3/8/2017 at 2:27 PM, dargosmydaddy said:

I didn't catch the first two episodes. If this is the best Chicago Justice has to offer, I'll pass. The whole thing seemed very heavy handed, and both lawyers seemed to be going for shock value rather than following through on the more logical aspects of the case. I like Phillip Winchester, Joelle Carter, and Law and Order, but this wasn't doing it for me.

Did I hear correctly that the Stone character is supposed to be an ex-MLB player??

They really are stacking the deck with young Mr Stone, an ex Cub. After a backdoor pilot and three episodes perhaps spreading the love to other cast members is in order.

0

Share Post


Link to post

My favorite part was how the Muslim female student made a sex video with her boyfriend.  Her family might LITERALLY kill her for having sex outside of marriage, and she films herself?!?!  So ridiculous.

0

Share Post


Link to post
On 08/03/2017 at 11:25 AM, MakeMeLaugh said:

Not there yet for me. The two crack SA investigators couldn't find evidence on the victim before the trial that he was a budding terrorist vs the award-winning student that someone did manage to dig up.

Not only did the SA investigators not catch it but Voight and his elite intelligence team had no idea that the victim was a terrorist, that he had a roommate that was  jealous of him and the the prime suspect had a muslim girlfriend. Seriously, what the hell was that.

Also will a find your phone app work when the phone has been sitting in a storm drain for months and presumably has a dead battery?

0

Share Post


Link to post
On 2017-03-18 at 8:44 PM, Kel Varnsen said:

Not only did the SA investigators not catch it but Voight and his elite intelligence team had no idea that the victim was a terrorist ...

It was so out of left field that I wondered if it was actually a red herring. I'm not entirely convinced even now that (a) the victim was as far down the road to radicalization as was implied or (b) that the killer was a "hero" for doing what he did. (And I don't think I can be convinced of the latter.)

0

Share Post


Link to post

Was the terrorist theory discredited at trial?... Victim did not own / rent a vehicle to transport fertilizer, no fertilizer found in apartment and no record of him ever renting a storage unit.

0

Share Post


Link to post
On 28/03/2017 at 10:07 AM, Sandman said:

It was so out of left field that I wondered if it was actually a red herring. I'm not entirely convinced even now that (a) the victim was as far down the road to radicalization as was implied or (b) that the killer was a "hero" for doing what he did. (And I don't think I can be convinced of the latter.)

That was the point. The victim WASN'T radicalized. At all. He was a typical Western guy. The killer lied about everything (the watching radical videos, buying fertilizer, etc) in order to mount a justification defense for killing him. The real reason he killed him was jealousy over the victim's better academic achievements. Not that I blame you for not getting it, because WOW was this episode poorly written. 

0

Share Post


Link to post

Oh, I got that the real reason was academic jealousy, but I thought there was some evidence (other than the killer's testimony) that suggested that the victim had radicalized to some degree. But, yeah -- mostly it was a muddle. Or maybe I lost track of what was supported and what was discredited at trial.

Edited by Sandman.
0

Share Post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now