You know, I think maybe that's a result of Erica M. running the show. It's like they decide what they want to see a character do, then they bend procedure to make that happen - like Garcia's episode, like JJ's fight scene. I could be wrong, but I think ex-cop Ed B. would never have gone along with such glaring out-of-policy happenings.
And it's not like it would be hard to fix. Would it be so difficult have put JJ in a situation where she was jumped at close quarters, lost her weapon, and had to take him hand-to-hand? It's been a while since I saw the Garcia ep, but couldn't someone in the writer's room have come up with a way to put er into a position where she had to do the negotiating?
When a character does something out of their normal 'character', the narrative needs to "corner" them into doing it; for example, Hotch didn't beat Foyet to death just because he could - the story forced him into a kill-or-be-killed situation.
If the narrative doesn't force the issue, the character just comes across as having acted foolishly; and IMO that's just lazy writing.
no subject
Date: Feb. 21st, 2012 06:03 pm (UTC)And it's not like it would be hard to fix. Would it be so difficult have put JJ in a situation where she was jumped at close quarters, lost her weapon, and had to take him hand-to-hand? It's been a while since I saw the Garcia ep, but couldn't someone in the writer's room have come up with a way to put er into a position where she had to do the negotiating?
When a character does something out of their normal 'character', the narrative needs to "corner" them into doing it; for example, Hotch didn't beat Foyet to death just because he could - the story forced him into a kill-or-be-killed situation.
If the narrative doesn't force the issue, the character just comes across as having acted foolishly; and IMO that's just lazy writing.