Did I miss something or didn't Briscoe & Curtis confirm that Mike Farino couldn't possibly have attacked Cookie Costello as he was busy beating up on some poor schmuck (complete with an eyewitness testimony) halfway across town at the time...why wasn't this brought up by the prosecution to at least attempt to discredit the ludicrous alternative theory proposed by the defense?
4 Reviews
Stupidity amuck
TheLittleSongbird11 February 2021
With elements of the truly harrowing Kitty Genovese case, "Remand" had potential to be a lot better than it actually was. Especially considering the mostly very high standard of the previous episodes, with only "Blood Libel", the previous episode, disappointing somewhat. Really liked the idea of the story and 'Law and Order' does the "ripped from the headlines" type of stories (a type that is visited frequently) very well and better than a lot of shows.
Sadly it doesn't completely come together in "Remand". An episode that starts off very well but is undone significantly by one aspect that is too prominent and distracting to ignore sadly. It's the second disappointing 'Law and Order' episode in a row and is marginally worse, despite "Blood Libel" being very patchy in story the topic was a lot bolder and it was tackled with guts and good intentions. It also didn't get bogged down in excessive stupidity later on like "Remand" did.
"Remand" though does have a lot done right. The production values are as professional as usual, and this aspect did come on a lot overtime with a sharper and slicker look growing with each season. The music is haunting while not intrusive or overused. The direction is sympathetic without being too low key. Some of the script provokes thought and has a suitable amount of grit, as well as some welcome levity at times with Briscoe.
It also starts off very promisingly, with a case (based upon that of Kitty Genovese) that really did sound intriguing, with well written and taut police work, and actually was up to a point. Briscoe is on typically good form and has a by now well gelled chemistry with Curtis, who has continued to grow. All the regulars are fine and while Marks really annoyed me as a character Talia Balsam gives it one hundred percent, the problem was the way she was written.
Unfortunately, "Remand" went drastically downhill when the case went to trial. The low point being the insultingly ridiculous defense argument that makes no sense at all, bad enough to be laughed out of court and dismissed. Lets not get started with that alternate theory, truly sloppy and borderline illogical writing in a theory proven already to be false and should have been immediately challenged when raised.
Balsam does what she can as Marks, but the character is really annoying and her excessive stupidity is enough to make anybody think "how on earth did she get into this job?" The judge is very nearly as bad. The ending did feel rushed.
Concluding, starts off very well but goes off the rails in the legal scenes. 6/10
Sadly it doesn't completely come together in "Remand". An episode that starts off very well but is undone significantly by one aspect that is too prominent and distracting to ignore sadly. It's the second disappointing 'Law and Order' episode in a row and is marginally worse, despite "Blood Libel" being very patchy in story the topic was a lot bolder and it was tackled with guts and good intentions. It also didn't get bogged down in excessive stupidity later on like "Remand" did.
"Remand" though does have a lot done right. The production values are as professional as usual, and this aspect did come on a lot overtime with a sharper and slicker look growing with each season. The music is haunting while not intrusive or overused. The direction is sympathetic without being too low key. Some of the script provokes thought and has a suitable amount of grit, as well as some welcome levity at times with Briscoe.
It also starts off very promisingly, with a case (based upon that of Kitty Genovese) that really did sound intriguing, with well written and taut police work, and actually was up to a point. Briscoe is on typically good form and has a by now well gelled chemistry with Curtis, who has continued to grow. All the regulars are fine and while Marks really annoyed me as a character Talia Balsam gives it one hundred percent, the problem was the way she was written.
Unfortunately, "Remand" went drastically downhill when the case went to trial. The low point being the insultingly ridiculous defense argument that makes no sense at all, bad enough to be laughed out of court and dismissed. Lets not get started with that alternate theory, truly sloppy and borderline illogical writing in a theory proven already to be false and should have been immediately challenged when raised.
Balsam does what she can as Marks, but the character is really annoying and her excessive stupidity is enough to make anybody think "how on earth did she get into this job?" The judge is very nearly as bad. The ending did feel rushed.
Concluding, starts off very well but goes off the rails in the legal scenes. 6/10
Skills and Stupidity
bkoganbing9 December 2012
Warning: Spoilers
When Jerry Orbach and Benjamin Bratt are questioning an arsonist on a different case he offers to give up the real perpetrator of an infamous rape from 30 years earlier. Back then Anita Gillette was raped in a stairwell with some 35 people looking on and no one calling the cops. Obviously the story is based on the infamous Kitty Genovese murder during the Sixties, but Gillette's character Cookie Costello survives.
And a man played by Edouard DeSoto was arrested, tried, and convicted for the crime. But now that might be in jeopardy. And the guy that the informant named turns out to be bogus although he has a connection with Gillette. That's enough to get eager attorney Talia Balsam working on a new trial which she gets.
After that it's Murphy's law. A combination of Balsam's skills and some truly imbecilic rulings by Judge Tom Stechschulte throw everything askew for Sam Waterston and Jill Hennessy.
Guilty or not I would want an attorney like Balsam representing me. Let's say that the victim goes on trial here and a whole lot of dirty linen is aired.
Makes you wonder what would have happened in real life to Kitty Genovese.
And a man played by Edouard DeSoto was arrested, tried, and convicted for the crime. But now that might be in jeopardy. And the guy that the informant named turns out to be bogus although he has a connection with Gillette. That's enough to get eager attorney Talia Balsam working on a new trial which she gets.
After that it's Murphy's law. A combination of Balsam's skills and some truly imbecilic rulings by Judge Tom Stechschulte throw everything askew for Sam Waterston and Jill Hennessy.
Guilty or not I would want an attorney like Balsam representing me. Let's say that the victim goes on trial here and a whole lot of dirty linen is aired.
Makes you wonder what would have happened in real life to Kitty Genovese.
The big mistake I noticed
CrimeDrama120 August 2022
This episode should have been a lot more compelling. Ugh! What happened to the arsonist anyway? When Lab Tech Hoeck stated that he would not bet his career on the victim's dress, I immediately wrote this review. What are the odds that there is more than one dress (identical or very close) and each have identical knife cuts, the victim's blood, the rapist's semen and amniotic fluid from her unborn baby? I would bet my career that it is impossible. Think about it. That is bad TV.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
