"Law & Order: Special Victims Unit" Greed (TV Episode 2002) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
5 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
A pair of slick Canadians
bkoganbing31 July 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Henry Winkler and Sherri Parker-Lee play a couple of slick Canadian con artists each married to a wealthy widow/widower and both are working in tandem to defraud their spouses. Part of that involves Winkler's spouse Mary Beth Hurt nearly being killed in a rape attack and Parker-Lee also being 'assaulted'.

These two are slick, especially Winkler who is first discovered to be culpable through forensics. These two went out of their way to frame a young kid played by Alex Feldman who is working as a locksmith to pay his college tuition. They are a heartless pair.

Forensics leads the SVU squad to the right parties, but cooperation of the spouses is essential. Roy Thinnes who thought he hit a jackpot trophy wife in Parker-Lee cooperates. But Hurt is in a state of total denial. And Winkler works the spousal privilege angle as if he went to law school.

Justice is obtained, these two do make a fatal mistake, but you have to watch this episode to see what it is. Winkler is some piece of work and he dominates the story.
6 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Great episode but...
fbupdates19 July 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Henry Winkler is a piece of work as a con artist married to a widow. He will make you forget all about the Fonz. Two things though are irritating:

1. Stabler calls Winkler Henry instead of Edwin, his character's name in one scene. They didn't notice that and do another take?

2. In the beginning the CSU tech says the victim is Jessica Todd, early 40s. Mary Beth Hurt was 56 years old. Either that was a slip and should have been early 50s. Or they thought the audience wouldn't catch that.

The story is a tricky one and it takes time to get the wife on board. The performances were overall top notch.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Love it but a disturbing problem for me.
sarahbear-6091110 September 2021
Warning: Spoilers
I love this episode, I watch it several times a week. It has two well-known stars in the world of Hollywood and both are amazing actors.

But, there's a problem in it that I just can't overlook: the assumed guilt of Daniel Ryan. I support the police, but their behavior regarding their prime suspect is unacceptable. They immediately assume his guilt and try to imprison him before the DNA evidence proves his innocence, that is not how it should be done, regardless of their suspicions. They stripped him of his constitutional rights and failed to go to a judge. For them, it was guilty until proven innocent, but this is America, it's innocent until proven guilty.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Twisted greed
TheLittleSongbird5 August 2020
Season 3 was mostly a very solid season. The only disappointment, as far as the previous episodes go, for me was "Redemption" (though "Protection" and "Prodigy" also could have been better) and even that wasn't bad at all. Which goes to show how high the overall quality of the season was. Like the previous two seasons, there are a number of wonderful episodes, episodes including "Monogamy", "Surveillance", "Execution" and the next episode "Denial".

"Greed" for me is one of the best episodes of the season. If you like cases with lots of twists and to be constantly surprised you won't be disappointed. "Greed" has this more than most episodes of Season 3. If you like episodes where you see completely different sides to actors you either are used to seeing in a certain type of role or don't care for generally, you won't be disappointed either. "Greed" is one of the primary examples of the season to have this, another one being John Ritter in "Monogamy".

The episode's biggest surprise is the performance of Henry Winkler. Actually like him in other things despite how that just sounded. But never have seen him in the type of role he plays here, the more we learn of this character the more unsettling Winkler's acting becomes very effectively without it being prematurely obvious or too obvious overall. Seeing this side to him was a total surprise and Winkler does a great job.

Furthermore, the story for "Greed" is also interesting. It is as said above full of twists, without feeling like there were too many or that they over-complicated things. They didn't feel predictable, convenient, far-fetched or pointless either. The only less unpredictable thing is that one does get, from it being a familiar trope for the show and the franchise, the sense that there is more to Winkler's character than it initially seems.

It is very clever stuff and while it is intricately plotted there for me was no trouble understanding what was going on. The rest of the acting is very good and the team interaction is as ever fun and cohesive. The script is tightly structured and provokes a good deal of thought without any waffling or trying too hard.

Production values are slick and with the right amount of muted grit. The music doesn't overbear and the direction is accomodating yet tight enough.

All in all, a wonderful episode and a season high point. 10/10
10 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Spousal privilege.
robhendrikx13 April 2023
Warning: Spoilers
In this episodes two lovers plot a conspiracy against his wife and her husband. When the wronged spouses are called upon to testify, both of the accused hide gleefully behind their lawyers who claim spousal privilege. I think the show's legal advisors dropped the ball here.

Spousal privilege means a husband cannot be forced to testify against his wife (and vice versa). It does NOT mean he is not allowed to testify. Especially when the crime is committed against said spouse.

In the show the situation is resolved by the conspirators both being bigamists, being still married to each other, which renders their later marriages null and void. A weak and in my opinion unnecessary plot twist.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed