The Good Wife s7 ep 2

A bond court case involving vandalism at a museum doesn’t sound all that promising a basis for an episode, but “Innocents” is precisely the kind of story The Good Wife has turned into art over the years and this was something of a return to form: a genuinely interesting, quirky, thoughtful yet quick look at the boundaries between art, indecency, freedom and family, with a fun judge and Nancy Crozier making her usual “I’m from Michigan, me” brand of mischief on the other side.

Good times.

In B and C-plot news, Cary’s war with Howard was very funny, Cary and Alicia remembering they’re friends and can speak to each other was great – perhaps they might even be in the same room together at some point soon? Pretty please? – and “Have you seen It Follows?” made me laugh. But everybody asking each other if they knew any good investigators while forgetting that yes, they did, her name was Robyn and she seems to have disappeared, annoyed me. (Seriously, where IS Robyn? Did she run away with Taye Diggs?) As did new guy Jason Crouse. I know we’re supposed to think he’s charming and handsome and generally awesome-sauce, but he seems more than keen enough on himself (nobody smiles like that all the time, dude, tone it down) to need any additional validation from me.

Advertisements

One thought on “The Good Wife s7 ep 2

  1. Jed Bartlet February 10, 2016 / 1:57 pm

    Yes, it turns out I was a bit premature in saying that the magic had gone. This was (mostly) great. The A-plot was TGW on top form, with yet another case which has a grounding in real life, albeit (at least if it’s based on who I think it’s based on) from a few years ago: lots to debate, although I thought the show was generally taking the son’s side, which might have placed a thumb on the scales. Good to have Judge Dunaway back. Lucca is a potentially excellent foil for Alicia. And Nancy Crozier is a treasure. “Have we met? What was your name again?” Not sure about Jason yet, but I’m quite happy to give him time.

    On the other hand, and much as Howard Lyman’s story was fun, it really served to demonstrate how irrelevant to the show Lockhart Agos Lee has become. I mean, who cares whether the associates are getting paid enough? I did, when Alicia and Cary were the associates, and Alicia was also debating whether to jump into bed with one of the partners. Now, not so much. Either they need to get Diane and Cary out of there, or Alicia (and Lucca?) in there.

    The same could be said of Eli and Peter. I normally love watching Eli use his skills, whether for good or evil, but if he’s just there to bring Ruth down, it’s a bit of a waste. And while I’m on the topic, why doesn’t Ruth just tell Peter what Eli’s up to, and make his hiring a non-negotiable for that reason alone? In fairness to Peter, he just thinks that Eli’s a disgruntled ex-employee, rather than one who’s also intent on vengeance.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s