NYPD Blue: "A Draining Experience" Summary/Review
Alan Sepinwall
NYPD Blue, Season 4, Episode 22, "A Draining Experience"
Story by David Milch & Bill Clark
Teleplay by Jane Wallace
Directed by Michael Watkins
(PLEASE NOTE: Because of certain rather earth-shaking developments in
this season finale, I'm going to do a first and include some spoiler
space on the off-chance that you, the reader, hasn't yet seen the
episode. If you didn't see what happened, do your best to bug your
friends or people on-line other than me to get you the tape; trust me on
this one.)
A
R
E
N
'
T
S
E
A
S
O
N
F
I
N
A
L
E
S
F
U
N
A
N
D
E
D
U
C
A
T
I
O
N
A
L
?
I
T
'
S
L
I
K
E
T
H
E
N
E
W
A
B
C
A
D
C
A
M
P
A
I
G
S
A
Y
S
:
T
V
I
S
G
O
O
D
PLOT ONE: SUSPENSION AND DISBELIEF
The hits just keep on coming in Bobby's ongoing assignment for FBI Agent
Kriegel, who informs our hero that he should expect a call IAB Lt.
Shannon, who may be Joey Salvo's mole in Internal Affairs. Kriegel orders
Bobby to acknowledge that he knows Salvo from childhood, but otherwise
remain silent, in the hopes that Shannon will then contact Salvo and
they'll have plugged their leak. Bobby insists that if that happens, he's
done, and produces a document detailing the chronology of the entire
operation, from Salvo's initial approach at the restaurant to everything
since. After Kriegel leaves, Lt. Fancy offers to look over the paper and
sign it as a confirming witness, shrugging, "I do what I can."
Andy and Diane have been bickering ever since he realized that Bobby told
her about the situation and not him, but Bobby feels confident enough in
recent developments to let his relieved partner know that the lines of
communication will be opened again. The meeting with Shannon goes as
expected, but the outcome is a big surprise to Bobby: Shannon has him
suspended and orders the surrender of his gun and shield. Bobby does it
in disbelief, wondering what the hell happened.
Bobby goes home to brood, but Kriegel calls him back in later in the day.
By now, Bobby's realized that they never thought Shannon was dirty, and
that Kriegel orchestrated the whole thing so that Bobby would feel no
choice but to get in deep with Salvo -- a suspicion confirmed by his
conversation with the duplicitous FBI agent. Kriegel promises to try to
make things right for Bobby once everything goes down -- an empty
promise in Simone's view, since word of his suspension is filtering
through the ranks and no amount of spin control will ever make him seem
totally clean to every cop in the department -- and then "suggests" that
Bobby make the best of a bad situation by going all the way with Salvo.
Bobby has no choice but to agree, but also decides enough's enough and
fills Diane and Andy in on everything. In the middle of their
conversation, IAB Sgt. Martens shows up, also suspended; apparently, once
his bosses realized he was clean, they decided to suspend him to get the
real leak to drop his guard. Andy, still stunned by the colossal screwing
his partner's getting, can't muster up much sympathy for Martens.
Bobby insists on wearing a tape recorder instead of a radio unit, and
while he's waiting to get hooked up, Andy comes into the locker room to
try to talk him out of playing Kriegel's game. Andy knows what a bad guy
Salvo is from his days on robbery, and doesn't want Bobby anywhere near
him, but his suggestion that Bobby clear his name by busting Salvo won't
fly; Bobby figures Kriegel would spin it in a way to make him look even
dirtier. When Diane enters after the resolution of the Lakos case (see
Plot Two), she doesn't offer any advice, except for Bobby to lock the
door so he can work off some of his stress by making love to her -- an
idea he picks up and runs with.
That night, Bobby meets with Joey in the same alley as last time, and
Joey offers Bobby a job in his organization. But just as Joey's offering a
friendly warning that Bobby should be prepared to break the law now and
then, shots ring out and Salvo falls dead. Bobby draws his back-up gun,
as a car screeches around the corner from the direction of the shots...
...with Andy at the wheel. Andy doesn't come right out and say he shot
Salvo, but sneers that "They got no game now." Bobby can't think
straight, and tells Andy to get the hell out of there before a radio car
shows up to investigate the shots. Before Andy drives off, he warns his
partner, "You better lose that tape." Bobby rips off the tape recorder
and stashes it inside a rain gutter just before the radio car pulls up
and a uniform cop orders him to freeze.
PLOT TWO: A PRIVILEGED PERP
While Bobby is stuck in Kriegel's spiderweb, Andy and Diane have to
investigate the murder of Christine Lakos, who was found murdered in a
parking lot with drain cleaner poured down her throat. Bobby briefly gets
assigned the case, and winds up interviewing Dr. Herbert Wentzel, the
victims' psychiatrist, who comes into the station because he thinks she's
in danger from sources he can't name because of doctor-patient privilege.
Bobby detects something hinky about the shrink and doesn't tell him about
the murder, and Wentzel suggests that the detectives have a long chat
with Christine's father, a plumber named Albert.
Albert and his wife, Greek immigrants, are devastated by the news, and
none of the detectives see any signs that Albert didn't get along with
his daughter. They also try to contact Christine's sister, but she's not
at her job when they call.
Wentzel comes in again and when informed about Christine's death, tries
to explain that he thought Christine was close to suicide over a
childhood incestuous relationship with her father, and might've swallowed
drain cleaner as a symbol of that relationship. Andy points out that the
drain cleaner was ingested post-mortem, so Wentzel rapidly changes his
tune and comes up with yet another theory, that her father killed her and
then, feeling guilty, used the drain cleaner to point the cops towards
him.
After talking with Christine's sister, who says Christine was seeing
Wentzel to get over the trauma of a rape, and fielding a half-dozen calls
per hour from Wentzel trying to get an update on the investigation, Andy
asks the doctor to come in again. After a few minutes of conversation,
Andy does some amateur psychoanalysis of his own, saying that it was
Wentzel who had an incestuous relationship with a parent -- his mother --
and that he went around the bend and started to see Christine as a
surrogate for his late mama. Because Wentzel declined a lawyer earlier in
the interview, Andy says that none of them are leaving the room until he
gets a signed confession, and they can do it the easy way or the hard
way. Wentzel eventually starts writing.
PLOT THREE: THE FOURTH ESTATE
Greg and James take a robbery complaint from a John Highsmith, who was
assaulted and had his wallet stolen by two teens -- one posing as an
epileptic, the other as a concerned friend. While filing the complaint,
Highsmith seems decidedly uncooperative, and at the end of the interview
the detectives find out why: Highsmith works for a magazine that recently
ran a story comparing the NYPD to a third-world country's police force,
violating suspects' rights and the Constitution whenever they see fit.
Medavoy and Martinez aren't too keen on going to the mat for Highsmith,
but when another unit picks up two kids named Jamal and Warren pulling
the same scam on another innocent bystander, they have the two brought
into the One-Five for questioning and call in Highsmith. Jamal and
Warren are underage but have been through the system enough times to know
how to manipulate it, like refusing to stand in a lineup and knowing that
the police can't have their photos on file. Nonetheless, Greg snaps some
Polaroids of each, and informs Highsmith that they won't be able to
convict the boys, but could conceivably get his wallet back. Highsmith
agrees to put his prized ethics on hold for a moment and picks Jamal and
Warren's pictures out of an array.
James lays out the situation calmly for the boys: if they were to tell
the detectives where Mr. Highsmith "left" his wallet, they'll be free to
go. Jamal isn't too cooperative, but Warren, who may not be as young as
he claims, suggests they look in the basement of a nearby abandoned
building. Highsmith gets his wallet back -- minus the nine dollars cash
that had been inside -- but says the experience hasn't changes his
overall feelings about the police.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Damn!
In its three previous seasons, NYPD blue went out of its way to play into
the conventional TV idea of the season ending cliffhanger. Season one
ended with Andy sobered up and The Other Guy knocking boots with Debrah
Farentino. Season two ended with Andy married and Bobby helping Diane get
sober. Season three ended with Andy taking his son for his "churching"
and Bobby and Diane planning a sunny vacation. Maybe not every loose end
got tied up, but there was enough closure to keep the fans sated over the
summer.
Well, all I can say is that David Milch picked a helluva way to muck with
tradition. :)
I've already seen a bunch of people trying to find a solution to the "Who
Shot Salvo?" mystery, but in my mind, there wasn't any mystery to begin
with. Andy did it. No other possibility even occurred to me until I
logged onto Usenet, so I went back and checked the tape, and there's no
way anyone could've shot Salvo in the back, since they were standing in
an enclosed alley, which meant the shots had to hit him in the front,
from the direction Andy was coming. Whether or not the angle was perfect or
whether or not he was too far away isn't the issue here; this is a
television show, no matter how we like to pretend it isn't, and sometimes
the laws of physics get thrown out the window in the service of good
storytelling.
Those who think Andy didn't do it, ask yourselves these questions:
1)Why would he be "taking a left on Mulberry" at just that moment?, and
2)Why would he be so quick to say "they got no game now" if he didn't
know it was going to happen in advance?, and 3)Why would he tell Bobby
to destroy the tape? If I may step out on a relatively sturdy limb, I'm
saying there's no question Sipowicz did it (watch, now the season
premiere in October'll say it was Upstairs John and I'll look like a
putz).
So, the question is, how do I feel about this? I'm a little conflicted.
First, I'm not a big fan of cliffhangers, especially with a show that
traditionally premieres late, so we're going to have to wait nearly five
months to get some sense of resolution, but I've gotta admit that this
was one damn good nail-biter.
Second, it's nice to see that the edgy, out-of-control Sipowicz from the
show's early days isn't completely gone. Characters on this show have
come close to executing scumbags before -- The Other Guy was willing to
shoot Richie Catena to get Janice out of a similar undercover fiasco,
Simone may have killed Andy Jr's murderers even if it hadn't been
self-defense -- but Andy (who tried to murder Alfonse Giardella himself a
few times) is the only one gonzo enough to really go through with it,
especially in a situation where his own safety isn't even in jeopardy.
We've seen in the past how loyal Andy is, and to commit murder just to
save his partner from a situation that may have resolved itself happily
in time is the kind of well-intentioned but completely wrong-headed thing
which only he is capable of. And, provided Milch doesn't lose his nerve
or focus, this incident is going to forever change the relationship
between our two heroes.
That being said, the way the scene was presented bugged me a bit. Unlike
the drunken Andy with nothing to lose from the first season, Sipowicz now
has "responsibilities" in Sylvia and Theo, so if he's going to kill a
guy, he's gotta make himself absolutely invulnerable to suspicion. He's
been a homicide cop a long time, and is smart enough to do that, but what
does he do? He drives right up to the scene of the crime immediately
afterward and gets his voice on tape commenting about the good that's
going to come from Salvo's death. Sure, it made for a killer (pun
intended) ending, but now Andy may have screwed himself, and, at the very
least, has screwed Bobby. If he'd just fired from a distance and driven
away without being seen -- or, if he had to let Bobby know right away
(and Milch had to let the viewers know), driven by silently with a finger
across his lips -- no one but Bobby would've been the wiser. But the FBI
is damn sure going to want that tape, and Bobby can't give it to them,
even if he somehow manages to record over the last bit (technology is
advanced enough to detect that sort of thing). So there's Bobby, already
strung up for IAB, now the only witness and possible suspect in a murder,
refusing to surrender a crucial piece of evidence for reasons he can't
reveal. If he thought he was jammed up before....
But that's something to be resolved come fall. In the meantime, we've got
the rest of a generally outstanding (with one dull subplot in the middle)
episode to dissect.
Last week, I was noting that the undercover story had a rather large
flaw, since the only real leverage the FBI held over Bobby was the threat
to have him or Diane transferred -- which, if you think about it, is
probably healthier for their relationship in the long run -- and he could
get out at any time with minimal damage to his career and reputation.
Well, he reached the point of no return right around the time Lt. Shannon
asked for his gun and shield. Like Bobby says, no matter what kind of
spin he or Fancy or Kriegel puts on this, there's always going to be some
guys who wonder about him, and with The Job, your reputation is
everything. I've compared this story to the mess that Janice got into
with Inspector Lastarza back in season one, but I think Kriegel is
turning into an even better villain than Lastarza, simply because he
doesn't telegraph his punches. Bobby (and the audience) knew that Kriegel
didn't have his best interests at heart, but I doubt anybody saw in
advance that the soft-spoken fed was setting Bobby up to get suspended so
he would have no choice but to go in deep. Bobby has a lot more
self-control than I do, since if I was in that situation -- and had Jimmy
Smits' physique (though I'm getting there, thanks to a recent workout
regimen <g>) -- Kriegel would've been a bloody pulp against the coffee
room wall the minute he suggested that I try to make the best of a bad
situation.
And while I often think that the sex scenes on the show are gratuitous
and distracting, this one really worked for me, mainly because it was
about as unsexy as they come. Here's Bobby, his career rapidly flying
into the dumpster, unable to think of how he's going to get out of this
mess and getting more and more tied up in knots. Diane comes along, and
the only thing she can think to do to help is at least get Bobby's mind
off his troubles for a few minutes with some good lovin' -- which has
also been the part of their relationship where they've emotionally bonded
the most, so she's also trying to give him some support -- but it doesn't
work, as Bobby looks and acts completely robotic while doing it (though
he has to be at least partly worked up to get L'il Bobby to cooperate, I
suppose). Very, very disturbing.
As for the rest of the episode, I thought the Greg and James case worked
nicely while Andy and Diane's was a real snoozer. The stuff with Dr.
Wentzel re-travelled territory we've been over a million times, and
without any kind of originality. Last week's case with the twitchy
building super was also kind of tired, but tied in so well to the ongoing
tension between Andy and Bobby that it worked well; aside from a small
bit of added surliness from Andy, this case could've been done on any
week, though I would've found it just as dull then.
The stolen wallet case, on the other hand, was a very good example of how
to write an interesting minor subplot to keep the supporting characters
busy. Not only did Greg and James come off as competent detectives --
without a single mention of semen samples, mercifully -- but there was
some nice tension and snappy patter between them and Highsmith (who,
considering all the civil liberties violations we've seen on the show in
four years, is pretty much right on the money with his assessment), a
nice bit of irony in them having to bend the law a little to get his
property back, and two very-well drawn perps in Jamal and Warren. And it
didn't take up so much time that it started to distract and detract from
the ongoing Bobby story.
In all, while some may say it was too little, too late, the fourth season
ends on two very strong notes, and I'm damned curious to know how on
earth they're going to resolve all of this.
Quick Hits:
-Guest Star Notes: Leland Orser (Highsmith) is the latest member
of the show's guest star casting carousel to make a return
visit. He last appeared as a skel named Zeppo in the first
season episode "Zeppo Marks Brothers." Stanley DeSantis (Wentzel)
also looked like he belonged in the club, but I couldn't find
him anywhere in the episode guide prior to this week. And Vicellous
Shannon(Jamal) was one of Annie Potts' students on the underrated
-- and just-cancelled -- "Dangerous Minds". And I sure hope we
see John Finn as Lt. Shannon again in the fall, since he played
cop of a much shadier nature -- Ken Olin's manipulative boss -- on
"EZ Streets."
-Man, I am glad I make it a point to change the channel whenever
a commercial for Blue comes on. If I'd seen the one that says,
"Wait till you see how far Andy will go for his partner," I
would've seen that ending coming a mile away.
-I should really have gotten my roommate to watch the show
sooner, since her fresh perspective often makes me notice things
I'd otherwise miss. Tonight, for instance, when Bobby removed
Diane's belt with one easy motion, she marveled, "Wow, he is GOOD!"
-Poor Martens. Not only does he get suspended, literally for being
an honest cop (though, considering that he's in IAB, it's doubtful
his reputation can get much more besmirched than it already is),
but suddenly everybody's mis-pronouncing his name as "Mar-TENS"
instead of "MAR-tins".
-This is the second episode in three weeks with a title that was
ripped off from an earlier episode. "Emission Impossible" evoked
"Emission Accomplished," while there was an episode earlier this
year called "A Wrenching Experience." This isn't automatically a bad
thing; "Emission Impossible" was an unrepentant crap-o-rama,
while "A Draining Experience" was damn fine television.
-One missed opportunity that I suppose couldn't be helped:
the writers wanted Sharon Lawrence to appear in this episode
(I would assume some bit with Andy weighing the decision to shoot
Salvo), but she was unavailable. C'est la vie.
-Again, no Kirkendall this week. Wouldn't have noticed her absence
at all if the ABC press releases for the last two episodes hadn't
listed Andrea Thompson in the guest credits. Let's hope we start
seeing her face in the opening titles in the fall.
-Completely unrelated to the content of the show, but an amusing
story, nonetheless: On Monday, ABC held their special presentation
for the advertisers and press to announce their fall schedule, with
all sorts of bells and whistles. The highlight was an appearance
by Savion Glover and some of the cast of "Bring in da Noise,
Bring in da Funk," who did some wicked tap dancing as part of
a revamped opening credits sequence for "Monday Night Football."
Later, when the ABC prez got to Tuesday nights, she started
praising Blue, and then pointed to the back of the stage, where
an NYPD patrol car rose up on some hydraulics with Dennis Franz,
Kim Delaney, and James McDaniel leaning against it. They strolled
to the center of the stage, and then began frantically -- and
badly -- tap dancing in homage to Glover and crew. Then Dennis
started talking about what a great time he's been having, but then
said, "And NBC has been so nice to us..." realized what he'd said,
and practically ran away to hide his embarrassment. Fortunately,
the stage-trained Mr. McDaniel covered for him nicely like a good
boss should. :)
-Line of the Week:
"Any money left, you can buy a self-improvement tape: 'Bein'
nicer so other people don't wanna hit you with a brick.'"
-Medavoy, on the prospect of Highsmith getting
his wallet back with all the contents intact
As for my own plans for next season, I have no idea. I figure I already
inadvertently chased away half the people who read these things (the ones
on the Web, at any rate) with my jumping-the-gun "farewell address" two
weeks back, plus I doubt my schedule will get any freer, plus I have no
idea whether the show will continue to hold my interest nearly as much as
it has the past two weeks. The way I figure it is this: I'll definitely
be around to weigh in on the season premiere, and then we'll take it from
there. If I don't have anything to say about a particular episode, I
won't do a review, and if I do, I will. Simple as that, though expect a
much bigger delay in posting them -- unless, of course, the episode is so
good that I can't go to bed without putting finger to keyboard about it
(like with "Is Paris Burning?").
I'll also likely be back sometime next week with some brief (especially
in comparison to last year's opus) thoughts on the season as a whole, so
watch the newsgroup and/or the website sometime after next Wednesday.
See ya in the funny papers...
Alan Sepinwall * e-mail: sepi...@force.stwing.upenn.edu
Homepage: http://www.stwing.upenn.edu/~sepinwal/
NYPD Blue page: http://www.stwing.upenn.edu/~sepinwal/nypd.html
RANDOM QUOTE:
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote, 'The world is a fine place and worth
fighting for.' I agree with the second part."
-Morgan Freeman, "Seven"
Maro Adams
Alan Sepinwall wrote:
> NYPD Blue, Season 4, Episode 22, "A Draining Experience"
> And I sure hope we
> see John Finn as Lt. Shannon again in the fall, since he played
> cop of a much shadier nature -- Ken Olin's manipulative boss -- on
> "EZ Streets."
After reading your plot summary, I wished I had watched NYPD Blue. I
would have loved to see John Finn. It must have been a very powerful
show.
maro
James Lloyd Hill
In article <5lvcks$k...@force.stwing.upenn.edu>
sepi...@force.stwing.upenn.edu (Alan Sepinwall) writes:
>Quick Hits:
>
> -Guest Star Notes: Leland Orser (Highsmith) is the latest member
> of the show's guest star casting carousel to make a return
> visit. He last appeared as a skel named Zeppo in the first
Not so. Orser appeared in last season's "He's Not Heavy, He's My Brother"
as a heroin junkie who killed a woman who fired his breakfast stash.
Jim
--
j-h...@coewl.cen.uiuc.edu http://www.swcp.com/~jimhill/
"Poor New Mexico! So far from Heaven; so close to Texas." -- M. Armijo
Alan Sepinwall
In article <cf9gzAeR...@netcom.com>, Mark Shaw <ms...@netcom.com> wrote:
>In article <5lvcks$k...@force.stwing.upenn.edu>,
>sepi...@force.stwing.upenn.edu (Alan Sepinwall) wrote:
>
>>2)Why would he be so quick to say "they got no game now" if he didn't
>>know it was going to happen in advance?, and
>
>corpse.
If Andy hadn't fired the shots, he wouldn't have been so self-composed,
because he wouldn't, among other things, know that the shooter wasn't
still out there.
>3)Why would he tell Bobby
>>to destroy the tape?
>
>Sipowicz is a good cop, able to think quickly and effectively.
But destroying the tape does Bobby a world of harm by casting suspicion on
him, and the only reason to do it is if Andy did the shooting and doesn't
want any evidence of his presence in the area.
>> If I may step out on a relatively sturdy limb, I'm
>>saying there's no question Sipowicz did it
>
>I'll bet you a bottle of wine you're wrong. If you don't drink
>wine, offer something of comparable value.
When I drink (which is pretty rare post-graduation), it's vodka. So, if
I'm right, you buy me a bottle of Stoli; if Andy didnt' do it, I owe you
a bottle of a similarly-priced wine. Deal?
If so, it's now recorded for posterity on dejanews.
>(watch, now the season
>>premiere in October'll say it was Upstairs John and I'll look like a
>>putz).
>
>Hmm, that's one possibility I hadn't considered.... :)
Actually, since Bill Brochtrup is joining the cast of Bochco's "Total
Security" (playing, not surprisingly, the receptionist/secretary of the
security firm), my theory doesn't hold up quite as well.
Alan Sepinwall * e-mail: sepi...@force.stwing.upenn.edu
Homepage: http://www.stwing.upenn.edu/~sepinwal/
NYPD Blue page: http://www.stwing.upenn.edu/~sepinwal/nypd.html
RANDOM QUOTE:
"I can't go to a bad movie by myself. What, am I gonna make
sarcastic remarks to *strangers* ????
-Jerry Seinfeld, "Seinfeld"
Sam Adams
Andy's reasons for asking Bobby to destroy the tape are not to save his
own butt, but because with Salvo dead and therefore no more sting
operation, it would take Bobby a whole lot of explaning to justify his
putting on a show of going to work for Salvo. It's unlikely Simone's
body mike would have picked up Sipowicz's voice anyway, since the
civillian kind at least have an effective range of about five feet or so
(for people talking in a normal tone of voice).
--Sam
David L. Butlien
Alan Sepinwall wrote:
>
> NYPD Blue, Season 4, Episode 22, "A Draining Experience"
well Alan, as someone (in large company I'd guess) who looks forward to
your reports, I say welcome back, thanks, and hope to see you in the
fall...
Mark Shaw
In article <5lvcks$k...@force.stwing.upenn.edu>,
sepi...@force.stwing.upenn.edu (Alan Sepinwall) wrote:
>Those who think Andy didn't do it, ask yourselves these questions:
>1)Why would he be "taking a left on Mulberry" at just that moment?, and
He wasn't. He was watching Simone's back, from around the corner,
and whipped around the corner when he heard the shots.
>2)Why would he be so quick to say "they got no game now" if he didn't
>know it was going to happen in advance?, and
Anyone that close to it would have known that as soon as he saw Salvo's
corpse.
3)Why would he tell Bobby
>to destroy the tape?
Sipowicz is a good cop, able to think quickly and effectively.
> If I may step out on a relatively sturdy limb, I'm
>saying there's no question Sipowicz did it
I'll bet you a bottle of wine you're wrong. If you don't drink
wine, offer something of comparable value.
(watch, now the season
>premiere in October'll say it was Upstairs John and I'll look like a
>putz).
Hmm, that's one possibility I hadn't considered.... :)
--
Mark Shaw <ms...@netcom.com>
PGP public key available at ftp.netcom.com:/pub/ms/mshaw
Chris Sonnack
Alan Sepinwall (sepi...@force.stwing.upenn.edu) wrote:
(some spoiler space...)
N
Y
P
D
B
l
u
e
N
Y
P
D
B
l
u
e
N
Y
P
D
B
l
u
e
I'm going to go out on a tiny, weak limb, and say Andy did NOT do it...
> Those who think Andy didn't do it, ask yourselves these questions:
> 1)Why would he be "taking a left on Mulberry" at just that moment?, and
As a previous poster said, he was watching Bobby's back. I agree.
> 2)Why would he be so quick to say "they got no game now" if he didn't
> know it was going to happen in advance?,
Again, as the previous guy said, he saw what happened and understood
the consequences immediately. He also knew Bobby had a nagra on him, so:
> 3)Why would he tell Bobby to destroy the tape?
Andy knew HIS voice was on the tape. The thing is:
> Unlike the drunken Andy with nothing to lose from the first season,
> Sipowicz now has "responsibilities" in Sylvia and Theo, so if he's going
> to kill a guy, he's gotta make himself absolutely invulnerable to
> suspicion. He's been a homicide cop a long time, and is smart enough to
> do that,...
Exactly. And I think it's TOO obvious for Andy to have done it.
How about Diane?
--
Chris Sonnack <cjso...@mmm.com> http://eishcq.mmm.com
Engineering Information Services/Information Technology/3M, St.Paul, Minn
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Never laugh at live dragons!
Opinions expressed herein are my own and may not represent those of my employer.
Edward C. Bennett
>If I may step out on a relatively sturdy limb, I'm
I don't think Andy did it for the simple reason that it would be such
an *incredibly* stupid thing for him to do.
--
Edward C. Bennett <edw...@rahul.net> 415-967-6849
"He's become a growling, snarling mass of white-hot canine terror."
Mark Shaw
In article <5m1qvf$p...@force.stwing.upenn.edu>,
sepi...@force.stwing.upenn.edu (Alan Sepinwall) wrote:
>In article <cf9gzAeR...@netcom.com>, Mark Shaw <ms...@netcom.com> wrote:
>>>2)Why would he be so quick to say "they got no game now" if he didn't
>>>know it was going to happen in advance?, and
>>
>>Anyone that close to it would have known that as soon as he saw Salvo's
>>corpse.
>
>If Andy hadn't fired the shots, he wouldn't have been so self-composed,
>because he wouldn't, among other things, know that the shooter wasn't
>still out there.
He didn't look all that composed to me, but you're right -- he was more
in control of himself than he should have been, even for a hard-bitten
homicide detective. Perhaps he saw the shooter take off; maybe he even
recognized him (or her).
>>3)Why would he tell Bobby
>>>to destroy the tape?
>>
>>Sipowicz is a good cop, able to think quickly and effectively.
>
>But destroying the tape does Bobby a world of harm by casting suspicion on
>him, and the only reason to do it is if Andy did the shooting and doesn't
>want any evidence of his presence in the area.
I was under the impression that the presence of the tape recorder was
known only to Simone, Sipowicz and Russell; that it was something Simone
was doing on his own in case Salvo let out with any interesting informa-
tion.
That being said, I honestly can't see any reason to ditch the recorder,
other than that Sipowicz' voice is on it. Unless they didn't want the
fact that Simone was wearing it to blow the undercover operation, but I
just don't see them being all that concerned about that.
Hmm, I take that back. If Sipowicz thought Simone was the shooter, he'd
tell him to ditch the tape because it might incriminate Simone.
>>> If I may step out on a relatively sturdy limb, I'm
>>>saying there's no question Sipowicz did it
>>
>>I'll bet you a bottle of wine you're wrong. If you don't drink
>>wine, offer something of comparable value.
>
>When I drink (which is pretty rare post-graduation), it's vodka. So, if
>I'm right, you buy me a bottle of Stoli; if Andy didnt' do it, I owe you
>a bottle of a similarly-priced wine. Deal?
Stoli'll work for me too. A fifth (.750 liter just doesn't roll off
the tongue like "a fifth" does, does it?) would be in the ballpark as
far as value. Or I could go a liter if you like; I'm pretty sure about
this. Your call.
Tom Robertson
Alan Sepinwall wrote:
>If Andy hadn't fired the shots, he wouldn't have been so self-composed,
>because he wouldn't, among other things, know that the shooter wasn't
>still out there.
This makes sense. It would have been a dereliction of duty for Andy
to not immediately go after the shooter. Only if it was either him or
someone whom he knew and wanted to protect would he act otherwise.
Phil Oliver
On 21 May 1997 13:50:20 -0400, sepi...@force.stwing.upenn.edu (Alan
Sepinwall) wrote:
<spoiler space included>
>Those who think Andy didn't do it, ask yourselves these questions:
>1)Why would he be "taking a left on Mulberry" at just that moment?, and
>2)Why would he be so quick to say "they got no game now" if he didn't
>know it was going to happen in advance?, and 3)Why would he tell Bobby
>to destroy the tape? If I may step out on a relatively sturdy limb, I'm
>saying there's no question Sipowicz did it (watch, now the season
>premiere in October'll say it was Upstairs John and I'll look like a
>putz).
I think that "Andy did it" is still pretty open. Although chances are
pretty good that Andy was involved, I still am not convinced that
Andy was the trigger man. Perhaps Andy did something that would
inevitably put Salvo's death in motion, but he didn't necessarily
pull the trigger himself.
> -Man, I am glad I make it a point to change the channel whenever
> a commercial for Blue comes on. If I'd seen the one that says,
> "Wait till you see how far Andy will go for his partner," I
> would've seen that ending coming a mile away.
I really need to learn to do that. And you might want to include
"I make it a point to not read a.t.nypd-blue in the day or two
before the show so that any viewers who see happen to see
the show a few days early won't tip me off". :)
-Phil Oliver
Nancy Dooley
I don't think Andy WAS self-composed; he acted like/looked like he was
pretty much on the panic button. He kept yelling, "This is what I
saw..." without finishing the statement. I also think he didn't go
after the shooter; he was concerned with getting away from the scene.
I also think Bobby thinks Andy was the shooter, that Andy was not the
shooter (but he probably set it up by "putting a stink" on the whole
undercover deal) and that Andy probably knows who the shooter was. As
for the shooter hanging around, why would he/she? It's called make
the shots and get outta there.
Oh, well, we'll all know in the fall, won't we.... ;-)
Nancy.
"You're only young once, but you can be immature
forever."
Loren Schoenberg
"David L. Butlien" <but...@cyburban.com> wrote:
>Alan Sepinwall wrote:
>>
>> NYPD Blue, Season 4, Episode 22, "A Draining Experience"
>> (snip)
>well Alan, as someone (in large company I'd guess) who looks forward to
>your reports, I say welcome back, thanks, and hope to see you in the
>fall...
one comment...
Andy seemed to holding a piece of paper in his hand when he went to
the bathroom door,only to find it locked. Maybe he had just uncovered
some information that he thought was vitalto Bobby and Salvo, and it
was in response to this that the shooting took place??
Loren Schoenberg
jim and/or ann
Alan Sepinwall wrote:
>
> -Guest Star Notes:
> Stanley DeSantis (Wentzel)
> also looked like he belonged in the club, but I couldn't find
> him anywhere in the episode guide prior to this week.
I thought the guy playing Dr. Wentzel looked familiar but I couldn't
place him until reading the name here. He was the mysteriously nerdish
Norman Neil Williams (the private detective trying to discover Mrs.
Madrigal's identity) in the miniseries "Tales of the City," based on the
Armistead Maupin novel.
jb
Chris Morris
nancy-...@uiowa.edu (Nancy Dooley) wrote:
>I also think Bobby thinks Andy was the shooter, that Andy was not the
>shooter (but he probably set it up by "putting a stink" on the whole
>undercover deal) and that Andy probably knows who the shooter was. As
>for the shooter hanging around, why would he/she? It's called make
>the shots and get outta there.
I keep going back to what Andy told the shrink. Something along the
lines of "The typical skel gets away with murder and walks. You
intellectual types gotta point the finger at an alternate suspect" or
something close to that.
Something tells me that may have been foreshadowing for next
season....
James Pavlovich
Tom Robertson wrote:
>
> Alan Sepinwall wrote:
>
> >If Andy hadn't fired the shots, he wouldn't have been so self-composed,
> >because he wouldn't, among other things, know that the shooter wasn't
> >still out there.
>
> This makes sense. It would have been a dereliction of duty for Andy
> to not immediately go after the shooter. Only if it was either him or
> someone whom he knew and wanted to protect would he act otherwise.
First off, Andy isn't all that composed at this point. Second, he is an
experienced cop, he recognizes an execution when he sees one. Therefore
he knows the shooter isn't going to stick around and wait to be made by
witnesses once he has done the job.
Andy's only concern is to make sure his partner is OK. He has no specific duty
to go after the shooter if he did not see the shooter or where he went.
Either Andy did a set up a la the Leary case or Salvo was shot by the dirty
cop because the feds were getting to close.
Once again I say that if Andy did commit cold blooded murder the writers screwed
up big time.
JGP
Phil Oliver
>Alan Sepinwall wrote:
>
>>
>> -Guest Star Notes:
>
>> Stanley DeSantis (Wentzel)
>> also looked like he belonged in the club, but I couldn't find
>> him anywhere in the episode guide prior to this week.
>
> I thought the guy playing Dr. Wentzel looked familiar but I couldn't
>place him until reading the name here. He was the mysteriously nerdish
>Norman Neil Williams (the private detective trying to discover Mrs.
>Madrigal's identity) in the miniseries "Tales of the City," based on the
>Armistead Maupin novel.
THAT's where I remembered him from. Those strange mannerisms
looked so familiar...
-Phil Oliver
Wade Keller
> In article <5m1qvf$p...@force.stwing.upenn.edu>,
> sepi...@force.stwing.upenn.edu (Alan Sepinwall) wrote:
> >In article <cf9gzAeR...@netcom.com>, Mark Shaw <ms...@netcom.com>
wrote:
>
> >>>2)Why would he be so quick to say "they got no game now" if he didn't
> >>>know it was going to happen in advance?, and
> >>
> >>Anyone that close to it would have known that as soon as he saw Salvo's
> >>corpse.
> >
> >If Andy hadn't fired the shots, he wouldn't have been so self-composed,
> >because he wouldn't, among other things, know that the shooter wasn't
> >still out there.
>
> He didn't look all that composed to me, but you're right -- he was more
> in control of himself than he should have been, even for a hard-bitten
> homicide detective. Perhaps he saw the shooter take off; maybe he even
> recognized him (or her).
>
> >>3)Why would he tell Bobby
> >>>to destroy the tape?
> >>
> >>Sipowicz is a good cop, able to think quickly and effectively.
> >
> >But destroying the tape does Bobby a world of harm by casting suspicion on
> >him, and the only reason to do it is if Andy did the shooting and doesn't
> >want any evidence of his presence in the area.
>
> I was under the impression that the presence of the tape recorder was
> known only to Simone, Sipowicz and Russell; that it was something Simone
> was doing on his own in case Salvo let out with any interesting informa-
> tion.
>
> That being said, I honestly can't see any reason to ditch the recorder,
> other than that Sipowicz' voice is on it. Unless they didn't want the
> fact that Simone was wearing it to blow the undercover operation, but I
> just don't see them being all that concerned about that.
>
> Hmm, I take that back. If Sipowicz thought Simone was the shooter, he'd
> tell him to ditch the tape because it might incriminate Simone.
>
> >>> If I may step out on a relatively sturdy limb, I'm
> >>>saying there's no question Sipowicz did it
> >>
Where was Russell? Perhaps Andy rushed to the scene in his car because he
discovered Russell零 plans to do the shooting to save Simone. Andy was
trying to get the scene to stop her. I don靖 see any holes in this theory,
although maybe there is one since I haven't seen anyone else post it.
Also, it零 not unheard of for Bochco to copy ideas from the past, and if
Russell did it, it would be similar to the first season of NYPD when David
Caruso零 cop girlfriend shot a mob guy.
I agree that Andy couldn靖 have done the shooting, and while he seemed
panicked, he seemed panicked in way that he was protecting someone else.
That would also explain why even though he didn靖 do the shooting, he
wasn靖 worried that the shooter might still fire off some rounds at him or
Simone.
Only Simone, Andy, and Russell knew that Bobby had the tape recorder on
him. They went out of their way in the previous segment to establish that
in the locker room. That said, Andy would want the tape destroyed because
if it wasn't, he (Andy) would be questioned on how he got to the scene so
fast and he would then have to cover for Russell, since according to my
theory, he knows Russell did it.
Also, an act such as shooting someone to protect Bobby would fit Russell's
character because she had just been through undercover herself and knows
what it can do to a person. Bobby is so important to her that she would do
anything to keep from losing him. Her character has has been established
as being extreme in her emotions, as evidenced by her 180 degree turn of
attitude regarding marrying Bobby after seeing Jerry MacGuire. This season
cleary established Russell as being emotionally chargable enough to shoot
someone to protect her man, and that she is tough enough to carry it out.
Any thoughts?
If you respond to this post, please e.mail me the response also. My server
can be a bit flaky and loses newsgroup messages quite often. Thanks.
Alan Sepinwall
In article <DVShzAeR...@netcom.com>, Mark Shaw <ms...@netcom.com> wrote:
>In article <5m1qvf$p...@force.stwing.upenn.edu>,
>sepi...@force.stwing.upenn.edu (Alan Sepinwall) wrote:
>>
>>But destroying the tape does Bobby a world of harm by casting suspicion on
>>him, and the only reason to do it is if Andy did the shooting and doesn't
>>want any evidence of his presence in the area.
>
>I was under the impression that the presence of the tape recorder was
>known only to Simone, Sipowicz and Russell; that it was something Simone
>was doing on his own in case Salvo let out with any interesting informa-
>tion.
No, the recorder was given to him by the feds, as a means of getting
evidence against Salvo. Remember, Bobby was sitting in the locker room
after having decided against wearing the radio mike, when Diane comes in
and asks, "Have they gotten you the Nagra (tape recorder) yet?"
>Stoli'll work for me too. A fifth (.750 liter just doesn't roll off
>the tongue like "a fifth" does, does it?) would be in the ballpark as
>far as value. Or I could go a liter if you like; I'm pretty sure about
>this. Your call.
Fine with me.
Alan Sepinwall * e-mail: sepi...@force.stwing.upenn.edu
Homepage: http://www.stwing.upenn.edu/~sepinwal/
NYPD Blue page: http://www.stwing.upenn.edu/~sepinwal/nypd.html
RANDOM QUOTE:
"I am a cipher...a cipher, wrapped in an enigma, smothered in secret
sauce."
-Stephen Root, "NewsRadio"
John Gruber
Alan Sepinwall (sepi...@force.stwing.upenn.edu) wrote:
: >3)Why would he tell Bobby
: >>to destroy the tape?
: >
: >Sipowicz is a good cop, able to think quickly and effectively.
: But destroying the tape does Bobby a world of harm by casting suspicion on
: him, and the only reason to do it is if Andy did the shooting and doesn't
: want any evidence of his presence in the area.
I think Bobby might be able to get away with "I wasn't wearing a wire."
Why not, they might ask him. "I thought maybe they'd frisk me."
--
Gruber
John Gruber
Wade Keller (kell...@gold.tc.umn.edu) wrote:
: Where was Russell? Perhaps Andy rushed to the scene in his car because he
: discovered Russell零 plans to do the shooting to save Simone. Andy was
: trying to get the scene to stop her. I don靖 see any holes in this theory,
: although maybe there is one since I haven't seen anyone else post it.
How about: It's not in Diane's character to do something like that?
Last we saw Diane, she wanted to help Bobby by fucking his brains out.
Last we saw Andy, prior to the shooting, he's in the locker room with
Bobby trying to hatch a desperate scheme to get Bobby out of this jam.
Bobby shoots down his oringial idea -- arresting Salvo -- so Sipowicz
comes up with his own: shoot the son of a bitch.
: Also, it零 not unheard of for Bochco to copy ideas from the past, and if
: Russell did it, it would be similar to the first season of NYPD when David
: Caruso零 cop girlfriend shot a mob guy.
It's not similar at all.
: I agree that Andy couldn靖 have done the shooting, and while he seemed
: panicked, he seemed panicked in way that he was protecting someone else.
: That would also explain why even though he didn靖 do the shooting, he
: wasn靖 worried that the shooter might still fire off some rounds at him or
: Simone.
Who is this "mystery shooter" Sipowicz is protecting? No way could it be
Diane.
NYPD BLUE plot points don't usually hinge on typical TV surprises.
Milch doesn't sucker punch us with "all evidence points to A, but guess
what, it's B!". If it looks like Andy followed Bobby, then shot Salvo as
soon as he got a clear shot, that's probably what happened.
: Also, an act such as shooting someone to protect Bobby would fit Russell's
: character because she had just been through undercover herself and knows
Suffice it to say, your conception of Diane's character is way off from mine.
--
Gruber