Retro Television Review: Homicide: Life on the Street 5.9 “Control”


Welcome to Retro Television Reviews, a feature where we review some of our favorite and least favorite shows of the past!  On Sundays, I will be reviewing Homicide: Life On The Street, which aired from 1993 to 1999, on NBC!  It  can be viewed on Peacock.

Pembleton’s back!

Episode 5.9 “Control”

(Dir by Jean de Segonzac, originally aired on December 6th, 1996)

A drug dealer named Reggie Copeland has been murdered and word on the street is that the killing was set up by Junior Bunk (Mekhi Phifer), who just happens to be the nephew of drug lord Luther Mahoney (Erik Todd Dellums).  When Lewis and Detective Stivers (Toni Lewis) arrest Junior, he immediately starts crying.

That certainly makes Lewis happy.  He’s obsessed with taking down Mahoney.  Junior gives the detectives the name of the man who he hired, on Luther’s behalf, to assassinate Copeland.  Munch and Lewis take a trip to the worst city on Earth (Philadelphia, if you had to ask) and arrest the gunman.  Even Ed Danvers thinks that they’re finally on the verge of nailing Luther….

Luther, it turns out, has got friends everywhere.  Even while sitting in a holding cell, he is able to find out the name of the hotel where the police are hiding Junior.  When the cops order room service, Junior makes sure that a baggie with two gold stars is included in Junior’s sandwich.  (All of Luther’s heroin comes in baggies with two stars.)  Junior realizes that Luther knows exactly where he is.  Junior refuses to testify and recants his previous confession.  And Luther … Luther goes free again!

Kellerman would be upset, except for the fact that he’s still under suspension.  (They’re really dragging this story out, aren’t they?)  Kellerman is in such a bad mood that he even kicks Brodie off of his house boat for being too happy.  However, at the end of the episode, Dr. Cox shows up at Kellerman’s houseboat.  I’m going to guess that she’ll be allowed to stay on the boat.

However, the main event of this episode is that Pembleton is working his first case since his stroke.  A woman has been found dead in her home, stabbed twenty times.  Meanwhile, her two young sons were both shot execution style.  Bayliss may be the primary but Pembleton is determined to take charge.  Pembleton thinks that the murderer was the woman’s boyfriend, a sleazy musician named Jimmy Sutter (Andrew DeAngelo).  Bayliss thinks that the murderer was the woman’s rigid ex-husbad, Lt. Commander Alex Clifton (Michael Gaston).

From the start, it’s pretty obvious that Clifton’s the murderer.  He’s too cold and unemotional when he is told about the murderers.  He’s very tightly wound.  The fact that the woman was killed in a fury but her children were killed “cleanly and efficiently,” (as Pembleton put it) indicated to me that the murderer was driven by rage against the mother but, in his twisted way, he felt he was sparing the children an even worse fate.  Clifton is obviously the killer and Pembleton, to his credit, eventually comes to realize it.

Unfortunately, the case nearly falls apart in the Box.  Pembleton and Bayliss have lost their rhythm as partners.  Bayliss gets frustrated when Pembleton suddenly starts asking Clifton about the blood pressure medicine he takes.  “Do you get any side effects?” Pembleton asks.  Outside of the interrogation room, Bayliss admits that he’s scared Pembleton is going to “stroke out” and die.  “Everyone dies!” Pembleton says.

Finally, Bayliss and Pembleton make it work.  They turn up the heart in the Box and when Clifton takes off his jacket and very carefully folds it, Bayliss presumes to sit down on the jacket.  Clifton keeps taking the jacket back and refolding it.  Bayliss spills water on the jacket.  Clifton finally loses it, yelling and admitting that he killed his ex-wife and his two sons.

Wow, this was a good episode.  Michael Gaston give a chillingly believable performance as Clifton.  Erik Todd Dellums was, as usual, magnetically evil as Luther.  Best of all, it was good to see Kyle Secor and Andre Braugher working a case together.  Pembleton is back and it’s about time!

A Movie A Day #285: Bless The Child (2000, directed by Chuck Russell)


Kim Basinger is Maggie, a nurse who has adopted her autistic niece, Cody.  Her sister, Jenna (Angela Bettis), used to be a junkie but now she has cleaned up her act and married a former-child star-turned-cult leader, Eric Stark (Rufus Sewell).  Because Jenna’s daughter has supernatural powers and Eric is a Satanist, they want the little girl back.  Christina Ricci is Cheri, a junkie goth who used to be a member of the cult and who tries to warn Maggie before getting her head chopped off.  Jimmy Smits is John Travis, the FBI agent who helps Maggie out when Jenna and Eric kidnap Cody.  Mostly, though, he’s just Jimmy Smits, a TV actor who looks out of place whenever he appears in a movie.

Bless the Child was one of two movies that Kim Basinger made after winning an Oscar for L.A. Confidential.  She also made I Dreamed Of Africa, which probably did the most damage to her career but the box office and critical failure of Bless The Child probably did not help either.  Bless The Child was an overlong rip-off of The Omen films.  The only suspense is whether Cody is the antichrist or the reborn messiah.  Basinger and Jimmy Smits both look lost amid all the theological chaos raging around them.  Even Christina Ricci is wasted in a role that could have been played by anyone willing to dye her hair black.

One final note: Rufus Sewell is not terrible in Bless The Child, even if the majority of his lines sound more appropriate for Darth Vader than a former child actor.  (He even tells Maggie to feel the hate growing inside of her, like Vader trying to draw Luke over to the dark side.)  Sewell is still a busy actor but it seems like he has never really gotten his due in Hollywood.  Most of the good Rufus Sewell roles now seem to go to Jude Law.

Film Review: Bridge of Spies (dir by Steven Spielberg)


Bridge_of_Spies_poster

I saw Bridge of Spies last weekend and I’m a little bit surprised that I haven’t gotten around to writing a review until now.  After all, this is not only the latest film from Steven Spielberg but it also stars the universally beloved Tom Hanks and it’s currently being touted as a possible best picture nominee.  (Mark Rylance, who plays an imprisoned spy in this film, is also emerging as a front runner for best supporting actor.)  The screenplay was written by the Coen Brothers.  (Oddly enough, films scripted by the Coens — like Unbroken, for instance — tend to be far more conventional and far less snarky than films actually directed by the Coens.)  Even beyond its impressive pedigree, Bridge of Spies is a historical drama and by now, everyone should know how much I love historical dramas.

And the thing is, I enjoyed Bridge of Spies.  I thought it was a well-made film.  I thought that Tom Hanks was well-cast as an idealistic lawyer who stands up for truth, justice, and the Constitution.  I agreed with the pundits who thought Mark Rylance was award-worthy.  It’s become a bit of a cliché for Amy Ryan to show up as an understanding wife but it’s a role she plays well and she made the most of her scenes with Tom Hanks.  Steven Spielberg knows how to put a good film together.  This really should have been a film about which I rushed home to rave.

And yet, at the same time, I just could not work up that much enthusiasm for Bridge of Spies.  It’s a good film but there’s nothing unexpected about it.  There’s nothing surprising about the film.  Steven Spielberg is one of the most commercially successful directors in history and the American film establishment pretty much orbits around him.  He’s good at what he does and he deserves his success.  Unfortunately, he doesn’t have a subversive bone in his body.  Bridge of Spies is a lot like his previous Oscar contender, Lincoln.  It’s very well-made.  It’s the epitome of competence.  But there’s not a truly surprising or unexpected moment to be found in the film.

And I have to admit that, even as I enjoyed Bridge of Spies, I still found myself frustrated by just how risk-adverse a film it truly was.  After all, we’re living in the age of Ex Machina, Upstream Color, and Sicario.  Bridge of Spies is a good movie and, in many ways, it provides a very valuable history lesson.  (The film’s best moments were the one that contrasted the U.S. with the cold desolation of communist-controlled East Germany.)  But, overall, it just didn’t make a huge impression on me.  It was just a a little bit too safe in its approach.