Jones: "Why not?"
Michael showed up at the end of the episode looking like an extra in a biker movie. Have we ever seen him looking that shaggy? Who cares? Damn, I was glad to see him.
Casting Edward Woodward as "Jones" was a good move. You look at him and believe he's a powerful man. Too bad Jones is such an outrageously bad father. I mean, think about it. Nikita was left with alcoholic mother who neglected her. Homeless, death row, railroaded into Section? Nikita has every right to be royally pissed off about being abandoned and manipulated for her entire life. I don't see a lot of Father's Day cards in their future, even if Nikita did consent in the end to go out to dinner with him.
And there's a mole in Section. Again. For such a powerful, covert organization, they get breached way too often. With a choice of two, it felt like it should have been O'Brien. (I never believed it was Operations.) I was somewhat sorry to see O'Brien meet his Jurgen-like death.
But I'm basically okay with the departure of O'Brien, because we have Michael back now. Has Michael really turned this time? No, I just don't believe it. Sure, he told them that they could take out everyone in Section but Nikita, and that's consistent with Michael as a character, but I still don't believe it. He's up to something else.
We got several scenes at the Collective in order to set up Michael's return. I'm not impressed with the Collective. It appears to be a bunch of nondescript guys in khakis lurking around in a basement. Maybe I was expecting a bunch of strange people with Russian accents and eye patches sitting around a table holding Persian cats on their laps.
Bits and pieces:
— During the scene in O'Brien's apartment, I started thinking that Michael was hiding in plain sight, masquerading as O'Brien just as Nikita masqueraded as Quinn. I'm sort of sorry it didn't turn out that way. Wouldn't that have been cool?
— So Michelle really is Nikita's sister? It seems unfair that Michelle gets to lounge about the pool drinking wine while Nikita keeps risking her life in Section.
— The extreme scar on Michael's left cheek was gone.
— O'Brien was doing favors for Nikita. I think he really was hot for her. Too bad we'll never know for sure.
— Nikita said "I won't bite" just before she kissed O'Brien into unconsciousness. So, technically, she did bite. Sort of.
— Does Nikita have a last name now? No, I don't think so. "Mr. Jones" seems to be a pseudonym, like "Alias Smith and Jones."
Quotes:
Jones: "You belonged in Section."
Nikita: "Nobody belongs in Section."
Nikita: "Do you want me to tell you how much I admire your sacrifices?"
Jones: "No. Just pout because Daddy never took you to the zoo."
Oh, come on. Seven years in Section can't really be compared to not taking your kid on an outing.
Two out of four stars,
Billie
---
Billie Doux loves good television and spends way too much time writing about it.
Another illogical script riddled with plot holes from writer Hertzog. The casting of Edward Woodward as the real Mr. Jones/Nikita’s father is wonderful, but unfortunately, budget constraints damage the credibility of both the action sequences (which are blatantly cheap and unexciting) and the Collective (which is supposed to be the “most dangerous threat we’ve ever had to face”, but is depicted as a bunch of wimps hanging out in someone’s basement). In addition, the poor casting of both Haled and Michelle causes every one of their scenes to fall flat. Equally annoying is O’Brien’s pointless death just as he was starting to become interesting as a character. At least the identity of the mole is a surprising development, though there are plenty of logic flaws in this revelation.
ReplyDeleteSpoilers follow...
Even with repeated viewing, it is impossible to untangle the mess of illogical and contradictory plot points, so I will only mention the most confusing inconsistencies:
– How did Mr. Jones find out that classified information was being left at the dead drop? There is no mention of Mr. Jones having a spy in the Collective.
– It is established that the Collective gets information from the mole by “transmission on subchannel 7". It makes no sense that Michael would bother with a shadow disc when he could have just transmitted the data, but the follow-up scene of the Collective receiving messages from the mole implies that Michael was indeed responsible for the disc.
– The disc Nikita found at the drop is supposed to contain Section-encrypted Level 8 material (though the specific contents are never described). If the disc was from Michael, then he would have had to hack into Section computers to steal the data. But why would Michael bother? He is already providing tactical plans to the Collective based on his own knowledge of Section protocols and contingencies (“My guesswork is better than your intel”).
– Because of the discrepancies about the disc, it appears that there is still a mole in Section. Further evidence to support this: Graff says “intel shows no signs of high level changes in Section One”, plus Graff later identifies Michael on sight, and knows at least the basic details of his tenure in Section.
– Mr. Jones limits the choice of suspected moles to only two (Operations and O’Brien) because everyone else was “cleared” – how? And why doesn’t Nikita question these assumptions? In addition, since the disc is the only “evidence” presented to the viewer, the lack of explanation as to how O’Brien could get access to Level 8 material is a glaring omission that undermines Mr. Jones’ belief that O’Brien is the mole.
– Both Mr. Jones and Nikita are supposed to be highly intelligent, so it would be nice if the script actually demonstrated that intelligence by having them perform some clever deductions to figure out the mole. Instead, they seem to base their conclusions on personal opinion and subjective interpretation of events. Even worse is Nikita’s “investigation” of O’Brien, which involves knocking him out and searching his apartment. Not much skill or intelligence required for that plan, and it would hardly be a comprehensive investigation, either. Both characters are diminished by such inept writing.
Then there are the problems with the character of Mr. Jones:
– not warning Nikita that the drop was hot seems either petty or careless
– the line about “pouting” alienates the audience, as Mr. Jones seems to be belittling Nikita’s danger and suffering while he and Michelle were living in the lap of luxury
– Operations seems to recognize the real Mr. Jones (“I should have known”), and yet previously seemed to accept Mick as Mr. Jones. What gives?
– Why would Mr. Jones suddenly decide to show his face in Section One when he has kept his identity a secret all these years?
The only good lines:
Nikita giving her father a taste of his own medicine: “Stand on your own and be strong.”
Michael, demonstrating why he is the best: "“My guesswork is better than your intel”
As well as being a bit confused by the contradictions and plot holes (although not nearly as aggitated as Serena!), I am also confused about the timeline.
ReplyDeleteHow much time is supposed to have gone by between seasons 4 and 5? Do we get any indication? Michael's hair was WAY too long for this to only be weeks or months, or maybe it was just the lack of resources to properly style the mullet!!
Speaking of hair - do you think that Don Francks actually has his own hair? It looks pretty thick on top to be real - and we've never seen him without the bandana (that would just be weird!).
But I digress.
Despite the flaws, really, we're all just hanging on to see the outcome of Michael and Nikita's relationship, right? And because, seriously, Roy Dupuis can do no wrong : )