Happy
Labor Day weekend, everyone!
I
saw season 5’s The Mystified Miner again, in full, Friday night. I had
wondered if I would feel any different about it, but I didn’t in the least. If
anything, I was more irritated than before! And I discovered other things I’d forgotten
that irritated me too.
The
plot itself is very intense and exciting, between Kathie Browne guesting and a
shoebox of money and the two mysteriously appearing and disappearing Amelia
Cornings. My most favorite scene is when Perry, Paul, Tragg, Andy, and Brice
find the crooks’ hideout and save the real Amelia Corning. It’s quite different
from most other episodes! I figured Mrs. Corning was probably dead. It was a
thrill to realize she had been kidnapped and was still alive.
This
one is based on a book, and if the plot in it is anything like this episode, I
stand by my opinion that Gardner really knew to write a good plot. It’s some of
the details within said plot that he had some trouble with.
As
previously mentioned here more than once, Perry really pulls a doozy of a stunt
in this one. Actually, he pulls more than one. Having a lab man go over the car
to satisfy himself as to fingerprints and blood? I don’t recall him ever going
that far in any other episode. He always respected the police and stood back to let them do
whatever they had to with vehicles and homes and whatnot. The only other time I
remember him fooling around with a murder scene is in the very first episode, The
Restless Redhead, when he fires a gun and makes two new bullet holes in the
area so it looks like his client’s gun fired those harmless shots. Good grief,
Counselor!
(Then there's the infamous doorbell/buzzer antics in The Curious Bride. If I remember right, that location was across from the murder scene, instead of being the murder scene. It's still an integral part of the case, though. But that time it was brought to everyone's attention, and Perry was testing a witness, so it doesn't seem quite as bad as these other times.)
(Then there's the infamous doorbell/buzzer antics in The Curious Bride. If I remember right, that location was across from the murder scene, instead of being the murder scene. It's still an integral part of the case, though. But that time it was brought to everyone's attention, and Perry was testing a witness, so it doesn't seem quite as bad as these other times.)
And
then there’s the previously complained-of stunt with the car in this Mystified
Miner episode, when he lets the air out of a tire and recruits a bunch of
kids to change it, so their fingerprints will be all over the thing. That was
terrible!
But
you know, I think what annoys me the very most about those antics is something
I just realized Friday night. Perry is way better and way cooler than to have
to resort to such cheap shyster stunts. Those are the kinds of things he pulled
in the early books, I’m told, where he really did come across at least somewhat
as a shyster lawyer. I’m not sure why Gardner wanted to do that when he was
supposed to be improving the public’s image of lawyers. Well, I suppose he must
have succeeded with some people, anyway, or those first books would not have
taken off. And I wouldn’t be surprised if he managed to take down some
people’s opinions of the police and the district attorney at the same time.
Seriously,
though, television Perry’s biggest weapon is his sharp legal mind when he goes
to work in the courtroom. And his best “tricks” are his elaborate plans and
demonstrations in court to show what really happened. It may turn things into a
sideshow, but it is very effective. I am not complaining about those
demonstrations, not in the least. This is completely different.
When
he proves time and time again that he doesn’t need to do things like messing
around with the murder scenes to manipulate his cases in his clients’ favor, to
have him suddenly do it feels very, very wrong. Television Perry graduated
beyond such stereotypical stunts (as did the book Perry in later volumes). I
don’t like seeing him fall back on them, especially after that point in time.
Filming a book that may have included such antics is no excuse. If that was the
case with the book, the television version should have deviated. (Or been
filmed in season 1.)
And
then we come to a third thing that annoyed me. The audience is no doubt
supposed to feel that Lieutenant Tragg is totally in the wrong by questioning
Susan Fisher and Della Street at the station when he realized Perry had
neglected to mention certain information involving the murder and the people
involved (re: Susan). But I say he’s fully in the right. What’s more, it’s not
the first time he’s done it, not by a long shot. And yet Perry is absolutely
furious, for one of a handful of times in the series. I don’t think he’s ever
treated Tragg more coldly.
I
suppose fans of the Perry and Della dynamic might point to that with glee and
say that Perry is so angry because Della is being questioned. And . . .
well, I have to admit that’s possible. It’s more logical than thinking that the
case itself is getting him that tied up in knots. Except that Della has been
questioned before. That isn’t a new scenario, either.
.
. . I wonder if what Perry is really mad about is that Tragg is sitting at
Della’s desk (and answering her phone)? Suddenly Perry’s exclamation of “This
time you’ve gone too far!” takes on a whole new meaning. I am amused.
And
it’s all supposed to look like Perry really didn’t “obscure” Susan’s
fingerprints, as Tragg accuses, since he pulled that stunt with the kids and
made more fingerprints instead of wiping the car clean. But he did
obscure her prints. He just didn’t do it the way Tragg thought he would. And
the way he did it, there’s no way for Tragg to prove anything. Which Perry
knows quite well. I suppose the audience is also supposed to think Perry did a
wonderful, heroic thing there. But I most strenuously disagree. It was
unnecessary and cheap.
Between
Perry’s gimmick with the car and calling out the lab man, Hamilton would have
been thoroughly justified in bringing charges against Perry in that episode. As
it is, Hamilton doesn’t know about the car gag, to my knowledge. No one really
does. Tragg is most likely left absolutely bewildered (or else still suspicious
of Perry but without a way to prove anything). And since Perry turns the lab
evidence over to the police after Susan is arrested, they apparently have no
claim on bringing charges against him for that, either. But since Perry knows
very well what he’s doing, I say calling out his own lab man is tampering with
evidence. The thing with the fingerprints on the car (and moving it at all!) is still what gets on my nerves the most,
however.
Also,
I don’t like when the judge thinks Hamilton is out of line for one of his
objections. Sometimes Hamilton is, I’m willing to admit that. But this time I
think he’s in the right. It’s kind of aggravating when the judges side with
Perry even in those cases. I think most of the time, though, they’re a little
more strict. At least, they sustain Hamilton’s objections more than some people
remember, and some of them don’t like Perry’s “fishing trips”. And I remember one
judge who comes down pretty hard on both of them. That is certainly
interesting.
Perry
is a hero to me when he doesn’t resort to stingy shyster tricks to get ahead. I
love when he solves the cases and how determined he is to prove his clients
innocent. And I adore the little kindnesses he shows and how often he takes on
cases where the clients can’t pay much, if anything. But when he pulls things
like what he did in this episode, I am most displeased.
I
don’t really like the message it sends out, either, considering that Perry is
the protagonist, someone to look up to, and is never called out for what he
does in this episode. Sometimes other characters, Paul as well as Hamilton and
the police, comment negatively on what Perry’s doing. They didn't here; they didn't know (other than what Tragg suspected and couldn't prove). Strange, that the very worst
things he’s done are never discovered. Pulling stunts like that is not
okay, folks. And said stunts shouldn’t be done by a good guy who’s proven
himself way better than that, unless they’re going to do something fascinating and
possibly character-developing with the angle and say that he got extremely
desperate that time. (Sort of a “Stumbling/Fallen Hero” storyline, where the
act would be treated as bad.) And it doesn’t seem like he would have become
that desperate; the case wasn’t any more serious than the great majority of the
rest of them.
Even
if they were going to use that angle, though, it could still be construed as
out-of-character behavior if it wasn’t written right. I might actually be
really interested in seeing one that was written well. (Although it
would be very depressing, I’m sure, even if it managed to have a hopeful ending.)
I love both of the episodes where Perry has moral dilemmas. I’d rather see him
make the right choice in the end, though, as he does in the existing moral
dilemma episodes, instead of choosing to pull a Mystified Miner stunt.
If The Mystified
Miner had been filmed for season 1, it would make a lot more sense,
characterization-wise, but I’d still be just as irritated with Perry’s stunts.
And I can’t say I really would have wanted it to be season 1 instead of 5, for at
least one reason: Andy.
No comments:
Post a Comment