(1,541-word review) Based on the ending, one of the theories I floated around in my review of the premiere could turn into a reality. My "original" theory regarding this potential plot angle was that O'Donnell would be revealed as an enemy by the end, having pretended to be on Reacher's side. There was a subtle aura of suspicion around his first appearance: the backdrop is Neagley's ransacked hotel room, he's the main character of this metaphorical narrative, and he has the benefit of the doubt to convincingly shift blame, you know? But I still gave him the benefit of the doubt, and whether or not the writers intended for you to come to the assumption of his further involvement, which is now looking to be a red herring, is anyone's guess.
More importantly, I also floated the possibility that a different member of Reacher's unit could fit the bill. Picard was a traitor (or rather a wolf in sheep's clothing) in the first season, and that kind of element feels like something you'd see used all the time in similar stories; it feels so common. I wouldn't be surprised if Lee Child repeated it or did a similar enough plot point throughout multiple novels – to varying degrees, at the very least. And the writers are toying with that part of my overall theory, though this implication of Swan's involvement might be yet another red herring, or the first red herring if they didn't intend for the audience to be wary of O'Donnell's allegiance.
They might even hoodwink me (and hoodwinked others who were in either of those two boats, or both) a third time by going the full mile of making a member of the Special Investigators an antagonist after revealing that it isn't Swan. The only remaining member, in the event of that scenario, would be Dixon. I'm vaguely aware that Reacher never has a long-lasting, in the sense of an over-the-course-of-multiple-novels, or even permanent love interest in the source material. I may have seen an announcement, stating Shaun Sipos' (O'Donnell) return for the third season a couple of months ago – nothing about Serinda Swan (Dixon).
Those things contribute to various things that may end up happening concerning her character. If she's an antagonist, she'll likely die by the end, probably at the hand of Reacher. If she's one of the good ones, death could still await her. Or everything turns out fine, as it did with Roscoe, and her fling with Reacher will end on the same note – off to the next season where a different love interest awaits.
Concerning the implication with Swan, he possibly wasn't aware of whatever was going on, found out, went along with it, then changed his mind once the other three guys got wind of it, specifically when they started getting taken out; he got killed, went on the run and got killed, or he's still on the run. Another course of events is that the first two happened, only he had a problem with it, starting poking around, which led to him getting Franz involved, who then got Sanchez and Orozco in on the investigation. If that's the case, Robert Patrick's character likely doesn't know, given he mentioned getting "a bead on" Franz's "buddies in Atlantic City" and Franz's defiant silence during torture, suggesting Swan's part in the whole thing remained close-lipped. Variations of that avenue of theory include him being the reason Franz, hence Sanchez and Orozco, got discovered, or somehow getting found out himself, subsequently being taken out.
The narrative is seemingly heading toward making him involved in a "You're going to get torn in half by Reacher" sort of way. That can explain why his apartment was the one place that wasn't ransacked, which the writers made a point out of by having Dixon bring it up as a thing that must mean something in the previous episode. There's also the continual mention of Swan by the characters. That makes sense narratively, but it makes me feel like there's a deeper reveal coming than him being dead. But I'm probably looking too deeply into it.
Moving away from the topic at hand, of theories and theorizing, for a moment, mainly because there's more where that came from after this, I want to switch the topic to Russo's character. He seems characterized as that by-the-books character, a role Finlay's character revolved around in the first season, who's always going on about it – breathing down the necks of the characters who want to take matters into their own hands, which writers almost always make sure to include in various shows and films, and I have no idea why. I'm not sure if it's to prop up the characters who dare to go against that type of character and those moralistic, stickler-coded values in a "Stick it to the Man" manner; conversely, I'm not sure if it stems from a borderline authoritarian-fueled obligation forced upon writers to adhere. The reasoning possibly comes down to a simple thing: creating the sort of clashing dynamic you'd usually see between such characters and the conflicting ones, often the main character. That trope is inherently annoying and unneeded.
Interestingly enough, I happened to see a photo or two of Russo when this season was airing – and, oddly, I automatically assumed that he must be from Reacher's unit. That would've been so much better than his actual characterization. The stickler-cop routine is cheap and diminishing. I don't know if most TV show/film characters like this are often New Yorkers as well, but that aspect did feel like an addition to distract you from how weak his overall characterization is – a good ol' sleight of hand "Look at this stereotypical, foul-mouthed (simply in the sense of almost swearing every other word: not necessarily a negative thing, at least in real life, but TV shows and films can be a different story) New Yorker instead of seeing a trope-laden, empty cardboard cutout" routine to get you to mistakenly believe he's an interesting or even entertaining character because of the stereotypical, direct (with some spice) shtick.
Now, it's time to circle back to the topic of theories. One of my loose, tossed-out-there theoretical thoughts that I included in my review of the previous episode concerning Robert Patrick's character, whose name we now know is Langston, was on the money. We haven't had this explicitly stated yet, but it does appear that he has a leadership role at New Age Technologies – most likely the top guy, CEO-style. I seemingly predicted that part correctly.
So far, it appears that Langston is selling "products" (weapons or otherwise) to the overall military, given he's presumably the CEO himself of an aerospace company, while the military-official-seeming guy who, in the previous episode, executed a transaction with Adrian, is the guy in charge of doing the official transactions for the military, only he's in on it: sporadically giving information about shipments here and there to Adrian – he uses that information to steal the shipments, then sells the weapons to the highest bidder. I'm mostly spit-balling without much basis regarding the "military" guy's role in the entire process. It's anyone's guess.
I've considered the possibility that he isn't a second-party, military-associated cog in the machine but rather an extended arm of Langston. The chain of command (in the sense of Point A to Point B to Point C within the order of events) may go Langston/"military guy" > Adrian > highest bidders. But I feel like he's an additional party besides the other two guys. The way I figure that revolves around his need for reassurance from Adrian in the previous episode that "the weapons" will "all be used overseas" and that the truck driver of the shipment won't be harmed. He may turn out to be a piece of the puzzle that contributes to the downfall of everyone and everything else involved in whatever Franz, Sanchez, and Orozco were investigating.
This episode also had more humor and comedic undertones than there was in the previous two; it felt that way, at least. It feels like a balance has been found between subtle moments like that, other subtle elements, and everything else – leading this season closer to the first season's synergy.
Additionally, the action is heating up, already exceeding what we got from that component back then. The two action sequences, at least the first one, as the second one was less of an "action sequence" – Reacher & Crew's raid on Trevor Saropian's "house," which was epic, and their easy-peasy, in-and-out infiltration on New Age Technologies at the end, despite being clean with no resistance (no gunfights/action sequences/fight sequences), was equally as epic – were better than any of the action in the first season. It's starting to look as if the odd inkling I got from the premiere that this season will be more action-oriented/action-y, comparable to the atmospherical commonality of action films, is relatively close to the mark. I suspect there are more excitingly enjoyable, even better action sequences throughout the remaining episodes.
In short, you DO NOT mess with the Special Investigators! Everyone, their dog, and Swan's dead dog do, but we might as well keep saying the catchphrase; the characters most certainly will.
Review by LineageBlockedParent2024-04-24T21:57:07Z
(1,541-word review) Based on the ending, one of the theories I floated around in my review of the premiere could turn into a reality. My "original" theory regarding this potential plot angle was that O'Donnell would be revealed as an enemy by the end, having pretended to be on Reacher's side. There was a subtle aura of suspicion around his first appearance: the backdrop is Neagley's ransacked hotel room, he's the main character of this metaphorical narrative, and he has the benefit of the doubt to convincingly shift blame, you know? But I still gave him the benefit of the doubt, and whether or not the writers intended for you to come to the assumption of his further involvement, which is now looking to be a red herring, is anyone's guess.
More importantly, I also floated the possibility that a different member of Reacher's unit could fit the bill. Picard was a traitor (or rather a wolf in sheep's clothing) in the first season, and that kind of element feels like something you'd see used all the time in similar stories; it feels so common. I wouldn't be surprised if Lee Child repeated it or did a similar enough plot point throughout multiple novels – to varying degrees, at the very least. And the writers are toying with that part of my overall theory, though this implication of Swan's involvement might be yet another red herring, or the first red herring if they didn't intend for the audience to be wary of O'Donnell's allegiance.
They might even hoodwink me (and hoodwinked others who were in either of those two boats, or both) a third time by going the full mile of making a member of the Special Investigators an antagonist after revealing that it isn't Swan. The only remaining member, in the event of that scenario, would be Dixon. I'm vaguely aware that Reacher never has a long-lasting, in the sense of an over-the-course-of-multiple-novels, or even permanent love interest in the source material. I may have seen an announcement, stating Shaun Sipos' (O'Donnell) return for the third season a couple of months ago – nothing about Serinda Swan (Dixon).
Those things contribute to various things that may end up happening concerning her character. If she's an antagonist, she'll likely die by the end, probably at the hand of Reacher. If she's one of the good ones, death could still await her. Or everything turns out fine, as it did with Roscoe, and her fling with Reacher will end on the same note – off to the next season where a different love interest awaits.
Concerning the implication with Swan, he possibly wasn't aware of whatever was going on, found out, went along with it, then changed his mind once the other three guys got wind of it, specifically when they started getting taken out; he got killed, went on the run and got killed, or he's still on the run. Another course of events is that the first two happened, only he had a problem with it, starting poking around, which led to him getting Franz involved, who then got Sanchez and Orozco in on the investigation. If that's the case, Robert Patrick's character likely doesn't know, given he mentioned getting "a bead on" Franz's "buddies in Atlantic City" and Franz's defiant silence during torture, suggesting Swan's part in the whole thing remained close-lipped. Variations of that avenue of theory include him being the reason Franz, hence Sanchez and Orozco, got discovered, or somehow getting found out himself, subsequently being taken out.
The narrative is seemingly heading toward making him involved in a "You're going to get torn in half by Reacher" sort of way. That can explain why his apartment was the one place that wasn't ransacked, which the writers made a point out of by having Dixon bring it up as a thing that must mean something in the previous episode. There's also the continual mention of Swan by the characters. That makes sense narratively, but it makes me feel like there's a deeper reveal coming than him being dead. But I'm probably looking too deeply into it.
Moving away from the topic at hand, of theories and theorizing, for a moment, mainly because there's more where that came from after this, I want to switch the topic to Russo's character. He seems characterized as that by-the-books character, a role Finlay's character revolved around in the first season, who's always going on about it – breathing down the necks of the characters who want to take matters into their own hands, which writers almost always make sure to include in various shows and films, and I have no idea why. I'm not sure if it's to prop up the characters who dare to go against that type of character and those moralistic, stickler-coded values in a "Stick it to the Man" manner; conversely, I'm not sure if it stems from a borderline authoritarian-fueled obligation forced upon writers to adhere. The reasoning possibly comes down to a simple thing: creating the sort of clashing dynamic you'd usually see between such characters and the conflicting ones, often the main character. That trope is inherently annoying and unneeded.
Interestingly enough, I happened to see a photo or two of Russo when this season was airing – and, oddly, I automatically assumed that he must be from Reacher's unit. That would've been so much better than his actual characterization. The stickler-cop routine is cheap and diminishing. I don't know if most TV show/film characters like this are often New Yorkers as well, but that aspect did feel like an addition to distract you from how weak his overall characterization is – a good ol' sleight of hand "Look at this stereotypical, foul-mouthed (simply in the sense of almost swearing every other word: not necessarily a negative thing, at least in real life, but TV shows and films can be a different story) New Yorker instead of seeing a trope-laden, empty cardboard cutout" routine to get you to mistakenly believe he's an interesting or even entertaining character because of the stereotypical, direct (with some spice) shtick.
Now, it's time to circle back to the topic of theories. One of my loose, tossed-out-there theoretical thoughts that I included in my review of the previous episode concerning Robert Patrick's character, whose name we now know is Langston, was on the money. We haven't had this explicitly stated yet, but it does appear that he has a leadership role at New Age Technologies – most likely the top guy, CEO-style. I seemingly predicted that part correctly.
So far, it appears that Langston is selling "products" (weapons or otherwise) to the overall military, given he's presumably the CEO himself of an aerospace company, while the military-official-seeming guy who, in the previous episode, executed a transaction with Adrian, is the guy in charge of doing the official transactions for the military, only he's in on it: sporadically giving information about shipments here and there to Adrian – he uses that information to steal the shipments, then sells the weapons to the highest bidder. I'm mostly spit-balling without much basis regarding the "military" guy's role in the entire process. It's anyone's guess.
I've considered the possibility that he isn't a second-party, military-associated cog in the machine but rather an extended arm of Langston. The chain of command (in the sense of Point A to Point B to Point C within the order of events) may go Langston/"military guy" > Adrian > highest bidders. But I feel like he's an additional party besides the other two guys. The way I figure that revolves around his need for reassurance from Adrian in the previous episode that "the weapons" will "all be used overseas" and that the truck driver of the shipment won't be harmed. He may turn out to be a piece of the puzzle that contributes to the downfall of everyone and everything else involved in whatever Franz, Sanchez, and Orozco were investigating.
This episode also had more humor and comedic undertones than there was in the previous two; it felt that way, at least. It feels like a balance has been found between subtle moments like that, other subtle elements, and everything else – leading this season closer to the first season's synergy.
Additionally, the action is heating up, already exceeding what we got from that component back then. The two action sequences, at least the first one, as the second one was less of an "action sequence" – Reacher & Crew's raid on Trevor Saropian's "house," which was epic, and their easy-peasy, in-and-out infiltration on New Age Technologies at the end, despite being clean with no resistance (no gunfights/action sequences/fight sequences), was equally as epic – were better than any of the action in the first season. It's starting to look as if the odd inkling I got from the premiere that this season will be more action-oriented/action-y, comparable to the atmospherical commonality of action films, is relatively close to the mark. I suspect there are more excitingly enjoyable, even better action sequences throughout the remaining episodes.
In short, you DO NOT mess with the Special Investigators! Everyone, their dog, and Swan's dead dog do, but we might as well keep saying the catchphrase; the characters most certainly will.