Could be good, but is kind of not.I went on for some length at LJ if you want to read it, but I could not follow the case of the week. Blair was good, though.

I'm not sure where the line is for me wrt to non-disabled actors playing disabled characters, but I know Ironside is over that line.

I don't think seeing him in flashback is absolutely essential, actually I think it plays to a bias that injured people need to be thinking about life Before, or whatever, which keeps me from telling my story on TV because I don't have one. I think probably they sold the show, based on Underwood's involvement(which should have been a mixed bag as I love him, but he's made a lot of stuff that hasn't lasted and/or crap.)

I know Ironside is over that line.

How?

How?

I'm not really sure. It's mostly just a gut thing. Although partially it is quotes I've seen from the show runners talking about the fact that they would have to show scenes of him before the accident throughout the series so that they had to have an able bodied actor. Which seemed to imply, at least for me, that a show about solely about a guy in a wheelchair would not be interesting by itself. I get the impression that this may be the kind of show that has the character get some miraculous surgery at the end of the run, so he is no longer handicapped, and, therefore, everything is right in the world again.

Is it a problem that it's yet again, not a story about a permanently disabled person and there aren't enough of those, since I'm assuming there's nothing intrinsically wrong with stories about people who became disabled? Or is there something in the way this story is being told that is being done wrong?

So, about Person of Interest - I did a search in thread, and as far as I can tell, we have spent more time talking about whether we should talk about it here or in Boxed Set than we have spent actually talking about the show. I want to talk burble about The Machine as a character, and I feel shy about doing so in Procedurals, because that tells against it being here. But then again, if I get out my pom-poms and enthuse about moving the discussion to Boxed Set but only have a couple of posts of burbling in me, I'd feel silly. Should I go to Boxed Set, get my burbling over with, and let everyone else carry on without me?

I liked this week's elementary. Last week lacked whatever makes the show for me. Not enough of Joan I think, Lestrade uninteresting and unpleasant (and not in a "love to to be annoyed by way".) Mycroft uninteresting. The mystery boring. Sherlock phoning it in.

The week, nothing special, and I'm not sure they have laid the ground well enough for Sherlock's intervention in Joan's personal life being for the best - though at least he only brought to the forefront a problem she already knew about but was not admitting to herself, and she came up with a better solution than he did. But the Sherlock/Joan relationship remained interesting. The crime, though highly implausible (as is the custom on his show) kept my attention throughout. It waa decent, highly entertaining Elementary. Nothing outstanding, but well worth the time to watch, and miles better than last weeks.

A further comment on last week: the actor who played Mycroft seems quite good. I blame the writing. I'm pretty sure making him primarily the owner of a chain of restaurants is a mistake. Cause if Mycroft is not smarter and more powerful than Sherlock, (though preferring to act from behind the scenes - from laziness or from some other cause) what is the point of him?

And I seem to have misused the slash in the above post, but will let in stand.

Windsparrow,

talk about that issue in Boxed Set. That's what I say.