The Glades

Season 4 Episode 10


Aired Monday 9:00 PM Aug 05, 2013 on A&E

Episode Fan Reviews (1)

Write A Review
out of 10
23 votes
  • Jim Longworth is a storyteller, not a detective

    I've just about reached the end of my interest in this show and am about to give it up. How can you have a cop show, where the main character, the main cop, does really nothing? Jim Longworth moves through every episode (at least this season) without displaying any great bouts of deductive reasoning or investigative prowess, or even insightful reasoning and intuitive understanding of other people or of human nature.

    This is the plot-line for each episode, of which Gallerinas is no exception:

    Each episode begins with the discovery of a murder victim;

    Jim and team begin the so-called investigation;

    In short order, Jim is given a piece of potential evidence, usually in the form of a motive of sorts;

    Jim approaches one of that particular episode's suspects and accuses him/her of murder to his/her face;

    His questioning then takes the form of, they protest their innocence, tell him he is wrong (just count how many times someone says, "You are wrong detective" per episode), and he weaves a story, using the evidence that was given to him, showing why the suspect is the murderer;

    Then Jim is given another piece of evidence, which by the way is always discovered by either Carlos or Daniel, another possible motive; and

    Jim confronts suspect number 2, and accuses him/her of murder, and weaves another tale, using that evidence as the foundation of his story.

    This goes on throughout each episode. The support team (Carlos, Daniel and Colleen) find potential evidence, not Jim himself, and he will alternate between suspects number 1, 2, 3 and 4, going back and forth between them. That is until, finally, he is given the very last piece of evidence, clue or motive (which in itself is no more weighty than any evidence he was given before hand) and he approaches and confronts the suspect with it, who then confesses.

    I guess points for originality in a cop show must go to the creators, produces and writers: just have the hero approach each and every suspect one at a time and accuse them of the crime, and keep going back and forth to each, until one finally gives it up.

    This is what I call the dartboard approach, just keep throwing darts (the evidence, clues motives) at the dartboard (all the suspects) until one finally hits the bull's eye (the real killer) who naturally then confesses.

    The most difficult aspect to understand of all this, to the extent that it beggars belief, is that each suspect he accuses, the majority of who will be proven innocent of the crime by the end of the episode, just humor him and let him do it.

    They don't lawyer up, or threaten to sue, or even say "how dare you?" They simply try to convince him that he is mistaken.

    Jim accuses, quite stringently at times, and the suspects good humorously accept it, no fuss, no muss. Jim even goes so far as to publicly handcuff them and haul them into the station (only to let them go later off camera), and yet again they accept this public humiliation in front of family and friends, with little or no protest.

    I've never been to the Florida Glades, so maybe I'm missing that the show is being authentic to the culture. Maybe it's a cultural thing of the area to be polite to the nice policeman when he accuses you of committing murder.

    I doubt it though.

    But if I am mistaken, then the other aspect of each episode that defies belief: Once Jim confronts the suspect who turns out to be the real killer with the last crucial piece of evidence (again that someone else discovered), evidence that this time isn't a red-herring like all the other earlier "evidence" he confronted the other suspects with, the perpetrator just confesses.

    Lets see, the killer who committed premeditated murder, the killer who planned to kill and successfully carried out the killing of another human-being, as soon as he/she is confronted by our hero armed with the real motive, just gives up.

    And this is after he/she has been accused at least once, maybe even two or three times before, with "evidence" that wasn't correct. Having denied the crime at least once, was the killer just waiting for Jim to find the real motive?

    How does planning premeditated murder for these people go: "I'm going to kill such-and-such, because of this reason, but if the cops find out my reason I'm just going to give up. And if they accuse me due to another reason, I'll just deny it, but not leave town. So after I kill such-and-such, I just wait until the cops come up with my motive, or they just go away.

    The formula for this show really needs to change.