Leverage on TNT

[Dark Raven]

Well at least this week's Leverage was a more traditional con story. It's about time!

 

[Dr Lee]

and we got a little hint at the big bad....

 

[Pink Ranger]

It was kind of a below-average episode. Outside of his little speech at the beginning, the antagonist wasn't very compelling, and hardly the "opposite side of Nate's coin" that would draw him into a deep conflict, that they were playing at throughout the episode. Even the brief reveal of the potential boss villain for the season was a little meh.

 

[Dark Raven]

*Sigh*. Back to these non-traditional episodes again this week with a war time romance story told in flashback. What the heck was that? There was no real con at all this time. It's almost as if they're running out of ideas or the whole production is undergoing new management. People tune into Leverage to watch a con or heist, not these melodramatic star-crossed lovers romance. I think this has been the worst episode yet.

If they keep this up during this season, they shouldn't be surprised if they aren't renewed for a 5th season.

 

[Marvolo]

I watch more for the character's than the heists. I mean the show never really interested me until I gave it a chance and realized I loved the characters. So as long as the character's remain themselves I will keep watching irregardless of how many heist they pull a season. Plus, this isn't really a heist show. It's a show about helping the helpless. In that regard, they can go many places with it besides just heist after heist.

 

[Pink Ranger]

It was a cute episode, and Danny Glover is always good, but I agree with DR that this kind of high-concept episode doesn't belong so early in the season, when we still have yet to see any real "con" plots. They're thieves, not social workers, it kind of reminds me of the later episodes of MacGuyver when he went from being a secret agent to a youth minister of something.

Leverage is really upping its show budget this year, you can tell, but they might be having too much fun with it at the expense of what makes the show good.

 

[Dark Raven]

I watch more for the character's than the heists. I mean the show never really interested me until I gave it a chance and realized I loved the characters. So as long as the character's remain themselves I will keep watching irregardless of how many heist they pull a season. Plus, this isn't really a heist show. It's a show about helping the helpless. In that regard, they can go many places with it besides just heist after heist.

They help the helpless, but it has always sold itself on being a heist/ con show, and that's what people are tuning in to see. They help people using their thieving/ con artist tricks of the trade, not being social workers as Pink Ranger said, otherwise this might as well be "Touched by an Angel" or something.

And it's regardless, not irregardless, which doesn't make sense since that would be the equivalent of a double negative.

 

[Marvolo]

They help the helpless, but it has always sold itself on being a heist/ con show, and that's what people are tuning in to see. They help people using their thieving/ con artist tricks of the trade, not being social workers as Pink Ranger said, otherwise this might as well be "Touched by an Angel" or something.

And it's regardless, not irregardless, which doesn't make sense since that would be the equivalent of a double negative.

They use their skills every week so I'm not sure where that complaint is coming from. If you want each of them to use their skills every week its a little far fetched. All their jobs wont be the same. About 'irregardless' it has been around since the 1900s and though informal and a double negative it can be used. It is in the dictionary. Habit over formality. Plus, I prefer its sound, and I find it flows better in speech than 'regardless'. Its the same reason I use 'ain't' and 'y'all'. Its whatever rolls off the tongue and fits the flow. When in formal settings or trying to impress I would remove these abominations. That's what my OCD grammar teacher called them. Among others, though, why not relax and have some fun. **** I hear the grammar police.

 

[mr. peasant]

Maybe you can try 'irrespective' instead? The flow works the same as 'irregardless' and it's probably there (irrespective + regardless) that the latter originated from. On-topic, I see Leverage as the NCIS of con shows. The premise is about cons and heists while what sells the show is its characters. As such, it's not surprising that there will be a few episodes where they venture away from the original premise, focusing more on the characters instead.

 

[Pink Ranger]

Maybe you can try 'irrespective' instead? The flow works the same as 'irregardless' and it's probably there (irrespective + regardless) that the latter originated from. On-topic, I see Leverage as the NCIS of con shows. The premise is about cons and heists while what sells the show is its characters. As such, it's not surprising that there will be a few episodes where they venture away from the original premise, focusing more on the characters instead.

Meh, no offence, but if Leverage started becoming more like NCIS, I'd stop watching. The design and execution of cons is as integral to the show as the characters. Moreso, because unlike other shows we almost never see the main characters in their "civilian" lives, so without the job the show is really not much of anything.

 

[Dark Raven]

Meh, no offence, but if Leverage started becoming more like NCIS, I'd stop watching. The design and execution of cons is as integral to the show as the characters. Moreso, because unlike other shows we almost never see the main characters in their "civilian" lives, so without the job the show is really not much of anything.

I don't think they even have civilian lives apart from Sophie (who is in the odd theater production). The idea of Leverage is that these are criminals who live for the job and are at a loose end when they're not carrying out some kind of heist/ con. The premise is almost like the original concept for Mission Impossible before they became agents sanctioned by the government. Originally the IMF team were meant to be a bunch of misfit criminals who were almost irredeemable, but were brought together for tasks by leader Dan Briggs (originally it was going to be called "Briggs' Squad"). Then later, as the concept developed, it was decided that they needed to be good guys for a weekly show. With Leverage, they've gone for the criminal angle, with the tagline: "sometimes the bad guys make the best good guys."

I don't want the Leverage team to simply be simply do-gooders who help people out without any element of a con or heist. That almost goes against the tagline quoted above. Leverage is about using the tricks and techniques of criminals to bring justice to the downtrodden, and not just helping others by lending some emotional support, being a listening ear or doing a bit of manual labour to assist etc.

 

[Pink Ranger]

Wow. I didn't think this season was that great, but the reveal of who the boss villain is was a complete mind-****. I originally didn't think much of this character at first, but it was all worth it.

My only concern is:

Spoiler

He becomes like General Stockwell (Robert Vaughn) was to the A-team. An enemy who becomes the guy who sends them out on missions. It ruined the A-team when that happened.

 

[signalman]

Nice to see another member of the "NERO WOLFE" stock company on the show, James Tolkan.
He hasn't had many sceen credits in the past 10 years.

 

[Morg]

Parker smash!

 

[Pink Ranger]

Whoooo boy, Sterling is gone catch himself a mighty beatin' if Elliot ever sees him again.

 

[Dr Lee]

That he is... Interesting twist though.. didn't see that coming in the manner it did

 

[Destructus86]

So...this is one of my favorite shows. I like how it never takes itself TO seriously.

 

[Dark Raven]

Leverage should be back one of these days. Not sure if it's this month or next.

 

[Morg]

Leverage should be back one of these days. Not sure if it's this month or next.

It's tonight

 

[signalman]

I thought the last two episodes were really good.
Spliting the team in two groups, Boys and Girls.
Bringing back Jeri Ryan as Tara was a plus.

 

[wiegeabo]

great episodes. I think I liked the Boys Night Out a little bit more than Girls Night Out.

 

[Black Dynamite]

"I'm a crooked cop" my favorite line of boys night out

 

[Dr Lee]

i thought the idea of the two episodes was brilliantly funny.

where have i seen elliots friend before?

 

[Spider-Fan83]

^Sean Faris from "never back down"

I almost missed the second part (boys night out) cause I recorded and when I went to start watching it the begins seemed the same so I thought it was a re-run... luckily I kept watching, instead of just skipping to the end and deleting it

 

[Dr Lee]

^Sean Faris from "never back down"

I almost missed the second part (boys night out) cause I recorded and when I went to start watching it the begins seemed the same so I thought it was a re-run... luckily I kept watching, instead of just skipping to the end and deleting it

I thought it was him....