A New Take on The Pilot

[maggiethecat]

greenbeing said:

One issue I've recently started thinking about was about the writer's choice to turn the bank scene into a nightmare. I'd always accepted that that scene is precisely how we saw it played out. But a couple weeks ago, I started thinking about the form. A dream by nature changes reality.

I'd go with what you say, were it not for the fact that, in the opening of "Up on the Roof," we see the bank sequence skewed and reworked into a second nightmare with different players and a changed setting.

Since the bank shootout -- which we don't even know Jim is dreaming until it's over -- is the first minute and forty seconds of the entire series? It's real. The writers wisely used the dream device to give us the backstory, framed by shots of Dunbar's eyes, sharply focused and then blind. Told me all I needed to know.

[mlm828]

I have always thought the bank shootout scene was intended to be a representation of what actually happened. It's even arguable it's not a dream -- it's a flashback, followed by a return to the "present," when Jim wakes up.

Just to clarify: he may have been dreaming about the shootout, but I think what we see is what actually happened, not a dream version of the events.

[maggiethecat]

Agreed, mlm88. Bleached pallette notwithstanding, there's a definite clarity to the way in which the character is presented . . .



. . . unlike the dreamy, drugged images from the "Up on the Roof" version.



Again, I vote for the writers using The Pilot dream/flashback as a clever device to lay out Dunbar's backstory, and in double-quick time.

[kytdunne]

Just time for a couple comments...

maggiethecat said:

1. He is courageous and fearless, as witness his actions at the bank.

Kyt's response:

Let's add in foolhardy, apparently suicidal to abandon cover like that, and ready to drag his partner into the same behaviors. (Some concern there, too, about Dunbar's attitude toward Terry, though that eventually came clear, it was bizarre at the outset.)

[/b]

Just more proof, as though we needed it at this point (!), that everyone has a different take on this show and the characters.

Foolhardy? Suicidal to leave cover? What choice did Dunbar have, really? As far as we can tell, everyone else on the scene is either dead or wounded. There is one excruciatingly brief window of opportunity, when the gunman runs out of ammo. At this point, Dunbar has safe cover behind a car, and Terry is behind the corner of a building. Terry -- from what Dunbar says to him -- has a clear shot. By not taking the shot, for whatever reason, Terry forces the issue. Call it what you will -- quick thinking, experience, confidence in his shooting abilities, or testosterone -- I believe Dunbar had no choice other than to do what he did. Wait safely behind the car until the gunman had a chance to reload? Considering all the damage he's already done?[/quote]

Okay, let's widen that gap on interpretations.

The gunman had just ditched the automatic and was down to a handgun. Still deadly, but he's lost his primary weapon.

A couple cop cars had just arrived onscene as backup. (I'd also assume SWAT was on the way, probably with a sniper in their group as well).

Terry isn't behind a building, he's ducked behind a box on the sidewalk. I presume a utility box of some type, but I don't know. He doesn't have a lot of cover, and he may only be concealed, and as soon as the gunman gets a bead on his position, bullets will go through that box. Dunbar's telling him to fire *now* which a moment's hesitation and/or inability to immediately respond to, already changes the dynamics. Is there still enough time and how much has he lost. He's not able to see without sticking his head into the firing zone.

Terry's inaction alters Dunbar's course of action, but the decision is completely Dunbar's. The moment he walked out into the line of fire, he was putting himself at risk and - had he failed to kill the gunman - would have put other cops at risk because they'd have to rescue him (providing he survived).

Dunbar not only had options, his training would not have included walking-into-gunfire as a supported method of taking control of a situation.

That he chose to, and is moving forward with his life and the consequences of his actions, is part of what makes the character of interest. Add in the complexity of the character and that makes him compelling.

maggiethecat said:

So I still qualify Dunbar's actions as the very definition of courage: To do what must be done despite the cost to oneself.

I agree he's courageous and in a dangerous situation, and split-second timing, found an insane solution and survived it, albeit scathed.

maggiethecat said:

2. He suffers the consequences of his actions -- emotional and physical -- as we learn when he awakens, shaken, sweating, and obviously blind, from the bank nightmare.

Kyt's response:

That was cause for concern. If he's ready to go back to the job and he's having nightmares, maybe we ought to rethink things. OTOH, had to cut him some slack again and wait to see if this was going to be a repetitive behavior (a bad sign) or not. As it turned out, I chalked it up to first-day-back- jitters.

I will start by admitting a genuine soft spot for all sexy male characters who are "either displaying or trying to mask the obvious signs of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder." Heh. First-day-jitters . . . or a very clever way for the Blind Justice creators to open with an action sequence in which we are shown just what kind of cop Jim Dunbar was, and how he was injured in the line of duty -- both important character elements that were established in a remarkably short amount of time and without any boring expository dialogue.

It was very well done for introducing us to the backstory and bringing us up-to-speed. Most backstories tend to slow the action. Sure can't be said of this one.

But if Dunbar was suffering PTSD, should he *really* be going back on the job? Unlikely. That he *had* nightmares for a while, and again the night before he tackles resuming his old job despite all the opposition, is no surprise. But it wasn't a distinction (PTSD or incident-triggered {no pun intended} flashback) that I could make at the time.

maggiethecat said:

Basically? I liked that Jim Dunbar was prickly and complex and had enough baggage to fill the hold of the Queen Mary. I liked that he was a bit of a mess. Made him damned interesting. Still does.

No argument with liking the fact that Dunbar was a complex character. Thing is, it didn't make me LIKE him, as a character. Only gave me enough curiosity and interest to stick with the show. And he still grated me wrong for the first few episodes, but had enough redeeming values to think this guy MIGHT be okay.

Kyt

[maggiethecat]

kytdunne said:

Terry isn't behind a building, he's ducked behind a box on the sidewalk. I presume a utility box of some type, but I don't know.

Good Lord, Kyt. I always thought Terry was behind the corner of a building. Are you telling me I'm going to have to watch The Pilot again? ;D

[kytdunne]

admin said:

Unlike many people here, I liked Marty right away. As I've said before, his type of teasing is similar to what I received from my three brothers growing up. It often had a sting to it and wasn't always in jest at all, but if you can survive that, you're in.

Can you expand more on what you consider 'teasing' as it relates to Russo and his attitude toward Dunbar and/or anyone else that he slammed/teased?

The word, alone, leaves a lot of room for interpretation. There's playful teasing, meant to mock but not harm. And there's malicious teasing with the full intent of harm.

Given your reference to your brothers, I'm interpreting your comments as seeing Russo playfully teasing Dunbar, sometimes with a bit of a barb, but as a camaraderie thing. Is that what you mean?

Kyt

[kytdunne]

maggiethecat said:

Good Lord, Kyt. I always thought Terry was behind the corner of a building. Are you telling me I'm going to have to watch The Pilot again? ;D

There's a good excuse. But if you can't get to the tv... how's this:

Glass


Tree


Box (front view) (What's with the big eyes in the background?)


Box (side view)

[bjobsessed]

Thanks for the great screencaps Kyt!

[maggiethecat]

WOW. Thanks, Kyt. Now I have to go back and think.

[maggiethecat]

So, Kyt, now I know. Terry didn't have the cover I thought he had. So do we then refer to both Terry and Jim's perceptions of the event, as expressed in the scene when Terry comes to him at work?



Back and forth, back and forth, then Terry's line," Jimmy, what was I supposed to do? He had me pinned down--" Dunbar cuts him off with "Stop it. We both know what happened that day. Don't make it worse by trying to pretend differently." And Terry backs down.

If we go with that, then I have to believe both men knew that Terry -- however he was positioned, and however precarious his situation -- had the clear shot. And couldn't, or wouldn't, take it. Which I still believe left Dunbar with no choice, or limited choices, even with a SWAT team on the way and the gunman reduced to a secondary weapon.

So, yeah, I still come down on the side of brave rather than foolhardy.

Mags

PS. What was with the big eyes in the background? Oh God, don't tell me it was . . . symbolism.

[hoosier]

[quote author=kytdunne board=1 thread=113745594

Let's add in foolhardy, apparently suicidal to abandon cover like that, and ready to drag his partner into the same behaviors. (Some concern there, too, about Dunbar's attitude toward Terry, though that eventually came clear, it was bizarre at the outset).

Kyt[/quote]

As I recall, Jim was out of bullets. He had reloaded at least once that I remember. He must have assumed that Terry still had some rounds since he yelled at him repeatedly to shoot. Terry froze and Jim was forced to leave cover to get Terry's gun--not because he was foolhardy or because he was macho but because he was forced to by Terry's inaction and this was possibly his one chance.

I went into the show prepared to like Jim Dunbar. I was a fan of Longstreet and it had been many many moons since there had been a blind main character on television. I was caught by the promos and had my VCR ready to record the show since I was afraid that it wouldn't last He is not perfect by a long shot and that is what makes him interesting. I was sympathetic with his situation, really hated Terry when he had the gall to show up at Jim's first day back and then was somewhat taken aback when Jim did hijack the case after swearing up one side and down the other that that was the furthest thing in his mind. I could understand his motives , that he had to prove himself,but I thought ooh boy, what a thing to do the first day back!

The dream/flashback--I do think flashback--did a lot to fill us in on what went down. I was riveted! You knew he was stressed about going back, he had to be anticipating what would happen , he had to have expectations he didn't know if he could fulfill, so its no surprise that he would flashback to the root cause of his situation. We didn't see anything else he went through to get back to the job--his rehab, the legal case etc.--all we have to go by his recollection of the shooting.

Of the other characters , I originally thought Marty was one class- A jerk! He got on my nerves with his relentless harassment , his tasteless jokes, his innuedos. I was glad when Fisk finally called both of them on their attitudes! My opinion of Marty did change over the course of the show. I could see that he was making Jim earn his respect and his place in the squad rather than just handing it to him on a silver platter. His basic opinion of Jim did change to some extent but he still had a problem with the gun ,as they all did, Marty just more vocal and in your face about it.

[kytdunne]

mlm828 said:

[/li][li]He persuades his partner to lie to their boss and withhold information about a case (admittedly, it's because he doesn't want the case pulled from them for bogus reasons, but it shows the lengths he's willing to go to).[/quote]

One of the things I appreciate most about the conflict between Dunbar and Fisk at the outset, is that it makes sense from both sides.

For Dunbar, being pulled for the case for bogus reasons was all the justification needed for not being upfront about what he suspected.

For Fisk, it makes sense to see what the new guy can manage before putting him on the big cases.

mlm828 said:

[/li][li]He basically highjacks the "Tongue Collector" investigation and continues to investigate (along with his partner) after the boss pulls them off the case and warns him about highjacking the case (again, showing the lengths he's willing to go to).[/quote]

Dunbar & Bettancourt built on what was known and followed a different path. The fact that Dunbar was still working on the problem after being told not to, doesn't mean he's hijacked it. I'd have to back Dunbar on those claims.

Kyt

[kytdunne]

maggiethecat said:

So, Kyt, now I know. Terry didn't have the cover I thought he had. So do we then refer to both Terry and Jim's perceptions of the event, as expressed in the scene when Terry comes to him at work?

Back and forth, back and forth, then Terry's line," Jimmy, what was I supposed to do? He had me pinned down--" Dunbar cuts him off with "Stop it. We both know what happened that day. Don't make it worse by trying to pretend differently." And Terry backs down.

If we go with that, then I have to believe both men knew that Terry -- however he was positioned, and however precarious his situation -- had the clear shot. And couldn't, or wouldn't, take it.

IMO, that Terry didn't shoot was only the catalyst for the point of contention. Terry froze and he never owned up to that. He kept making excuses for himself. Dunbar would've dealt with the fact that Terry froze, if Terry had dealt with it.

If Terry had a clear shot from where he was crouched down, then why would Dunbar walk toward the gunman in the full open rather than using the same cover Terry had?

maggiethecat said:

Which I still believe left Dunbar with no choice, or limited choices, even with a SWAT team on the way and the gunman reduced to a secondary weapon.

So, yeah, I still come down on the side of brave rather than foolhardy.

I'm not sure how Terry's reduced level of cover could have changed anyone's opinion on the quality of Dunbar's actions.

I don't view brave and foolhardy as mutually exclusive. I included foolhardy with your earlier comments on courage, etc. The fact that he was brave does not make his choice a wise one.

maggiethecat said:

PS. What was with the big eyes in the background? Oh God, don't tell me it was . . . symbolism.

It'd have been a bit much to do it intentionally, wouldn't it?

Kyt

[kytdunne]

hoosier said:

As I recall, Jim was out of bullets. He had reloaded at least once that I remember. He must have assumed that Terry still had some rounds since he yelled at him repeatedly to shoot. Terry froze and Jim was forced to leave cover to get Terry's gun--not because he was foolhardy or because he was macho but because he was forced to by Terry's inaction and this was possibly his one chance.

So if Dunbar didn't have an option, he wasn't foolhardy, and he wasn't macho, he couldn't have been brave, either. That's an act of survival. Others may view his actions as bravery, but the survivor always knows the difference.

Kyt

[maggiethecat]

kytdunne said:

IMO, that Terry didn't shoot was only the catalyst for the point of contention. Terry froze and he never owned up to that. He kept making excuses for himself. Dunbar would've dealt with the fact that Terry froze, if Terry had dealt with it.

If Terry had a clear shot from where he was crouched down, then why would Dunbar walk toward the gunman in the full open rather than using the same cover Terry had?

Kyt

Taking the second point first, do we need a diagram here?! I think it's a triangle: gunman in the street, Terry behind the (thank you again for the clarifying screencaps, Kyt) box, Dunbar behind the car. Terry has a clear shot -- Dunbar would have to leave cover to make his. But he's also out of ammo, right? So Dunbar is forced to cross to Terry to get a loaded gun, to make the shot once he realizes Terry will not.

As to why Dunbar didn't simply grab the gun from Terry's hand and then make the shot from beside him? All I can say is it's incredibly dramatic -- I was holding my breath on March 8 -- to have him coolly walk toward the gunman with gun held steadily at shoulder height. It may just be a case of the writers wanting to show Dunbar as fierce and -- here's that word again -- courageous under the worst imaginable circumstances. And he did make the shot, didn't he? Tore out the gunman's jugular . . . unfortunately at the same moment the guy was squeezing off one last round. It's almost a death twitch on the gunman's part -- it all happens so quickly -- so let's give Jim one tiny split second of satisfaction, one tiny split second of knowing he'd brought the man down before it all went to Hell.

And yes, I agree absolutely -- as evidenced by both The Pilot and "Up on the Roof" -- that if Terry had ever admitted his culpability, the story between these two men would have been vastly different. I think, in the end, Dunbar did deal with Terry's having frozen far better than Terry ever did. Mentally running all the lines from the river confrontation in "Up on the Roof" (which Lord knows we can all do in a heartbeat), I think Dunbar grew to pity Terry for his weaknesses, for his unresolved guilt, and for his pathetic attempt to portray himself as a hero.

One line from the scene between the two men in The Pilot that I find particularly resonant, is when Terry says, "I need for you to hear me say I'm sorry." I need? It's all about Terry, and the expiation he so desperately craves. Perhaps Dunbar only dealt with the fact that Terry froze only after Terry acted so rashly on that roof. Terry, making excuses to the last, never did.

The survivor knows the difference. Well said, Kyt. I think Dunbar, looking back to the bank shootout, judged his actions as doing what had to be done. Everyone on that street was in peril and he took care of them. Call it survival, macho, bravery, or a man without options -- he took responsibility. And paid the price.

God, this is fun.