Caution: Spoilers ahead!

No stranger to the Green Scare, the latest episode of CBS’s The Mentalist (Season 2, Episode 12 – the appropriately titled “Bleeding Heart“) featured a terra-inducing plot line, complete with a proposed mega-development in the wilderness, government corruption and intrigue, and a graffiti-and-arson-loving eco-terrorist named Jasper.

Here’s what you need to know, via TVOvermind:

The Mentalist “Bleeding Heart” begins with Agent Teresa Lisbon (Robin Tunney) and consultant Patrick Jane (Simon Baker) being interviewed by a camera crew in the CBI office. [...]

Lisbon allows the crew access to the office and bullpen, but not the crime scene. The team is investigating the murder of the mayor’s aide, who was found when the mayor herself broke ground in front of the cameras for a new development project. When they interview Mayor Melba Walker Shannon (Sharon Lawrence of Privileged and NYPD Blue) and her assistant Wilson (Firefly‘s Sean Maher), Jane notices immediately that the mayor seems uncomfortable talking about the victim. When he presses, the mayor asks them to leave.

A possible perpetrator of the crime is an environmental group led by a man named Jasper. Though they’ve burned down buildings on protective land and other drastic measures, they haven’t committed any murder in their past history. Rigsby and Cho pay a visit to the foreman on the building site where the aide’s body was discovered, but while they’re questioning him, the trailer gets firebombed and the door jammed. The foreman is injured and Rigsby and Cho barely make it out with him before the place burns up. It’s clear to them that Jasper is escalating in violence.

Further investigation leads the team to suspect that the mayor was being bribed to approve projects on previously protected lands.

The investigation continues, yada yada yada, Jane takes the news crew out for tacos by way of an apology for exploding at them earlier – and is promptly kidnapped by Jasper and his crew:

Jane is blindfolded and led to a cabin in the woods. His blindfold is removed and he’s confronted by the masked men, one of whom he surmises is eco-terrorist Jasper. Jasper wants Jane to carry a message that he’s not the one who committed murder or attempted to kill the detectives. Unfortunately Jane reveals that he’s figured out Jasper’s identity–the mayor’s assistant Wilson. [...]

While Jasper tries to decide what to do now that Jane knows his identity, Jane tries to talk his way out of his own possible murder, saying he can help Wilson. He succeeds in getting Wilson to a near state of hypnosis, when they’re suddenly interrupted by a loud shout that the house is surrounded by law enforcement personnel. Jane urges Jasper to stay calm. When Lisbon and the cops burst in, Jane is alone and restrained and Jasper has escaped out of a trap door.

On The Mentalist, the most obvious suspect never turns out to be the murderer – and “Bleeding Heart” is no exception. Despite the murderer’s obvious attempts to frame the eco-terrorists, in the end, Jane is onto Martha’s killer:

Mike [the news reporter] confesses that he’d been begging the aide for information about possible corruption in the mayor’s office–that the scoop could make his career. She wouldn’t tell him a thing, but then one day he discovered an expose she was writing about the mayor. Jealous and enraged at her cutting him out of the story, and pushed over the edge when she started mocking him, he killed her.

Jane remained true to his word to help Wilson. Due to the way he handled things, Wilson is able to cut a deal with the DA in exchange for information about the mayor’s corruption.

As with the series’s previous animal rights themed episodes, I was rather unimpressed with The Mentalist‘s treatment of eco-terrorism. While not the killer, Wilson/Jasper is portrayed at turns as a super-spy (infiltrating the enemy’s lair, gaining her trust, and persuading Martha to break the bribery story) and a bumbling fool (committing one crime in a sorry attempt to convince law enforcement that he’s innocent of another, thus revealing his true identity in the process). Additionally, while Jasper is no killer and in fact abhors physical/bodily violence, it’s strongly implied that Jasper is (reluctantly) willing to kill Jane to prevent his secret from getting out. Smart/foolhardy, crafty/sloppy, violent/pacifist – pick a side, we’re at war! (Lazy writing, perhaps?)

Also dubious is how Lisbon manages to track down Jane. CBI hauls in one of Jasper’s known associates for questioning – which basically involves Cho and Rigsby threatening bodily harm. As one reviewer puts it, “he folds like a card table, giving away the location of Jasper’s cabin.” From “green warrior” to snitch in less than 60 seconds. As if. (Possible, yes, but not bloody likely. Government harassment and repression of activists and dissidents is all-too common, such that I have trouble believing that an ELF member wouldn’t be able to withstand a little posturing, at the very least.)

Likewise, at one point during his kidnapping, Jane drops this eye-roller:

It’s a good rule of thumb to avoid doing things that require wearing a mask. And you’re such a handsome fellow too.

Now, Jane’s a smart, astute, observant guy – and in the season and a half that he’s been rolling with the CBI, he’s seen his colleagues do some illegal, unconstitutional shit. He’s enticed them into doing some illegal, unconstitutional shit. Hell, he’s done plenty of illegal, unconstitutional shit himself. Assault, breaking and entering, illegal search and seizure; Jane even wiretapped the CBI. In short, he should know much, much better than this.** Activists choose to remain anonymous for a number of reasons – including protecting themselves from government-sponsored “terrorism.”

So, as with the previous plot lines involving animal advocacy and terrorism, this episode of The Mentalist is a wash. While the show doesn’t buy into popular narratives of activists as misanthropic criminals, it doesn’t upend them, either. Also, only 38 episodes into the series, and 3 have featured animal rights and/or eco-terrorist themes – a rather high percentage, no? Then again, as the husband observed, the show is set in California. Bleeding hearts may be CA’s greatest export!

* While the title is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, I’ve no doubt that the entire crew of Serenity qualify as terrorists, even absent today’s uber-”inclusive” definition of the term.

** On a side note, I’ve a similar bone to pick with, ahem, Bones. Booth, the Reaganesque FBI agent / former military sniper, wants desperately to believe in America, “the greatest country on earth.” Acknowledging that the government is at turns immoral – repressing dissidents, oppressing marginalized groups, lying to its citizens, violating the constitution, etc. – might mean acknowledging that the many sacrifices Booth made throughout his career were in the service of evil. Yet, as an FBI agent who oftentimes abuses his power, Booth himself is evidence of that which he does not want to believe.

See, for example, Season 5, Episode 12, “The Proof in the Pudding,” in which shadowy government agents (led by an African-American man named “Mr. White”) put the Jeffersonian on lockdown (effectively kidnapping everyone inside) so that Brennan and her team can examine a set of human remains (whom they are forbidden to identify) for cause of death. Available evidence suggests that the bones are those of John F. Kennedy – and that the gunshot wounds in the man’s skull were inflicted by two shooters. Booth refuses to accept that the remains are indeed JFK’s, since this would indicate a massive government cover-up. In the end, Brennan uses “the proof in the pudding” to assure her partner that the skeleton is not that of JFK – though the audience is left wondering. Yet, the mystery man’s identity is moot, given the rest of the plot line. (I.e., is a government that kidnaps its citizens any more trustworthy than one that rewrites history?)

Proceed with caution: Spoilers galore!

Ten episodes in, and already The Mentalist has jumped on the animal rights terra-ism bandwagon.

Let me preface this by saying that I’m addicted to cop tv: The X-Files, CSI, NCIS, Law & Order, Criminal Intent, Life, NYPD Blue – I just love ‘em. And my love runs extra-deep for the serialized cop drama/mystery/thrillers with a season/series-long story arc. Throw in a lead character who just so happens to be an atheist, and I’m hooked. Hello, The Mentalist!

That said, the latest installment (Season 1, Episode 10: Red Brick and Ivy) just wasn’t up to snuff.

The plot line is all too familiar: a scientist who experiments on non-human animals is murdered; the prerequisite, SHAC-like animal rights group which has been “terrorizing” said scientist (or said scientist’s university/lab/company/employer) for months is suspect numero uno. Cue the crazy!

In The Mentalist, the scientist in question is an up-and-coming neuroscientist who, along with his colleagues, has been conducting invasive research on animals (most notably, chimpanzees – unfortunately, a baby chimp does have a role in the episode) in order to locate the structures in the human brain which govern morality. The end goal? Finding a way to manipulate these structures and thus, magically, turn all of humanity into moral beings. Whatever that means.

(One question used to judge whether the subject is “good” or “evil,” for example, goes like this: “You and another person are stranded on a desert island. There’s only enough food supply to sustain one person. Do you hoard all the food for yourself, or do you share it?” I’m paraphrasing, but you get the gist. The morally “good” answer is to share the food; this implies that you’d be “evil” to hoard it. But if you share the food, you and your fellow Lostie will both die of hunger, albeit more slowly. The questioner did say that there’s only enough food to feed one person, remember? So why would it be “immoral” or “evil” for each island dweller to try and ensure his or her own survival?

Another question involves eleven people stranded in a life boat made for ten; do you sacrifice the sole 60-year-old man to ensure the survival of the ten children on board, or not? The moral answer is to chuck the older dude overboard. But moral in whose estimation? I’m sure the old dude would take exception with the “moral” choice.

Also of interest is whether the scientists’ own research will put them out of business; if your goal is to make all of humanity moral, won’t the end result be a world in which no one wants to torture animals for a living?

Finally, and I know I digress, but the research involves the ability to “turn” people good – or evil. Hello, anyone see a problem with the applications here? I’m fairly certain that success in this area will not lead to the hoped-for “utopia.”)

In the end, the murderer is not a member of the animal rights group (whose name escapes me now – it’s something generic, like “Animal Equality Now”), but rather the dean of the university which houses and supports the research institution. The animal rights terra-ism angle, in fact, is ditched pretty early on – within the first 15 minutes or so. But not before the CBI (California Bureau of Investigation) hauls in one of its members, who proves to be eccentric at best – in need of mental help, at worst. The guy is a middle-aged, conventionally unattractive white dude, living in a run-down warehouse-like building with twenty-odd cats – your typical gross loser slob. He promptly confesses to killing the Professor (even though he didn’t), and claims that the lead researcher is next. Then he starts ranting about the structure of the animal rights group; nevermind that ALF (which usually serves as a prototype for Hollywood) doesn’t have a hierarchical leadership structure. The “titles” are laughable, and sound like something out of World of Warcraft or Harry Potter: I am the Grand Imperial Wizard of AEN! All bow to my awesome power!

So while the animal rights crazies didn’t do it, the animal rights crazies are still crazy. Bah.

On the flip side, the “scientists” are all depicted as frauds, falsifying their data to prove their cockamamie theories and justify worthless research. Call it a wash, I guess.

The stupid stereotypes surrounding animal advocates isn’t the only reason I disliked this episode, though. Normally, The Mentalist is pretty fastidious with the details. But the psychiatrist/patient relationship as depicted between Patrick Jane (Simon Baker) and Sophie Miller (Elisabeth Röhm) is unrealistic. In real life, fraternizing with a patient – even an ex-patient – like that is highly unethical, if not grounds for having your license revoked. As is allowing Jane to consult on a case in which his ex-psychiatrist is the main murder suspect. It just wouldn’t fly. At least, I hope not. Our justice system is supposed to be just, ya know?

Anyway, I do so hope The Mentalist hasn’t jumped the shark. We need more atheism and skepticism on tv, not less!

Major spoiler warning, people!

I’ve been meaning to blog about a recent episode of Life for weeks now. If you’re not familiar with the show, it’s a kind of cop drama, in which individual cases are presented against the backdrop of a conspiracy-theory story arc which spans the series. Think The X-Files, Alias, Lost or The Mentalist – if you enjoy any of these, you’ll probably *heart* Life, too.

Season 2, Episode 3 of Life, “The Business of Miracles,” involves the murder of a cancer researcher. The main suspects, naturally, are a group of SHAC-like animal rights activists of the anti-vivisection variety. It’s been a few weeks since I watched this ep, so rather than try to offer a plot summary, here’s TV Recap with their recap:

Dr. Auerbach was a scientist who was testing cancer drugs on animals. So his death naturally occurs in the lab and on the window is written, “animal testing is murder.” Something not so natural about his death: He was frozen to death because some one switched his oxygen tank with a liquid nitrogen tank. But who could have done it? Maybe it was the group, BAT [Ban Animal Torture], that has sent Dr. Auerbach death threats?

[The group's moniker, "BAT," was also graffitied on the wall of Hurback's lab. About as subtle as leaving an ELF calling card at the scene of a torched, insured, unsold McMansion, no?]

According to the group’s leader, Betsy, they wouldn’t hurt any soul, even one like Dr. Auerbach’s. She seems sweet enough. She even tells the other member to be quiet when he says it’s good the doctor is dead. So if it wasn’t her, maybe it was the assistant who seems too concerned with the results of the test. Or maybe the janitor? Or the company’s owner? Hmm. I can’t decide, and neither can Crews [Damian Lewis] and Reese [Sarah Shahi] so they do a little more digging and come up with…Betsy, the leader of Ban and the good doctor’s former assistant who left because they were having an affair. Say what?

I know, it’s a crazy little twist but it turns out that Betsy’s real name is Deborah and she and Dr. Auerbach never stopped their affair. And while it seems she has the perfect motive of conflicted emotions, she also has a videotaped alibi. So then Crews and Reese move on to the janitor, who originally said he saw Betsy at the lab that day. Turns out the janitor is stealing pills from the study and selling them. Or so it looks when he gives the box of pills to a woman on a park bench in return for an envelope full of…pictures? When Crews and Reese dig a little deeper they find the janitor’s son has cancer and the pills have been working for him and the woman is his ex-wife. I guess he has a good motive, too. And more importantly, he confesses to the murder. But something isn’t right. Along with the dead doctor, there were lots of dead lab rats. The only dead rats, though, were rats with red tags so why would only those rats be dead and who would want to kill them?

With the help of then now cleared ex-assistant, Crews and Reese learn that the red tagged rats were the control rats and you would want those to be gone if you didn’t want other people to know the experiment was a failure. And who would want that? Yup, the new assistant. Turns out she knew the janitor was stealing pills and blackmailed him. But he wasn’t such a moron that he didn’t have evidence damning her. He had a formula she wrote computing how much liquid nitrogen it would take to kill a man the doctor’s size. So the dedicated assistant killed the doctor after all. She had spent seven years working with him and now her career would be over because the drug was a failure. It was only helping the janitor’s son because he had an extremely rare form of cancer. It wouldn’t work on the mainstream cases. Guess that liar is busted.

Unlike many other cop dramas (the Law & Order franchise, if I recall, has featured its fair share of guilty, stereotyped animal rights extremists), Life doesn’t simply pin the crime on the “obvious suspects” and move on. Rather than get swept up in the Green Scare, Detectives Crews and Reese follow the evidence…which leads them away from the “bad”/”misanthropic” animal rights activists and toward the “good”/”altruistic” cancer researchers.

In the end, the members of BAT prove to be the only suspects whose hands are actually free of blood: the cancer researcher, his assistant, the janitor and the financier of the research – all are guilty of murder. In particular, the show’s portrayal of the lead cancer researcher and his pharmaceutical company employer are damning: neither the individuals nor the business care about an anti-cancer drug that may save lives… just, not enough lives to make manufacturing and marketing the drug a profitable endeavor. In the end, the “bad” activists prove more ethical than the “good” scientists.

Also, I was absolutely tickled by the detectives’ initial meeting with Betsy/Deborah, the “leader” of BAT (scare quotes because leader sounds so patriarchal, yecht). She mentions her veganism, at which point Crews attempts to call her on the hypocrisy of wearing leather shoes:

Crews: If you love animals so much, why are you wearing leather shoes?

Betsy: They’re Jim shoes. They’re made of Jim, our founder. When he died he willed his body for industrial use as a way to raise people’s consciousness about what it means to butcher animals for food and clothing.

(Shades of Ingrid Newkirk, anyone?)

As Elaine notes,

Some people feel threatened by veganism and try to find loopholes. They look for anything. They’re the same people who point to recycled rubber shoes and say, “You’re not a vegan because you’re wearing leather!” and then walk away before you can explain that it’s NOT leather.

I love that Life purposefully jumped into that loophole – and then let Crews choke himself with it.

Of course, the more mainstream Reese is less than impressed by BAT’s consistent ethics:

Reese: They’re wearing people.

Crews: Just dead people!

Reese: It’s the Texas chainsaw massacre, it’s enough for a warrant.

Crews: For a search maybe, not for an arrest. Does it seem weird to you that they’d leave their slogans on the wall?

Reese: They put dead people on their feet, putting slogans on the wall seems pretty normal compared to that.

So there’s a little ribbing on animal rights advocates there, but for the most part the show does a good job of humanizing the activists, treating them as complex, three-dimensional beings instead of silly/scary cliches, and ultimately clearing them of the crimes of which they’re suspected.

The Green Scare came to Life…and failed to scare the life out of anyone. Bravo, NBC, bravo!

Just one thing, though, NBC: please to stop Crews from stalking his ex-wife’s new husband? It’s not cute or quirky; it’s obsessive, controlling and creepy. And asking the new hubby for “permission” to sleep with his wife? Bleh! Way to reduce a woman to a piece of property. Srsly, no want.