Seeing is Believing

Season 3, Episode 145

Written by Michael Teversham, directed by Steve DiMarco

Original broadcast dates:

Official Episode Synopsis

Kowalski, Welsh and Thatcher all witness a murder at a local shopping mall, but even with the two suspects in custody, they can't agree on "who did it." It's up to Fraser, who was apprehending a purse-snatcher at the time, to puzzle out the identity of the killer.

Significant Guest Stars

JUDY CATES - Polly Shannon
KEITH WARREN - Ross Hull
MIKE BENNET - Bruce Vavrina
STELLA KOWALSKI - Anne Marie Loder
CANDACE MADISON - Yanna Mcintosh
PENNY MORTON - Susan Coyne
DENNIS FAGAN - Sean Sullivan
JOHNNY MAIGOT - Mif
ELDERLY WOMAN - Dolores Ettienne

Music

NOVEMBER
Performed by: Mythos
Written by: Bob D'Eith and Paul Schmidt

SIRENS
Performed by: Mythos
Written by: Bob D'Eith and Paul Schmidt

PREMONITION
Performed by: Mythos
Written by: Bob D'Eith and Paul Schmidt

(The above information was cheerfully and unrepentantly stolen from the official Due South website – www.duesouth.com – which is, all in all, a pretty good site except for its inexcusable tendency to refer to RayK as ‘Stan.’)

Unofficial Episode Review

They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. If that's true, then Akira Kurasawa's 1950 film "Rashomon" is one of the most flattered films in the cinematic pantheon. A dramatic mystery that stages its central conflict in a court of military justice, "Rashomon" is perhaps best known for its central conceit, which is the use of three different viewpoints to explain (or rather attempt to explain) the events surrounding a rape-murder. Three different witnesses to the crime share their version of events. None of the accounts match exactly, and it's left to the prosecutor -- and the audience -- to determine which of the witnesses is right. Any time a film or TV show utilizes the technique of showing the same event in several different ways and from several different perspectives, angles, etc., it's more likely than not something of a tip-of-the-hat to "Rashomon."

One of the things I've always liked about Seeing is Believing is that it doesn't just get “Rashomon’s” surface trick right -- several viewpoints, each similar enough that it's obvious the participants saw at least the same *event*, yet different enough to call into question the veracity of each participant's observations -- it actually pays homage to Kurosawa's true theme: We all view things the *way* we view them because we each have own our frames of reference, and who and what we are necessarily affects how we see the world around us. No two people will see the same thing in the exact same way because no two people have lived the same life, and consciously or un, each individual allows his or her life experience to color their perceptions of what happens around them. I think it can be said that this is what’s happening with Welsh, Thatcher and Kowalski.

There is much to recommend in the teaser. The episode starts with a pretty funny discussion between Fraser and Ray during which one could infer that Ray actually pays attention to current events and/or the news. In expressing his dismay at Canada’s gift of the Inukshuk (“nice pile of rocks”) to the people of Chicago, Ray opines that, “when you give another country a present, you give ‘em somethin’ practical, like that time we gave you those assault rifles.” I’m also deeply fond of the brief display we get of Ray’s hallmark-in-training sarcasm: When Fraser explains that an Inukshuk can be used to determine the depth of the snow, to determine direction, or to locate the best seals (yes, *seals*), Ray responds with, “And all my friends have been asking: ‘Ray? Where do you get such good seals?’ ” And for once, Fraser doesn’t pretend as though he doesn’t catch the sarcasm, instead asking, almost defensively, “What are you trying to say, Ray?” It’s clear, at least to me, that they are still getting to know each other at this point. Still learning one another’s moods, modes of expression, etc.

I’m not sure it’s of any great import, but I do like the fact that Welsh has the same reaction to the Inukshuk that Ray does: “Nice pile of rocks.” Also, it’s interesting to me that, for whatever reason, Welsh has apparently been chosen to present the Inukshuk, or, at a minimum, to take part in the presentation ceremony. When he, Thatcher and Kowalski split up, Welsh gives the need to “check out my podium” as his reason. What I’ve never quite understood is why the Inukshuk is taking up residence in the mall. Given its status as a sacred object (and apparent natural guide), that almost seems … disrespectful to me. For some reason, I think it would be more apropos for it be in one of the parks or on the grounds of one of Chicago’s museums.

Another intriguing bit of information I gleaned from the teaser was something that seems to fly in the face of fanon notions of Kowalski’s eating habits. He indicates, upon taking his leave of Welsh, Thatcher and Fraser, that he’s going in search of “some green food thing.” It isn’t much to go on, obviously, but it does suggest that Ray actually *doesn’t* subsist on a steady diet of pizza, candy and other forms of junk food.

The central event – the murder of mobbed-up Mike Bennet -- is nicely staged, in a number of ways (an aside: Broadway baby that I am, and given my awareness of the games DS’ writers often like to play with names, I couldn’t help but notice that Bennet shares his moniker with the late, great Tony-winning director and choreographer Michael Bennett, who is perhaps best known for his work on the landmark “A Chorus Line”). First, we, as the audience, only see and hear snatches of the conversation/physical interchange between Bennet, Judy Cates and Keith Warren; it’s a deft and clever touch because it puts us in the same position as Welsh, Kowalski and Thatcher with regard to knowing what actually happened. *Our* visual and audio frames of reference are as incomplete as theirs.

Another very smart choice on the part of writer Michael Teversham was the decision to take Fraser out of the field-of-play by sending him after the purse-snatcher. Fraser’s observational gifts are much-vaunted in the DS universe (and for the most part, their quasi-mythic status is well-deserved; as Thatcher once observed, the man probably *could* track a snowflake back to the cloud from which it came). Had he been one of the actual witnesses to Bennet’s murder, I’m not all that sure the central set-up would hang together as well as I think it otherwise does. This isn’t to say that I think Fraser’s tracking/detecting skills are perfect, just that I think it might have been a lot more likely that everyone would have – for better or worse – assumed that what he saw and heard was the most accurate account of how things happened. Given Fraser’s “bat ears,” this would have been, I think, particularly true with regard to trying to determine what Bennet, Cates and Warren might have *said* to each other.

There are also a couple of good directorial choices in the filming of the crucial altercation scenes. They are carefully shot so that we *can’t* see Judy and Keith’s hands at the moment Bennet is stabbed, and the Inukshuk – where we later learn the Fourth Man was hiding and emerged from to stab Bennet – is also carefully not in view right at that moment.

I find Fraser’s imitation of Superman during his pursuit of the purse snatcher to border on over-the-topness, but it really does seem to be the most expedient means of getting to where he needs to be to catch the guy. I’m more fond of the look he gives the purse snatcher as the man tries to weasel his way out of it. I’ve always been of the opinion that Fraser’s not as naïve as he sometimes pretends to be, and there’s something quite pleasing to me in the ‘stop bullshitting me’ cock of his head as the purse snatcher quickly comes to the realization that he does indeed need to just “go quietly.”

Meanwhile, I really, *really* like how quickly Ray, Welsh and Thatcher get into ‘cop mode’ once Bennet goes down.When Bennet started getting loud with Cates and Warren earlier, all three of them started paying attention, as if their police officer instincts were already tweaked. It seems a simple hop, skip and jump to turn those instincts all the way up. I love, love, *love* the way Ray practically leaps from his position to get down to where he can contain the situation, reaching for his gun and identifying himself as a police officer *while he’s moving.* It’s one of those things I call ‘grace notes’ – little moments that almost seem throw-a-way, yet serve to remind you of something significant. In this case, it’s the fact that Ray knows his job and he’s good at doing it.

Thatcher’s pissy “I wasn’t insinuating there was something wrong with my technique, *Detective*, the man simply happens to be dead” -- said in response to Ray’s suggestion that she perform mouth-to-mouth resuscitation on Bennet -- never ceases to make me smile. In fact, until she gets all loopy over Fraser (and I’ll get to that momentarily), I actually consider this to be one of Thatcher’s best outings in the series. Like her male counterparts, she demonstrates herself to be a smart, competent, capable cop, and I appreciate it that she’s also allowed to be just as bullheaded about her version of what happens as Ray and Welsh are. She doesn’t simply back down because she’s got two guys telling her she might be wrong, much like Welsh and Kowalski don’t back down just because they’ve got two other people telling them they might be wrong.

Act I commences with a lunch room scene, during which we discover that Fraser still hasn’t learned that it’s discourteous to drink milk straight from the carton. I always find myself wondering if that’s his milk; does it have his name on it? Does everyone else know not to drink it because it’s Fraser’s milk? Unless the answers to all these questions is ‘yes,’ it completely *kills* me (in the good way) that Mr. Common Courtesy has this habit.

On a more serious and substantive note, we also learn that Fraser can take dictation in two official languages (and since he’s Canadian, I’m presuming those languages are English and French), three forms of shorthand, Cantonese and Inuktutuk For some reason, it always jars me when Thatcher points out that she doesn’t think Fraser can take her, Welsh and Kowalski’s statements in any “official capacity.” I know that Fraser is considered to be Ray’s “unofficial” partner, but I was always under the impression that his role as Liaison Officer was an official one. If her point is that only a member of the Chicago PD could take a valid witness interview, I’m still at a loss as to why she feels the need to make it; after all, Fraser’s been interviewing witnesses ‘unofficially’ for over two years by this point, and it’s not as if Welsh is unaware of this fact. In any event, I like Welsh’s decisive response to the quibble: “You’re deputized.”

The editing work is quite nice as Fraser actually takes the statements, and the way the three versions flow into one another, coupled with the shot-reaction shot method of showing us when Fraser’s interview subject has changed from Thatcher to Kowalski to Welsh, does a good job of underscoring Fraser’s comment that the statements share certain areas of congruence but on-balance, aren’t even remotely similar.

What is most intriguing to me about the three versions of events is the difference in the way Welsh, Kowalski and Thatcher view Bennet and his demeanor. Thatcher sees him as aggressive and, we later learn, possibly abusive. For Welsh, he actually has no personally defining characteristics, so glued is the Lt. to the idea that Bennet’s just a garden variety mobster who probably double-crossed one cohort too many. Ray’s take on the man is the one that most humanizes him. It’s actually quite sympathetic, which is, at first, surprising, given Ray’s typical in-your-face manner of dealing with and evaluating suspects (of course, the reason for Kowalski’s more sympathetic/empathetic version of Bennet becomes clearer later on).

The first full-length scene in Welsh’s office does a good job of setting up just how stubborn the three witnesses are going to be with each other. I like Thatcher’s odd, pseudo-feminist reading of the crime, in which she scoffs at the idea that because Cates is a woman she could only be the motive rather than the perpetrator, but I like the smartness of Ray’s comeback even more (“It’s good to be the motive”; the implication, naturally, is that being the motive isn’t a crime). As for Welsh: while his solution of charging both the suspects and “letting the courts sort ‘em out” may sound, on a first hearing, like he’s passing the buck, it actually makes sound procedural sense assuming the evidence against both suspects is sufficient to at least sustain an indictment.

Another aspect of this episode that makes it significant for me is the way the Welsh-Kowalski and Welsh-Frannie dynamics play out. In this initial scene in Welsh’ office, I get the sense that Welsh genuinely likes Francesca; she’s allowed to prod him over things in a way I’m not sure we see anyone else on the show attempt, as evidenced by her plea for a cappuccino maker (“And you know, it *might* improve your temper”). For his part, Welsh seems to indulge her in a way he doesn’t quite do with anyone else except Kowalski and Fraser, even when he’s being gruff with her (“get a longer shirt”).

Like Frannie, Ray seems to get away with a lot in Welsh’s presence and I don’t think this would be the situation with the other detectives. Case in point: Ray moves around Welsh’s office as though he’s in his own living room sometimes. This is best illustrated by the way he slings his leg over the guest chair and slinks down into it when he informs everyone that “body language is a fact that I am particularly sensitive to,” as well as the way he props his feet up on Welsh’s desk while visualizing the crime scene with his eyes closed. I have a terrific working relationship with my supervisor, but I don’t imagine that I could prop my feet up on her desk during a meeting and not have her think something was amiss.

The most telling indicator that Welsh and Kowalski have a good relationship and may even – as some people have posited here and in other fora – have known one another prior to Kowalski taking the Vecchio assignment is the way Welsh reacts when Ray re-enacts his version of events. While it’s not all that unusual that Welsh would know Ray was divorced, it’s never been lost on me that this episode suggests he knows that at least one of the reasons Ray and Stella had difficulties was because they couldn’t agree on the issue of kids. I know that Ray starts talking about kids when he projects himself into the interaction between Bennet, Judy and Keith, but when Welsh says “I think you’re talking about the problem that put your marriage in the dumpster,” it seems to me that he’s speaking from a deeper knowledge than the few seconds Ray babbles to Judy/Stella about the issue.

Speaking of Stella: Seeing is Believing marks the beginning of the weirdly inconsistent way Stella was written throughout the series. While other people may think differently, I found her to be somewhat three-dimensional in Strange Bedfellows (I haven’t yet completely warmed to the character, but in SB I did think she came off as much more than the cardboard cut-out shrew she’s often written as being in fiction -- and, to a lesser extent, on the show -- and it was clear to me, in SB, that she really did care for and about Ray). In her other appearances – here and in DGR, GftS and CotW – she seems more one-note (which is unfortunate because I think Anne-Marie Loder has a unique and interesting appeal). I cannot stand the way she treats Ray (although she’s less strident with him in DGR than she is in any episode that follows SB), but her borderline, surface unpleasantness seems to extend to the other characters as well. From a professional standpoint, however, in this episode I can defend her exasperation with Welsh, Thatcher and Ray: their inability to determine the actual number of suspects, not to mention the lack of significant physical evidence linking Judy and Keith to the crime (notice that no one mentions the apparent lack of fingerprints on the murder weapon) makes it more difficult for her to do her job. It also amuses me that she admonishes Ray to “cut the sarcasm,” then turns around and unleashes some of her own (“and you three were apparently in different time zones when the murder occurred”).

After Stella leaves, we get down to the meat and potatoes of this episode’s appeal to me – the ensemble work. Paul and Callum are their usual vibrant and engaging selves, and the interaction between Fraser and Ray has its moments of high sparkle, but it’s the fact that their co-stars also get to Do Their Thing that makes this one worthwhile for me. I can’t think of another episode aside from Dr. Longball and perhaps Mountie on the Bounty that so prominently features Welsh and provides Beau Starr with such a good opportunity to show his considerable stuff. As I indicated earlier, I think Thatcher is, for the most part, used to great advantage here (and it’s almost as if I can *see* Camilla Scott’s pleasure at being more than just a romantic foil to Paul). And once you get past the fact that Frannie shoots Fraser more variations of a come-hither look than Baskin Robbins has flavors, Ramona Milano makes it easy to see that Frannie’s fitting in at the 27th in a way and to a degree I don’t think Elaine ever quite did.

I love the way Welsh, Thatcher and Ray argue with each other over who did what and why, and the sound I hear is the crackle of good actors sparking off one another. Ray’s cursory dismissal of Welsh’s “double … or is that a triple bluff” theory of the crime as “brainless” is only surpassed, in terms of his willingness to argue, by his mocking (there is no other word for it) of Thatcher’s insistence that she knows what’s she’s talking about because of what she saw and what she heard (“because of what I saw and what I heard” he says, sing-song, “who are you, Sherlock Holmes?”). We learn that despite their different takes on the crime, Ray and Thatcher are both observers eagle-eyed enough to make Fraser proud. Their one-upsmanship of one another over Judy’s jewelry – Thatcher notices that those are black pearls and not some faux-obsidian costume piece as well as the fact that the earrings are Cartier (don’t snicker; I can tell when someone’s jewelry is from Tiffany & Co), while Ray catches the fact that Judy’s wearing a school ring – is both funny and more subtle evidence that their detecting skills are not inconsiderable.

I lose it a bit when Thatcher starts waxing rhapsodic over the image of Fraser running, but the moment is saved for me by the pregnant pause and the amusingly bemused looks on Paul, Callum, and Beau’s faces (I do, however, find her smearing of blood down Fraser’s cheek later on to be hilarious).The use of the novel Sword of Desire as an analogy for the crime’s potential status as being one of passion is also hilarious, as is the re-cap Fraser gives later, right down to referring to Keith as “Pool Boy”, and I like how it’s used to weave Frannie into the problem-solving discussion (continuity alert: Sword of Desire is the novel Luanne Russell reads to Mrs. Tucci in A Likely Story). I think it could even be argued that the injection of Sword of Desire into the discussion is just a further playing out of the central theme of how who we are and the way we live affects the way we view things: It’s something in her life experience that Frannie draws from to offer an alternate way of looking at the crime.

When Thatcher launches into a fuller explanation of her theory of the crime – that the young woman killed Bennet to protect the young man – I think it’s clear that she’s extrapolating … something … from her relationship with Fraser to reach her conclusions. What she describes as the possible dynamic between Judy and Keith – not lovers but maybe something a little more than friends – could certainly be a description of the relationship dynamic between her and Fraser (at least as it stood after All the Queen’s Horses), and I definitely get the sense that she cares enough about Fraser that she’d be willing to go to great lengths to protect him if need be. We also learn, during this sequence, that Fraser believes men and women can develop intense, non-romantic relationships with one another while Ray apparently does not (“yeah, on Mars maybe” "No, Ray, here on Earth as well”).

We next meet Judy Cates proper, after having spent approximately twenty minutes listening to other people’s theories of what she’s like. I always wonder if Fraser recaps the Sword of Desire theory of the crime (complete with the reference to Keith as “Pool Boy”) in front of her to induce her to speak, because she doesn’t say a word during the scene until after he presents her with that version of events. As Viridian correctly observed off-list to me, the actors playing Judy and Keith are very nicely opaque throughout the episode; they don’t make the characters all that easy to read, which only *heightens* rather than lessens, the crime’s entire feel as a jigsaw puzzle with several crucial pieces missing. The demonstration with the pen, during which it becomes obvious that Judy couldn’t have whipped a knife out of her pocket quickly if her life depended on it, is a terrific bit of cop work from Fraser, *and* it provides Ray with an opportunity to gloat (“where’d you get your jewelry?” … “oh, I like jewelry”).

Ray’s appreciation of Fraser’s cleverness with the pen provides the episode with one of its – and the show’s – slashiest moments: Fraser and Kowalski’s confession of love <g>. In all seriousness, the sequencing of the dialogue does strike me as interesting. It’s only after Fraser responds to Ray’s “I love you, Fraser” with “And I you, Ray,” that Ray indicates he means it “symbolically.” Even given Fraser’s penchant for taking things literally, I do wonder why Ray feels he needs to clarify himself. Does he think *Fraser* meant it literally when he responded? Is he really that worried Fraser might think that *he* meant it literally when he said it? My slashy little mind thinks they both *mean* it, but just aren’t ready to deal with it yet, so they deflect (which is one reason why I like it in fanfiction when this moment is used as a touchstone for an actual confession of love, i.e., “I mean more than symbolically,” paraphrasing someone I read recently; Crys, maybe?). Even without slash-colored glasses on, it’s still a sweet moment, with Ray reveling in Fraser’s smartness and Fraser himself seeming to take a certain degree of quiet pleasure in putting another piece of the puzzle into place. I also really like the way Ray teases Fraser (“Is this going to turn into some story about Eskimo Joe and how he could swing polar bears over his head or somethin’?”) as well as Fraser’s dryly dismissive response (“Now that’s just silly, Ray”).

 

After Keith’s confession returns our detectives to square one, we get Ray’s take on the crime, including his heartfelt declaration that “passion can make you do things” you wouldn’t normally do. I think it’s clear, when Ray opines that Judy had “this sweet breath that could turn a windmill like in one of those old Dutch paintings,” that he isn’t really talking about Judy (an aside: the reference to ‘old Dutch paintings,’ taken along with Ray’s comment in BDtH that he knows what he likes when he’s looking at art, his seeming knowledge of who Hieronymous Bosch is in M&S, his possession of a book on Canadian Impressionists in Asylum, and his comment that “sculpture does not turn his crank” in Odds, all demonstrate, to me, that he has a genuine interest in and probably love of art; I like to think it’s an interest he acquired for himself, too, and not, as has been posited, something he picked up in an effort to impress Stella). This becomes even more clear once he actually inserts himself into the proceedings, taking Bennet's place at the table and in the argument.

Callum is, quite simply, terrific in this scene. His hang-dog expression, as Ray/Mike tells Stella/Judy how much “this hurts me,” manages to be funny and sad all at once. Equally great is the seriousness of his intonations as Ray promises Stella/Judy that he can wait for her to set up her career, get established, and then they “can have kids, lots of ‘em”; I get the sense that Ray is enacting a possible second chance here, telling Stella the things he probably thinks – after having had some time to reflect on it – she wanted or needed to hear and that he didn’t or couldn’t say to her before. That Callum conveys such a wealth of emotion using little more than the right vocal inflections just knocks me out.

It intrigues me that Welsh’s version of the crime reveals him to be *more* cynical than I thought he was (“you two keep looking for things like passion and romance … forgetaboutit”) and more coolly logical than I would have guessed. To him, it’s almost like a business transaction gone way awry, but the fact that his assessment of the whole thing is more clinically precise than either Thatcher’s or Kowalski’s doesn’t necessarily make him more *right* about what happened.What intrigues me about how emotionally detached Welsh seems – in contrast to Thatcher and Kowalski, who both have very “emotional” takes on the scenario – is that his ability to be detached doesn’t automatically translate to him being hardened or inured to the point of no longer *caring.* He is something of a cynic – a quality that I suspect is borne more out of decades as a cop than something inherent in his personal make-up – but he still cares about getting the job done and getting it done well.

We next get the set-up for what is probably the episode’s most ‘controversial’ aspect: Fraser’s use of post-hypnotic suggestion (“PHS”) on Ray and Thatcher. Before I get to that, though … I really love the exchange between Fraser and Frannie when she suggests he hypnotize her (“Francesca, you weren’t there.” “Well, does that matter?” “Oddly … yes.”), as well as the excuse Ray gives for why he won’t be the subject – “I got bad eyes”; it’s just so … random, and it makes me snicker every time. I think someone could do an interesting psycho-analytic study of the fact that Fraser apparently thinks slipping into hypothermia, not to mention the sound of a thundering herd of caribou, are relaxing life experiences, and I still haven’t decided if it’s portentous or merely note-worthy that Thatcher finds the RCMP Administration Manual (which Fraser apparently knows by *heart*, or at least the introduction) soothing.

Now, to be perfectly blunt about it: Yes, I think Fraser misbehaves when he plants post-hypnotic suggestions on Thatcher and Ray, and I think it’s fascinating that he does it to the two people who, it could be argued, most turn him on. Do I think he acts with malice? No. But I do think that what he does – even though the episode makes it pretty clear that he means no harm and obviously feels no reason to hide it – is wrong. He wasn’t given permission to do it, and while in my darker moods the moment can almost squick me, I *like* it that he’s allowed to misbehave like that, that he’s allowed to be flawed. And the true beauty of the scene lies in the way Paul plays that pause right before Fraser says “Ray? When you hear me say … ‘cauliflower.’ “ It’s one of those moments that is, to me, near-magical from an acting standpoint – when an actor can almost make you see the character *thinking*. In that second or two before Fraser speaks, I can almost see him making the decision to act up, *choosing* to do something he knows he shouldn’t be doing, and it’s great to see it because we all have those moments of “I really, really shouldn’t but … what the hell, you only live once.” For everyone who likes to buy into the myth that Fraser’s inhumanly perfect, I’d hold this moment up as Exhibit A to disprove that notion.

Once we learn of the existence of the Fourth Man, it becomes clear that Welsh, Thatcher and Kowalski, while all being partly wrong, are all also partly right. Elements from each of their theories of the crime play into how the whole thing really did go down. As Thatcher suggested, Judi was trying to help Keith out. As Ray suggested, there were probably deeper-than-platonic feelings between the two of them that precipitated them wanting to get out from under Bennet’s thumb; and, as Welsh suggested, there was an element of pure ‘business,’ mob-type retribution at work, too. I love the way the re-enactment of the crime, with all the pieces of the puzzle now in place, is shot, and Fraser ducking as the Fourth Man throws the knife is a nice touch (although it amuses me that he apparently acts the scenario out *in the station house* as he describes it; when the camera cuts back to all of them in the station, Paul is clearly standing up from a crouch; if you don’t believe me, go look for yourself <g>).

The next set of scenes after Fraser explains the crime demonstrate his propensity for recklessness. As many of you know, I’m a huge fan of Fraser’s proficiency with sharp objects (his straight razor and his Big Mountie Knife make me smile), but I have to admit, I think it’s remarkably dangerous when he sends that letter opener sailing across the bullpen, even as I bask in that “how bad-ass *am* I?” glow he radiates as he does it the second time. And we’ve discussed here before that it’s risky bordering on reckless the way he walks up to the Fourth Man, unarmed, knowing the guy’s thisclose to probably being a sociopath, and reminds him that he still has another weapon he can use.

During the confrontation scene with the Fourth Man, I like how the idea of different viewpoints is reiterated with Welsh, Thatcher and Kowalski arguing over how many rounds the Fourth Man has fired And Callum does some great ‘face acting’ during this sequence, too, first with Ray’s exasperation over Fraser’s failure to carry a gun, then when Ray tries to tell Fraser to get out of the line of the Fourth Man’s gun sights, and finally, when Ray snarls at Fraser after Fraser catches the knife. Callum puts across that “I could *hit* you right now if I wasn’t a) happy you’re safe, and 2) happy you’re safe” vibe with an economy of movement and expression that’s truly impressive. And Ray’s “I will beat you to death with this empty gun” is one of my all-time favorite Kowalski Moments.

(An aside: The conversation between Fraser and the Fourth Man, while brief, really intrigues me. I like it that TFM calls Fraser “Red,” and I love the exchange between them about the Inukshuk -- “You violated a sacred thing …” “You judgin’ me?” The Fourth Man is clearly a hired gun (or hired knife, as the case may be <g>) and probably *is* a sociopath, but he actually seems to … consider … what Fraser says; he thinks about it, even if only for a few seconds. One could argue it’s yet another example of the unusual effect Fraser sometimes has on people. Plus, as a bad-ass himself, TFM probably feels a begrudging respect for the way Fraser faces off with him; yes, it’s crazy, but in its own way, it’s still pretty All That. I could see the Fourth Man admiring that in the way one does when one realizes one’s opponent is … worthy.)

Much like the teaser, the tag’s got some delightful bits. Chief among them is Thatcher’s dismissal of Welsh’s assertion that he “called” much of the crime right with a terse “in a pig’s eye,” as well as more of the Welsh-Frannie dynamic, as Frannie rather blatantly demonstrates how much she heeded his assessment that cops have a God-given right to bad coffee, which is to say not at all. Then, of course, there is Fraser and Ray: Ray doesn’t exactly beat himself up over the Bennet case, but it’s clear that it bothers him that he didn’t call it completely right. Fraser does what a good partner and friend should do, which is to remind Ray that he still got a lot of it right and in the end he still got the job done. It’s the way I always feel Fraser *should* act at the end of ALS. In fact, Fraser’s behavior here is part of the reason his behavior in the tag of ALS bothers me as much as it does; I know, from SiB, that he knows how to get Ray to look at the glass as half-full if he chooses to do so.

The tag also gives us the beginning, I think, of Ray’s appreciation of The Stetson. love how … gently … he picks it up and hands it to Fraser; it’s a nice little pre-cursor to the way he outright fondles the thing during M&S. The purpose for which Fraser uses PHS on Thatcher is, for all of its Bad!Mountie-ness, very slashy. As Audra put it: Anything to spend a little more time with Ray. Ray’s lack of comment on it – much like Thatcher and Welsh’s lack of comment earlier when Fraser uses PHS on Ray – is curious to me, and it always make me wonder if Ray knows what Fraser’s up to. Of course, I also wonder where the two of them are going to go when they leave the station, and what they’re going to do when they get there.

Overall, I think Seeing is Believing is one of the more underrated episodes of the series. It has a good premise which it deploys in a very clever *and* smart manner, and some of the best ensemble work out of all four seasons. While SiB doesn’t have the symbolism of an episode like Eclipse, or the relationship politics of an episode like MotB, I’d still take it with me to a desert island.

Quibbles & Nit-picks:

One of my biggest peeves with this episode is in the portrayal of the Public Defender representing Keith. I know it's supposed to be funny when she comments on his possible guilt or innocence *in front of three law enforcement officers*, but it really rubs me the wrong way. Not only is it not funny (at least not to me), it borders on professional irresponsibility and a violation of the rules of professional conduct for lawyers (conversely, the portrayal of Judy’s attorney is much more satisfying and realistic, right down to her efforts to make Judy stay quiet and her reminder that she can’t effectively represent Judy if Cates won’t actually take her advice);

The letter opener-throwing demonstration is a great bit of BadAss!Fraser, but it would be even better if Paul had ditched the letter opener he never really threw *before* the camera cut back to him. You can clearly see him still holding onto it, then he slips it behind his back (of course, I never caught it until the 10th or so time I watched this episode, but still …);

If the Fourth Man actually wasn’t wearing gloves when he threw the knife, why is no mention made of the additional set of fingerprints that necessarily would have been on the knife? And why does no one bother to check them against the records of known felons?


Bon Mots

Fraser: Could you elucidate, sir?
Welsh: No, not since the 60s.
Kowalski: Uh, that’s Canadian for ‘explain.’

Welsh (looking at a closed-eyed Ray): Are we boring you, Detective?
Kowalski: No, no. I can see it better this way.
Thatcher: That’s probably the way you saw it in the first place.

Thatcher: It’s just the kind of gift an older man would give a younger woman to buy her affection and to ease his guilty conscience.
Kowalski: Whoa! That is one talkative necklace.

Thatcher: I would never shoot a fellow officer.
Welsh: That’s because you never had Ray working under you.

Fraser: Ray, have you ever thought about contacts?
Kowalski: Too many hassles… Have you ever thought about carrying a gun?
Fraser: Too many legalities.
Kowalski: You know, just once, I’d like to be able to say, ‘Rack that bad boy and cover me.’

Drool-Worthy Moments:

Callum’s pretty hot the entire episode. I prefer Ray’s other shoulder holster to the one he wears here, but I love the leather jacket he wears, and I’m very fond of that form-fitting grey tee-shirt he’s got on. For pure sizzle, though, it’s a toss-up for me between the way he slinks down into the chair in Welsh’s office, and the manic, half-crazed, fully sexy way Ray comes careening into the alley way and corners the Fourth Man (during which he’s also wearing his glasses, natch). I love that little war whoop he gives right before he says, “Give it up, you got nowhere to go.”

For Paul, it’s hands down that moment during the hypnosis scene, when Fraser looks over and sees Pliant&Yielding!Ray. As Viridian so correctly observed to me off-list, no one has ever before, nor will anyone ever again, make the word ‘cauliflower’ sound so goddamn sexy.

An honorable mention must go to the actor playing the Fourth Man who, if the DS site is to be believed, goes by the stage name “Mif”.What can I say but I’m a sucker for a perfectly shaped shaven head and a good pair of cheekbones?

Slash-O-Meter Ranking:

The “I love you … And I, you” exchange alone puts this at a 5 for me, but I have to give it a few extra points for the business with the Stetson and Fraser using PHS on Thatcher so he can hang out with Ray. While a good writer can certainly try and convince me otherwise, I think their relationship is still probably too young for them to fall into bed after this episode, but I bet they had a lot of fun wherever it was they went after they left the station. My slash rating: 6.5

Latonya

Back to Strange Bedfellows

Ahead to Bounty Hunter

Return to MRKS Review Page