Well, this was certainly one of the most graphic premises the show has had, which is saying something considering the subject matter of the series, but it really missed the mark. It sort of excused violent behavior with the ruling, and did not do anything to address how women should rebound from the heinous crimes done to them. Retribution is not the answer, legal action is to punish criminals.
9 Reviews
Contrapasso: Pound of Flesh
yazguloner9 March 2022
This episode that rises with marvel of Barba.
The intense, effective, difficult and dark grey cases from Season 13 and beyond of the new Svu are back. I missed the dark gray court defenses and closing remarks so much. That's the real Svu.
The subject is a teacher who abuses three children with toxic literary words. It is believed that he served his sentence when the three young women took her revenge.
However, Svu and Barba know very well that being fair is not about bargaining. It also teaches us.
The intense, effective, difficult and dark grey cases from Season 13 and beyond of the new Svu are back. I missed the dark gray court defenses and closing remarks so much. That's the real Svu.
The subject is a teacher who abuses three children with toxic literary words. It is believed that he served his sentence when the three young women took her revenge.
However, Svu and Barba know very well that being fair is not about bargaining. It also teaches us.
A Conviction Based on............What?
bababear11 October 2017
Warning: Spoilers
As usual on this show the dialog, acting, direction, everything else was great. Unfortunately, there seems to be a rule that every case Olivia Benson handles must end with a conviction. It's the same formula that fifty years ago had Perry Mason never take on the case of a guilty person.
Spoiler: A man winds up convicted of an aggravated rape that happened twenty years ago based on the victim's testimony and a poem the victim wrote when she was in high school. No forensic evidence. Just words.
I realize that the scenario would be more appropriate for a sketch on Monty Python than for my favorite show on the air. Even the best of writers have off days, I guess.
Spoiler: A man winds up convicted of an aggravated rape that happened twenty years ago based on the victim's testimony and a poem the victim wrote when she was in high school. No forensic evidence. Just words.
I realize that the scenario would be more appropriate for a sketch on Monty Python than for my favorite show on the air. Even the best of writers have off days, I guess.
Predictable episode, with lots of Holes.(No Pun Intended, but could be)
keelhaul-8085616 October 2017
Warning: Spoilers
We love SVU, but this episode was too predictable, and didn't even make a whole lot of sense. This is understandable with a show as old as SVU, as recycled and pieced-together plots eventually resurface, but still enjoyable. Here are my problems with the whole thing, though...
1)These girls were like 16 at the time, and one of them even admits to returning willingly to his house after being seduced there before. Does she have no will power or mind of her own? Gee, my counselor or teacher is so powerful that I have to ride home with him or drive over to his house again, to argue with him about our affair, so he can rape me again. Maybe I am being cynical, but this is also a problem in real life. 16 yr. old girls do not get the same sympathy from me as a little child being molested by a caretaker or something. Now, as a dad, I might be furious with such a teacher for doing this with my daughter, but people of this age need to take responsibility for themselves. People at 16 are driving cars, marrying with parental permission, working jobs, dying in wars(in the past and across the world), having abortions, having kids, acting in Hollywood movies made for adults, etc. Many of these teens are banging half their school's football team and throwing themselves at older men. Is this REALLY the same thing as an adult harming a prepubescent child? I think these cases need clarification and a distinction between sex with older teens and sex with kids who can't even understand or consent to anything. These girls just seem like the types who are now accusing Bill Cosby. Yes, he was sleazy, but WHY were you in that situation repeatedly to begin with??? You can't be that dumb.
2) The F****** statute of limitations. Did I TOTALLY MISS SOMETHING HERE??? I thought they mentioned a statute of limitations early in the show, then threw it out for the court case. I'm assuming this was considered first degree? Because NY has a 5 yr. limitation on any other degree of rape case.
3) Too tidy for an ending. What did they convict him on? A poem(that could have been about anyone or anything) and the word of some girls from decades ago?
4) The punishment DID NOT fit the crime. Come on. This guy got more punishment than most people do for actually torturing and eating people. He had his balls cut off, lost the ability to reproduce and be a man, and was humiliated for life and put in serious jeopardy with his health, mental state, and a ruined manhood or family potential. Based on the flimsy evidence, should he really be sent to prison on these charges, after being castrated by women in a hotel with a steak knife? I thought he had paid enough. Seemed more like a feminist 2017 announcement or fantasy to me than a likely reality or ending.
1)These girls were like 16 at the time, and one of them even admits to returning willingly to his house after being seduced there before. Does she have no will power or mind of her own? Gee, my counselor or teacher is so powerful that I have to ride home with him or drive over to his house again, to argue with him about our affair, so he can rape me again. Maybe I am being cynical, but this is also a problem in real life. 16 yr. old girls do not get the same sympathy from me as a little child being molested by a caretaker or something. Now, as a dad, I might be furious with such a teacher for doing this with my daughter, but people of this age need to take responsibility for themselves. People at 16 are driving cars, marrying with parental permission, working jobs, dying in wars(in the past and across the world), having abortions, having kids, acting in Hollywood movies made for adults, etc. Many of these teens are banging half their school's football team and throwing themselves at older men. Is this REALLY the same thing as an adult harming a prepubescent child? I think these cases need clarification and a distinction between sex with older teens and sex with kids who can't even understand or consent to anything. These girls just seem like the types who are now accusing Bill Cosby. Yes, he was sleazy, but WHY were you in that situation repeatedly to begin with??? You can't be that dumb.
2) The F****** statute of limitations. Did I TOTALLY MISS SOMETHING HERE??? I thought they mentioned a statute of limitations early in the show, then threw it out for the court case. I'm assuming this was considered first degree? Because NY has a 5 yr. limitation on any other degree of rape case.
3) Too tidy for an ending. What did they convict him on? A poem(that could have been about anyone or anything) and the word of some girls from decades ago?
4) The punishment DID NOT fit the crime. Come on. This guy got more punishment than most people do for actually torturing and eating people. He had his balls cut off, lost the ability to reproduce and be a man, and was humiliated for life and put in serious jeopardy with his health, mental state, and a ruined manhood or family potential. Based on the flimsy evidence, should he really be sent to prison on these charges, after being castrated by women in a hotel with a steak knife? I thought he had paid enough. Seemed more like a feminist 2017 announcement or fantasy to me than a likely reality or ending.
Suffering the opposite
TheLittleSongbird13 December 2022
My feelings on first watch of Season 19's third episode "Contrapasso" were mixed, leaning towards underwhelmed. Loved Barba and Raul Esparza's acting, wasn't crazy about the case and disliked even further the character writing for Olivia. Episodes of 'Law and Order: Special Victims Unit' that have strong emphasis on personal life stories have always varied, even when the show was in its prime years and became more and more variable with each season.
When it comes to the previous two episodes of Season 19, "Gone Fishin" was pretty good, despite a few misgivings, but "Mood" was a very mixed bag. As was "Contrapasso" on rewatch for pretty much the exact same reasons as on first watch while noticing a couple more issues and feeling more strongly about another one that was already a major turn off in the season and in most of the latter seasons. "Contrapasso" is a long way from a terrible episode, it just isn't great either.
It has good things. The production values are still slick and suitably gritty (without being too heavy in it). The music is not too melodramatic and is not used too much, even not being too manipulative in revelations. Some of the direction early on was solid enough.
Fin and Carisi were strong presences (great to not have Fin underused and Carisi true to character). They gel very well. The dramatic highlight of the episode was easily Barba's very impassioned closing argument, one of his best and most persuasive in a long time. Love Barba still as a character, who is one of the main reasons as to why the latter seasons were stuck with, and Raul Esparza's acting. Peter Herman is not close behind (the acting near-all round is fine, though Mariska Hargitay is a bit one dimensional) and the opening is disturbing.
Too much of the rest of "Contrapasso" doesn't live up to its initial promise. The story is very predictable and lacked any form of tension other than the opening. Also found it rushed at times, especially at the end where part of me was wondering whether there was anything else that wasn't mentioned that influenced the verdict. Too many things did not make sense, especially the outcome of the trial of the accused rapist despite evidence being so little and weak. And also felt strongly that the accusers/attackers, in a case where nobody in any way is innocent in their action, not only should gotten a much harsher sentence what they were charged with should have been more serious too. What was gone through with them was absolutely terrible, but that doesn't condone doing something that was close to equalling it in seriousness.
Once again, the dialogue is less than taut and came over as bland, Olivia's at times condescending. Olivia's sanctimonious-ness and victim bias has really worn thin and has been for ages, enough to make one question how so many relate to her in so many difficult scenarios and a role model if she is this stubborn, this preachy and this lacking in professionalism. Her personal life subplot didn't feel necessary to the story and while Brooke Sheilds did nicely with the little screen time she had in a role that would signal the start of an arc her appearance in this episode was on the shoe-horned in side.
Concluding, watchable but only for a couple of watches at most. 5/10.
When it comes to the previous two episodes of Season 19, "Gone Fishin" was pretty good, despite a few misgivings, but "Mood" was a very mixed bag. As was "Contrapasso" on rewatch for pretty much the exact same reasons as on first watch while noticing a couple more issues and feeling more strongly about another one that was already a major turn off in the season and in most of the latter seasons. "Contrapasso" is a long way from a terrible episode, it just isn't great either.
It has good things. The production values are still slick and suitably gritty (without being too heavy in it). The music is not too melodramatic and is not used too much, even not being too manipulative in revelations. Some of the direction early on was solid enough.
Fin and Carisi were strong presences (great to not have Fin underused and Carisi true to character). They gel very well. The dramatic highlight of the episode was easily Barba's very impassioned closing argument, one of his best and most persuasive in a long time. Love Barba still as a character, who is one of the main reasons as to why the latter seasons were stuck with, and Raul Esparza's acting. Peter Herman is not close behind (the acting near-all round is fine, though Mariska Hargitay is a bit one dimensional) and the opening is disturbing.
Too much of the rest of "Contrapasso" doesn't live up to its initial promise. The story is very predictable and lacked any form of tension other than the opening. Also found it rushed at times, especially at the end where part of me was wondering whether there was anything else that wasn't mentioned that influenced the verdict. Too many things did not make sense, especially the outcome of the trial of the accused rapist despite evidence being so little and weak. And also felt strongly that the accusers/attackers, in a case where nobody in any way is innocent in their action, not only should gotten a much harsher sentence what they were charged with should have been more serious too. What was gone through with them was absolutely terrible, but that doesn't condone doing something that was close to equalling it in seriousness.
Once again, the dialogue is less than taut and came over as bland, Olivia's at times condescending. Olivia's sanctimonious-ness and victim bias has really worn thin and has been for ages, enough to make one question how so many relate to her in so many difficult scenarios and a role model if she is this stubborn, this preachy and this lacking in professionalism. Her personal life subplot didn't feel necessary to the story and while Brooke Sheilds did nicely with the little screen time she had in a role that would signal the start of an arc her appearance in this episode was on the shoe-horned in side.
Concluding, watchable but only for a couple of watches at most. 5/10.
A truly gruesome case
bkoganbing4 October 2018
While Mariska Hargitay is dealing with a personal crisis at home, Kelli Giddish and
Peter Scannavino catch a truly gruesome case involving the castration of Peter
Fitzgerald.
It's a powerful motive,but on examining it closely how in the world could Fitzgerald not have recognized one of the students that back in his high school teaching days not have seduced. Granted these women, Betsy Beutler, Jeannine Kasper, and Kathleen Munroe are 20 years older, still it doesn't track. And after losing the family jewels, why would he care about disclosure of his romping through the female student bodies back in the day?
On the personal note Mariska Hargitay is being threatened with having Noah's adoption case reopened. This episode also introduces Brooke Shields playing (gasp) Noah's birth grandmother. She'd do a few episodes.
Too many problems with the story line.
It's a powerful motive,but on examining it closely how in the world could Fitzgerald not have recognized one of the students that back in his high school teaching days not have seduced. Granted these women, Betsy Beutler, Jeannine Kasper, and Kathleen Munroe are 20 years older, still it doesn't track. And after losing the family jewels, why would he care about disclosure of his romping through the female student bodies back in the day?
On the personal note Mariska Hargitay is being threatened with having Noah's adoption case reopened. This episode also introduces Brooke Shields playing (gasp) Noah's birth grandmother. She'd do a few episodes.
Too many problems with the story line.
Peter Hermann And Brooke Shields Salvage Weak Episode
stp4312 October 2017
Warning: Spoilers
SVU has been woefully uneven in the last several seasons and the show reaches something of a nadir here in a pathetically predictable presentation.
SVU finds a man with his genitals sliced off in a hotel; he is identified as Jason Karr and three women seen in the hotel or its vicinity the night of the assault are tracked down; their evasiveness about their whereabouts makes them suspects and when SVU checks further Olivia Benson and company find the three women were schoolmates who were part of a poetry class under Karr. And it gets worse; Karr's own evasiveness gives away he knows why he was castrated, and when the three women are busted for Obstruction they come forth saying they were sexually violated as students by Karr. The one twist - an ironic term here - comes when the ringleader tells of being penetrated when Karr put himself atop her armed with a corkscrew and threatening violence should she resist; what sinks Karr is when his youthful wife - subjected to the same pick-up lines the three women received - shows a poem in a student magazine authored by the primary victim.
The guilt of Karr is telegraphed almost by the end of the first act, and it's been an increasing problem with the series, the poor quality of the writing and resultant pathetic predictability of the plots. The show established itself (notably during the 285-episode Ted Kotcheff era) not only by the strength of the cast (as one reviewer notes the absence of Christopher Meloni and retirement of Dann Florek and to a lesser extent Richard Belzer has hurt the show's casting quality; Peter Scanavino really doesn't cut it and Kelli Giddish is decent but unspectacular) but also with the wildly creative writing with twists and complications akin to The Twilight Zone Meets The French Connection; the good episodes of recent such as the Season 19 opener are solid but don't capture the engagement of the show's apex, and the increasing number of inferior episodes drag the series down more and more. One reviewer scathingly notes the insulting preachiness of episodes since star Mariska Hargitay assumed more of an executive producer role (here it shows in Raul Esparza's childish rant of a closing argument, the kind of whiny delivery made by someone knowing he's lost the argument), and that definitely needs to stop.
The only thing that salvages an episode otherwise unwatchable is the debut of series semi-regular Brooke Shields and the return of Peter Hermann as attorney Trevor Langan. The on-screen interaction of the real-life husband-wife tandem of Peter and Mariska is always enjoyable to see and here they face the potential crisis that Olivia's adopted son Noah has a grandmother who'd covered her tracks for years but now is in town - and appears at Olivia's very door. Though her scene is brief, Shields manages to convey a striking balance of ladylike, motherly innocence with the malice akin to classic TV villain Fred Johnson, haunting the life of the series protagonist even when unseen.
Olivia naturally is taken aback by this development, to where she lapses into a surprising burst of accusatory anger at Trevor that makes her disturbingly unsympathetic; Olivia should know better than this and Trevor apologetically makes sure any action against Noah will be resisted.
This subplot will drive the series for the time being, but it still needs to clean up its weaknesses of poor storytelling.
SVU finds a man with his genitals sliced off in a hotel; he is identified as Jason Karr and three women seen in the hotel or its vicinity the night of the assault are tracked down; their evasiveness about their whereabouts makes them suspects and when SVU checks further Olivia Benson and company find the three women were schoolmates who were part of a poetry class under Karr. And it gets worse; Karr's own evasiveness gives away he knows why he was castrated, and when the three women are busted for Obstruction they come forth saying they were sexually violated as students by Karr. The one twist - an ironic term here - comes when the ringleader tells of being penetrated when Karr put himself atop her armed with a corkscrew and threatening violence should she resist; what sinks Karr is when his youthful wife - subjected to the same pick-up lines the three women received - shows a poem in a student magazine authored by the primary victim.
The guilt of Karr is telegraphed almost by the end of the first act, and it's been an increasing problem with the series, the poor quality of the writing and resultant pathetic predictability of the plots. The show established itself (notably during the 285-episode Ted Kotcheff era) not only by the strength of the cast (as one reviewer notes the absence of Christopher Meloni and retirement of Dann Florek and to a lesser extent Richard Belzer has hurt the show's casting quality; Peter Scanavino really doesn't cut it and Kelli Giddish is decent but unspectacular) but also with the wildly creative writing with twists and complications akin to The Twilight Zone Meets The French Connection; the good episodes of recent such as the Season 19 opener are solid but don't capture the engagement of the show's apex, and the increasing number of inferior episodes drag the series down more and more. One reviewer scathingly notes the insulting preachiness of episodes since star Mariska Hargitay assumed more of an executive producer role (here it shows in Raul Esparza's childish rant of a closing argument, the kind of whiny delivery made by someone knowing he's lost the argument), and that definitely needs to stop.
The only thing that salvages an episode otherwise unwatchable is the debut of series semi-regular Brooke Shields and the return of Peter Hermann as attorney Trevor Langan. The on-screen interaction of the real-life husband-wife tandem of Peter and Mariska is always enjoyable to see and here they face the potential crisis that Olivia's adopted son Noah has a grandmother who'd covered her tracks for years but now is in town - and appears at Olivia's very door. Though her scene is brief, Shields manages to convey a striking balance of ladylike, motherly innocence with the malice akin to classic TV villain Fred Johnson, haunting the life of the series protagonist even when unseen.
Olivia naturally is taken aback by this development, to where she lapses into a surprising burst of accusatory anger at Trevor that makes her disturbingly unsympathetic; Olivia should know better than this and Trevor apologetically makes sure any action against Noah will be resisted.
This subplot will drive the series for the time being, but it still needs to clean up its weaknesses of poor storytelling.
Mariska's prime time Preach-a-thons finally hit rick bottom.
oversplayer11 October 2017
Warning: Spoilers
I have been a huge fan of the entire "Law and Order" franchise since the mid-90s and SVU was my favorite of its various incarnations. That was until Mariska decided to use the show's preferred time slot as a personal soapbox from which to preach her "Women are always helpless victims while men are always unspeakably hideous pigs" blather. Okay, despite the downward plunge this series took when Chris Meloni departed(and Richard Belzer and Dann Florek subsequently retired), it was still worth watching for the occasional clever scripts and unexpected twists. However, as soon as Mariska became an executive producer and decided to flex her apparent man-hating muscles, coupled with her embarrassingly ignorant or, more probably, intentional disregard of the law, to jettison entertainment value in favor of unending sermonizing, the series sunk to previously unimaginably levels. But tonight's forced, contorted episode finally hit absolute rock bottom. Having practiced law for 40 years, let me assure you that the plot point of tonight's episode - that a prosecutor would even pause to consider filing a 20-year old forcible rape charge on the word of a woman who had just been arrested for committing and admitting a vile, unspeakable act of mayhem redefines the term, "suspension of disbelief." Sorry, Mariska, advocating for women's empowerment is an admirable, commendable enterprise, but using a prime, network slot to preach your personal, prejudiced views to a (previously) captive audience is unforgivable. Sorry to kiss one of my very favorite programs goodbye, but, when my subconscious reaction to the final scene of an episode is to immediately lunge for the shower, I know the shark has just taken a giant leap. And by the way, I don't know of anyone who could care less about whether Olivia keeps Noah or not.
Talk about purely circumstancial, if not an opinionated verdict.
rob-roy71729 December 2017
Warning: Spoilers
I actually looked it up and since they wrote it to go after the guy for first degree, there is no statue of limitations. But we're basing that on cock shells and a poem? And what about the girl that claimed this? She's golden on the castrastion? That's undisputable unlike her so called poem. What..it gains creditability bc the wife now feels gilted he's always gone after younger women? Ok, yes under the law he committed statutory rape...he admitted it and all 3 of them fell for him and got pissed bc he was seeing each one of them. What better way for scorned women to get back at that lover ehh? I never really paid attention to the credits but those of you about Mariska and her agenda... I have to agree. Shame on the liberal mindset, because that is close minded.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
