Hardison’s hacking abilities are pure fantasy. So is Parker’s disappearing tricks. One episode she jumps off a bridge and grabs ahold of a bar under the bridge and just hangs there, so the guy who looks over the side doesn’t see her. Very unlikely.
Compact EMP gun that temporarily disables cars?
Who says they actually get hired for those roles? They just dress up in appropriate costume, and walk in the door. Typically they are surrounded by enough people that even other employees aren’t going to know everyone. Or else they arrange a distraction for the real employee and show up as his/her “replacement”. We see them do enough of that explicitly that it is easy enough to fill in for the lesser moments (e.g. Parker just happening to be a waitress at a gala).
Its one of my favorite shows. I do agree that it is a bit uneven. Some episodes are waay better than others, but all in all, a fun show and all the characters are likable.
I totally want one of those (if such a thing were ever to exist). Next time I’m stuck in traffic near some pinhead with a window rattling sub-woofer, pull that sucker out, and whammo - instant peace and quiet.
I like Leverage myself. Like others have said, it’s pretty much turn-off-the-brain entertainment, but it’s pretty well done as such things go. Not everything has to be frickin’ Hamlet, you know.
For the fans out there, you should check out Kung Fu Monkey. It’s a blog by the creator of the show, where he answers question about each episode. He goes a lot into what stuff is real and what stuff they make up.
I enjoy it periodically but don’t watch it regularly. It’s got the evil lawyer from Angel in it and Timothy Hutton, both of whom I like. But I don’t dvr it or cry if I miss it, like I do with Human Target.
Human Target sounds like Hart to Hart to me, and I can’t watch Leverage without thinking of The A-Team. I watched half a season of Leverage, and got bored.
Okay. I’ve watched a couple of episodes of Leverage and it do like it. It fits the bill when you’re tired of the “heinous crimes” on L&O:SVU. The capers are tied up neatly like they are on Burn Notice.
Coupla background questions: Is the leader an active alcoholic or a recovering alcoholic? Or is he just a drunk? I lived with one and don’t find them appealing or amusing unless in recovery.
The guy with the long hair: does he smile or have any fun?
I watched an episode that I taped where they ran a con to save a pub that a loan shark was going to take in payment of a debt. There was a bit of *hommage *to The Sting in that the mark named Doyle (his last name, but the first name of Robert Shaw’s character in the movie) was taken in a rigged poker game. I loved it when… oops, don’t want to spoil… I loved the punch line about the other players.
I also loved how the black guy is impressed with his own competence- like when he rigged the impromptu weather report on the bar’s tv.
Nate (Timothy Hutton) was in recovery, but something happened. The team tried to be supportive, but, well, they all have their own demons.
Here is the fan site where you can find old episodes.
Eliot (Christian Kane) does smile occasionally. He’s also a country singer. They did a con last season where he was able to show off his talent. While I’m not a big country fan, I have to admit, he was pretty good.
Nate is either an alcoholic or a drunk, never made clear. At some point, he did get sober, and had been sober for some months just before the activity on the ep you’re talking about (saving McRory’s); but from time to time, it’s still necessary for him to drink in order not to blow his ‘cover’; he struggles with it, and knows he’s better sober. Of course, it is Timothy Hutton, so almost anything is forgivable!
Oh, Elliot! ::drool:: Love him! Yes, sometimes he does have fun, smile, ‘play’; mostly, though, he likes kicking the shit out of people who need the shit kicked out of them. He’s also a gourmet chef!
Great ep! Loved it!
Hardison’s shtick always reminds me of a cut-rate Eddie Murphy (circa 1990 or so). I like him, though. He does often seem very pleased with himself, and even though it’s not his ‘thing’, he can work a con in addition to jacking up a hard drive. There are sometimes hints at a possible sexual/romantic tension between him and Parker. I think they’d be cute together!
We like both Human Target and Leverage.
One thing that is a bit over-used and annoying on Leverage is when they are trying to decide which con to use and you hear them saying, “The Wilma Jean?” “Na, we need a tank for that.” “How about the Banana Float?” “Too difficult, we need snow…”
Etc. etc.
Minor nitpick to an otherwise, usually clever, game of con the con artists.
Generally speaking, Elliott (hair guy) serves as the straight man in dealing with Parker’s (blonde woman) insanity and Hardison’s (hacker) arrogance and distaste for some of the nasty parts of the work. As an example, Elliott and Hardison were tasked with searching through several dumpsters of trash for evidence of a payoff (The juror #6 job). Elliott was standing in the dumpster while Hardison was gingerly and slowly looking through the bags. When confronted with his apparent lack of effort, Hardison makes up a story of a peanut allergy and said that since neither of them wanted Elliott to have to give him mouth to mouth then Elliot should stay in the dumpster while Hardison does what he does. In a gesture of humor and frustration, he throws the next bag at Hardison, knocking him into the pile of refuse.
Watched the first episode and really liked it. unfortunately the rest of the first season was just “meh” and I stopped watching a little into the second season.
This was the evolution of my question: I got that he was an alcoholic; I was wondering if he was active or in recovery (e.g., Lt. Cragin of L&O is in recovery- part of his character’s back story). Those two terms- “active alcoholic” and “recovering alcoholic”- kind of go hand-in-hand within the context of the terminology of the substance abuse community (users and therapists). Two sides of a coin and descriptive in relationship to each other.
Anyway, “drunk” kind of sits by itself: someone who drinks and has no interest in stopping or getting into any kind of recovery program. Like Otis in the old Andy Griffith Show.
IOW what I was asking was whether Nate was a) active/recovering or b) just a drunk who did not struggle with the issue.
Yeah, I find that kind of annoying as well, but Leverage has at least had Hardison openly scoffing that every one of these damn cons has a cutesy little name. A wise move to make one of the characters a voice for us dissenters.
My understanding–and it tends to sort of drift into the background now that it’s not really an active arc element–is that Nate’s a functional alcoholic. It’s easy enough to forget, though, since he’s seldom showing any obvious signs of intoxication.
I love the show, though I can’t help but feel like it could be better. They leave some good stuff on the table–Nate’s alcoholism, and the third season ‘arc’ for example–and it’s been getting harder to keep the disbelief suspended in the third season. It’s still a lot of fun, though, and remains the only show where I’ve ever bothered to listen to the commentaries on the DVDs. Plus, the attention that John Rogers gives the fans over on his Kung Fu Monkey blog is hard to beat.
