Stalker

I find it interesting that no reviewer raised objections over a company using inmates as CSRs. Is it because when we think of criminals we only think of rapist and murderers, and not cyber criminals?

I would think that any company that gives felons access to citizens personal data is a breach of data security and business ethics. How can corporate America justify employing known felons, when prisons are infested with drug smuggling and other corruption. How does one vet inmates to be a CSR, when there is proof that violent felons are also involved in non-violent crimes like identity theft and money laundering.

I just hope that this episode is only fiction and there aren't companies allowing known felons to access an individual's protected data on any level, even with so called safeguards in place. Not all criminals are illiterate with low IQs.

This episode involves Briscoe and Curtis answering a call of a woman being thrown down a flight of stairs in her apartment building. Susan Floyd says she's been systematically stalked and terrorized by a man who seems to know everything about her and signs his e-mails Giovanni.

'Giovanni' is played by Stephen Gavedon and the only real connection that the detectives can establish is Gavedon like opera and his favorite is Mozart's Don Giovanni. It looks like Floyd might have faked the attack because no one was taking her cries for help seriously.

It all leads to a crisis of conscience for Jerry Orbach and a split from Benjamin Bratt. I agree with the other reviewer that Rey Curtis can sometimes be insufferably self righteous.

What I liked best though was the place where Gavedon honed his cyber stalking skills. None other than jail, a private prison run at a profit in Pennsylvania. The authorities there have their inmates working as telemarketers and of course once you buy via a credit card all kinds of information opens up on people. Score one for the free enterprise system. In fact the whole idea behind these places is to have more convicts that the state can't handle. Hence in New York the opposition to repealing the Rockefeller Drug Laws.

Good episode, I only wish there was an episode devoted strictly to that issue.

The subject matter is not a unique one for 'Law and Order' as a show and for the franchise in general. This doesn't matter though as it is a very relevant and unsettling issue that has always been a major problem and is still just as bad. So it is always worth exploring on shows as hard-hitting as the 'Law and Order' franchise, which specialised in the handling of tough topics (and this topic is one of the tougher ones of Season 8) and that played a big part in the show's and franchise's vast appeal.

"Stalker" is a solid outing for 'Law and Order', though not one of the best episodes of a mostly very impressive Season 8. It handles the stalking and its consequences theme very well, though 'Special Victims Unit' did this a few times in its early seasons and did it better in my view. "Stalker" is another one of those episodes where one half is superior to the other and one character really rubbed me up the wrong way here, but so much is done incredibly well.

Do have to agree about the way Curtis is written here. "Stalker" is one of the worst cases of Curtis' attitude towards the case and everybody else involved (such as his treatment of Briscoe) being alienating and enough to unbalance the episode. He is far too sanctimonious and stubborn here and it compromises the case in a way that was not present in his previous episodes.

It is a routine and predictable episode to begin with, and could have benefitted from a tighter pace and more suspense. Luckily things that the legal portions had.

Everything else works very well. The production values are solid and the intimacy of the photography doesn't get static or too filmed play-like. The music when used is not too over-emphatic and has a melancholic edge that is quite haunting. The direction is sympathetic enough while also taut.

Furthermore, the script is tight and intelligent. Shining in the second half when the conflict and tensions properly come to life. The second half is very compelling and has some nice suspense in the dialogue and character dynamics. When it comes to the performances, Jerry Orbach really stands out here. Do agree that he does conflicted anguish so well here and always did. Susan Floyd is touchingly vulnerable and Steven Gavedom is one creepy sleazeball.

On the whole, good but could have been great if Curtis was written better. 7/10.