Mentalist Wedding in Red Review


Synopsis

A murder in Napa county gives CBI consultant Patrick Jane a chance to investigate Sherriff McAllister (Xander Berkely), one of his suspects in the Red John Case. Meanwhile, a change in the CBI’s policy on inter-office relationships intrigues Agent Grace Van Pelt (Amanda Righetti) and boyfriend Agent Wayne Rigsby (Owain Yeoman).

Concise Verdict

A change of scenery is always great and the lovely setting of Wedding in Red set the stage for what turned out to be an equally beautiful  episode. Romance is a tricky genre to write and under a less talented writer (and actors) can be trite and juvenile. Needless to say this wasn’t the case here. Daniel Cerone’s fresh dialogue, action, and awesome acting makes season six’s third episode is another winner. 9.5/10.

Detailed AKA Humungous Review (Spoilers Galore)

The Case

Other than serving how dysfunctional both the groom’s and the bride’s family’s are, and (perhaps) how incompatible they seemed, the case served little purpose than to advance Rigsby and Van Pelt’s relationship, as well as give Jane (and us viewers) insight onto Sheriff McAllister.

Grace/Wayne Romance: The setup

The episode starts with a very domestic scene; Grace playing with Ben, Wayne’s son. We learn that she spends most nights at his place since it’s easier for him when he has his son. We also learn that the CBI no longer has rules on inter- office relationships; a fact Grace informs Wayne after he tells her “I could still make an honest woman out of you yet”. Grace’s “You could” had more meaning that just the fact that their relationship was no longer professionally taboo. There was a wistfulness in her voice that served as foreshadowing.

Wayne senses Grace’s tone and later discusses the matter with Cho who helpfully reminds viewers that Wayne is a marrying-type man: he proposed to the mother of his child. Wayne states that he did it because he felt his son deserved to grow up with married parents. But with Grace he feels unsure due to past complications in their relationship. He asks for advice which Cho declines to give.

Later, after Jane wrecks the relationship between the victim’s niece and her fiancée, he assigns Van Pelt the task of mending the break so that he can find the culprit. This inadvertently gives Wayne the assurance he needs from Grace as he watches her give advice to Stacy (Ericca Piccininni ):

“I had someone. Staying together would have ended my  career so I let him go. It ended badly so I shut down inside. Closed doors to feel safer. Problem is, with every passing year you close more doors until eventually you wonder if anyone will get through. “

This was a great, accurate, and sincere recap of Wayne and Grace’s relationship. But the best part is the regret we (and Wayne) hear in her voice when she talks about letting him go. Then there is her admission that she still has her wedding dress (from when she was engaged to Craig):

“It reminds me of who I was, naive, maybe a little foolish, but full of hope. If I destroy that dress I will forget what hope feels like.”

Beautifully poignant writing acted out to perfection by Righetti. And having Rigsby look in through the interrogation window (unbeknownst to Grace, I’m sure) served as just the right impetus for what would occur later.

The Proposal

The case again gives the couple a chance to come together, this time in the form of Lisbon asking Rigsby to provide a distraction during the wedding party to allow the suspect time to escape. Rigsby leaps at the opportunity and uses the act to propose to Grace in what was one of my favorite scenes in the episode.

First, he asks Lisbon how he looks.

-Aw! Wayne wants older sis Lisbon’s encouragement.

When a confused Lisbon tells him he looks fine he downs a glass of wine (or is it punch?) before he takes the mike from the DJ and says his piece.

-Now Yeoman and Righetti nailed the scene, but what I also loved was Lisbon’s reaction through all this. She represents the viewers.  At first she was confused. Then horrified as she looked between the two as the speech went on; but as Rigsby finishes talking about the bad patches and goes on to talk about how they found each other, you can just tell she’s about to cry. Like Grace, she knows this is real, this isn’t just an act. And she looked so happy for them.

As was I, I must admit. I was never a fan of the romance, but the two have just grown so much that they grew on me and my old cynical heart just melted. Here’s to Righetti and Yeoman for turning me around. And for Cerone for the mature dialogue that allowed them to win me over.

Sheriff McAllister

Jane and McAllister’s reunion was quite amusing. First he balks at the CBI’s presence saying he could handle the case, but then he takes the opportunity to good-naturedly spar with Jane, both trying to get a read on the victim based on his clothes.

-I loved the continuity here; the scene recalled the friendly game of rock/paper/scissors Jane and the Sheriff had the first episode he was introduced. Then there was this:

McAllister: “His scent, do you detect oregano about it?”

Jane (sniffs): “That’s a leap”.

I swear I laughed out loud here :D.

Later, after repeatedly telling Lisbon he needs to be alone with McAllister to get a read on whether he is RJ, Jane’s opportunity unexpectedly arrives when the Sheriff surprises him near a cliff. When Jane comments on how silently the man’s approach was he explains: “Old habit, I’ve been a hunter all my life.” And when Jane asks what he hunts, he replies, “Anything with a face, game’s game, right?”

Oh-kaay….

The conversation continues as follows:

McAllister: “You hunt?”

Jane: “No I’m too squeamish.”

Thank you, Cerone. Love this continuity on how Jane doesn’t handle blood and gore well. But more than that, it was an opportunity for Jane to say the following…

“I couldn’t handle all the skinning and gutting.”

…and gauge the Sheriff’s reaction to the bloody verbs describing Red John’s crimes. But McAllister doesn’t seem to skip a beat : “Sure if you clean and quarter a kill, it takes a certain stomach for that.”.

When Jane adds that it also takes “a certain blood-lust”, McAllister responds “There’s a grain a truth in that”.

All in all, it was an ambiguous but nonetheless appropriately creepy scene which probably left viewers with a bad feeling towards the man…the better to counter it when he saves Jane’s life later.

McAllister had raised a red flag for both Lisbon and Jane’s suspicions when it seemed like he had a fear of heights (just like RJ, according to his statement to Sophie Miller). But later, he climbs on top of the church roof to shoot the perpetrator saving Jane’s life, proving that he’s perfectly fine with heights.

Jane is (again) surprised by his sudden presence, which the man explains by saying he felt compelled to keep an eye on Jane because it felt like he had an agenda for working the case. Jane responds that he sometimes gives off mixed signals.

Here, it seemed that Jane was obviously grateful for the man and perhaps was rethinking him as a suspect. But when McAllister starts at the presence of pigeons on the roof, saying that he hates them, it seems like Jane is reminded that RJ’s declaration to Sophie Miller on being afraid of heights, could have been a lie to mask another phobia. Of birds, perhaps?

Bird Theme

This is obviously going to be a major theme this season. We had ducks at the beginning of this, episode. Also, for three episodes in a row, we’ve seen and heard pigeons. The first time was at Brett Partridge’s crime scene; second was when Jane and Lisbon were discussing Sophie Miller’s death (in a park? With a suspicious woman nearby). Finally, in this episode, they were perched on the roof of the church Jane and the perp where on.

A cursory search on what they could symbolize led me to this interesting webpage. Not sure which (if any) of the symbolism is applicable to this show but it’s an interesting read nonetheless. Curious to see what readers might think..

Best Lines

“As long as there are no rank issues.”  Grace, to Wayne, on the new inter-office dating polity. Rats. So Lisbon can’t date Jane cause she’s his boss. Good thing they’re practically already married.

“Do you wanna date Lisbon?” Grace, to Wayne. I interpret Wayne’s subsequent shudder as a reaction to him imagining dating his older sister (which is what is the canon relationship between Rigsbon, in my book).

“That’s very astute Lisbon. Well obsevered.”-I think Lisbon, like myself, was skeptical at first of Jane’s comment and suspected he was patronizing her. But after examining his face was reassured that it was an honest to god compliment. Better yet was the shy smile she tried to hide afterwards.

“Love is in the air, Lisbon.” –Yes it is Jane.

“Rigsby, you’re with me.” –Take charge Cho is hot Cho.

“Where did this inebriated smooth take place?” This was such a Jane thing to say.

“You knock her up too?” Cho, to Rigsby when he mentions considering marrying Grace.

“It would be like killing a lama. Why would you?” Bride’s father, explaining how no one could have had a motive to kill the victim to Jane.

“They spit.” Jane, in response to the above.

“I’d like the putty to spackle those emotional wounds that’s why I’m calling you.” Jane, to Grace on fixing the ruined wedding.

“I swear, I can marry you off in a minute.” (Ron passes by) “Don’t tempt me.” Jane, to Lisbon, on how he is legally ordained. Hilarious. For the record, Lisbon can do a lot worse than hot CBI Ron. Unless, of course, he turns out to be RJ.

“Whoa, that sounds messy. And beautiful.” Jane, in response to the  “And the twain shall become one flesh,” verse.

“By the power vested in me by a mail order ministry.” Jane, marrying the happy couple.

“I’d love to Charlie, but without wings…” Jane, to perp Charlie , when he demands he climb on top of the roof.

“Did you not see me on the roof?” Jane, to Lisbon’s statement that he missed the action.

Icings on the Cake

I remember a time when Jane would barely graze Lisbon’s back when he sees her out of a room. Now he not only helps her in her jack, but fluffs her hair out of it too? I went through the of the previous reviews several times but I couldn’t find a great point someone made on the intimacy hair touching represents or I would have quoted it here 😦 Whoever it was, please repost the comment in this review.

Honorable Mentions

All the regulars were off the charts amazing but this one was Righetti and Yeoman’s show with special performances by Kang, Tunney and Baker.

Writer, Daniel Cerone. Director Randall Zisk, Composer Blake Neely.

Pet Peeve

Lisbon’s dialogue concerning McAllister got a bit repetitive.

Conclusion

No best scenes here since I loved the entire episode. But I have to say the ending was absolutely beautiful. Wayne and Grace’s wedding was so sudden and unexpected. But also in character and I loved that. We’ve seen how quickly Rigsby proposed out of obligation to Sarah, so it makes perfect sense to me that he’d propose to Grace out of love which never for in six years.  Like Grace said, it’s been a long time coming.

Then, there was the fact that Jane was nowhere to be found, only to see him peaking through the door where the ceremony took place. It was like the pure happiness on the couple’s faces was more than what he can handle seeing directly. It was such a great bittersweet decision on the part of the writer. As was this line:

“Love freely given has no beginning nor no end. You rings represent the love you have for each other.”

Jane’s ring is a huge part of his character. I wonder if he’ll always wear it, even after avenging his wife’s, death, because it represents her love for him.

Then there was Cho, telling Grace and Van Pelt that their ride to the hotel is ready. As they left the building, a group of soldiers fired blanks completing the celebration as Wayne and Grace were driven off in a horse drawn carriage.

At first, I thought that the gesture would surely have been Jane’s doing. But then I remembered that Cho was the one who had questioned the civil war re-enactment buff with Rigsby. Jane didn’t know about him and so probably didn’t organize the event. And just to assure me further, was the smile on Cho’s face as he escorted Grace into the carriage, and saw her and Rigsby ride off.

Cho’s been hearing Wayne whine about Grace for six years. We’ve seen him plenty of times be annoyed with the affair. But seeing how happy he is here shows that, through it all, Cho always cared about the couple and is glad they finally got their act together. Seriously, he looked like a proud happy bridesmaid/best man at the end. I think I actually saw a tear in his eye. Or maybe those were just mine….

Image by Chizuruchibi. Copyright Reviewbrain, October 2013. Not to be used without permission.

Image by Chizuruchibi. Copyright Reviewbrain, October 2013. Not to be used without permission.

Of course, all this sweetness can’t last. There has to be a reason for this decision on Heller’s part to have the couple married now. Dare I hope for a happily ever after? Or is it just the calm before the storm?

*All material posted in this blog is the intellectual property of reviewbrain (unless otherwise stated). Readers are free to make use of the information provided they cite the source (this blog) either by name (reviewbrain’s blog) or by linking to it. Please extend the same courtesy to the authors of the comments as well (by mentioning their names) to ensure that credit is given where credit is due.

*Users, please allow at least 24 hours for your comments to appear. Spammers have been running amok on the blog and due to different time zones and life in general it sometimes takes a while to find real comments that sometimes inadvertently end up in the spam inbox. xoxo

Advertisements

About reviewbrain

Screenwriter, independent producer, compulsive critic, editor, artist, language lover, student of life, pacifist, parent. View all posts by reviewbrain

80 responses to “Mentalist Wedding in Red Review

  • Ifrah

    Another wonderful review to a splendid episode. Although there isn’t much to note for our suspect list, the ‘Pigeon Theory’ has caused quite a stir. Americ (from Youtube’s channel, Happy Cool) mentioned in this video, that RJ may have one of the following phobias: Atychiphobia, Philophobia, Autophobia or Acrophobia -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCVrJnKytk8&list=TLVGyEBfxqAl-ireeQBj9joGthwUkVw8QV
    As for Rigspelt, although I was never a shipper, I was satisfied with the wedding, although all good does come to an end. Cho has always been a reliable friend to Rigsby, and was of course, the best man. Lisbon played her part in the wedding, and her expressions during the proposal were spectacular (thanks to Robin’s impeccable talent.) What took me by surprise was Jane, silently behind the door, as if he were excluded from the wedding. (I’m not sure if I missed something, but I felt that Jane had every right to be there, in the room, beside Lisbon and Cho.)
    You mentioned that Lisbon is like an older sister to Rigsby, which is interesting, although I have always thought of the CBI as a family in a sense that; Lisbon and Jane as the [old] married couple, Rigsby as their son, VanPelt as the daughter-in-law, and Cho as the younger son.
    The scene in which Jane fluffs Lisbon’s hair and puts on her coat is adorable, and certainly not the last of the Jisbon moments of the episode. If Jane were to marry (not marry off) Lisbon in a minute, then that would be a delight to us shippers, but it does seem as if they have been married for the past 10 years (and since the first episode, quite frankly.)
    That is all, as I feel that the tables may very well turn this Sunday, with the return of Hightower.

  • Carla Oliveira

    Ok, RB. I’m going to read this now. I’m curious about what you think about this episode. I didn’t like it less than the previous.

  • Auli

    Lovely to hear your thoughts and the picture is just gorgeous, Chizuruchibi!

    I wasn’t such a fan of this episode because I don’t like weddings, at all. I am not particularly a romantic person so I find typical romantic grand gestures, such as weddings, wows, dresses and other stuff quite cheesy and just plain awkward. So the wedding part and the proposal was not my favourite. However, I liked bits and pieces in this episode.

    You know these people that has said that Lisbon and Jane have sibling like relationship. Well, this episode showed how a truly sibling like relationship is with Rigsby and Lisbon. I just laughed when he shuddered while thinking about dating Lisbon; I would have similar reaction thinking about dating my brothers, eewww… I liked also how big-sis Lisbon saved Rigsby from the crazy dancer girl in the wedding, smoothly played!

    I liked Van Pelt pouring her heart out to the bride-to-be; it gave such a wonderful description about her naivete but also showed her growth and character development, I just love thee so much!

    So, to the big thing, which is RJ. It was a pleasure to watch Jane and McAllister sparring with each other and the roof scene was well done. It was at the same time funny, scary and humiliating to watch how Jane pretty much crawled from the roof to safety while RJ suspect walked so filled with confidence behind him. I think that we have been given a lot of red herrings; the whistling, the birds, the phobia and so on. I think that RJ might have something to do them but I assume that they are not that relevant clues. I still have my money on Haffner for being RJ so yeah, I just think that McAllister is connected to some weird cop-conspiracy with Bertram and co. but he has nothing to do with RJ.

    Small things:
    – Rigsby’s kid was so cute and looked like Harry Potter!
    – Jane and Lisbon, you are such a couple.
    – Cho is awesome and HE SMILED! I repeat, Cho actually SMILED.
    – I just love when they work as a team.

  • Auli

    Oh crap, forgot to mention few things.

    First of all, my pet peeve:
    Didn’t Van pelt said that they got the letter about the new policy month ago (or last month) that CBI agents are allowed to date? If I understand the timeline correctly from season finale to this episode, only few days have past so why have they been so secretive about their relationship if they got the memo of it earlier? I also though that the memo was a bit too convenient and would have been happy if they have had addressed to it bit earlier.

    Another thing, Lisbon seems to be able to putting a front in front of McAllister because she didn’t seem to be that awkward around him. So she has only problems with people that she works closely or know them personally.

    Final point, I think it’s quite fascinating that from all the RJ suspects that we have seen so far, Jane hasn’t met Haffner still face to face. I can’t way to see that!

  • Auli

    @reviewbrain. Ok, I think I should write my points down from now on because I forgot to answer your final point, which is why Van Pelt and Rigsby got married now. I think this is indeed the calm moment before s*** hits the fan and I just hope that Heller wouldn’t kill some of them off. I like the whole team and I don’t want any of them getting killed. I predict that if death is not in question either Rigsby or Van Pelt get seriously hurt because the show has been pretty much all the time like no happiness before RJ’s end.

  • KM

    Thank you for the review.

    It was a nice ceremony. A little odd that she wore the dress she purchased to marry Craig. But, perhaps Craig never saw it, and she was able to disassociate it from him?

    I did like VanPelt’s confession to the bride-to-be. It was nicely done. Just as well as the scene in the church when Lisbon asks McAlister to get the hammer down and Rigsby thwarts it by mistake.

    If I am honest, then I’ll admit that I felt that the wedding of Grace and Wayne felt forced upon me. I’m glad for the characters and for the fans that wanted to see them together.

    Lastly, I know that California law allows only two witnesses, but I think Jane’s peeking in through the door is about his ability to share the joy of others. He chose to watch through the open door for the same reason he walked away after seeing the texted pictures of newborn Ben. Those moments are too bittersweet.

  • III Frogs

    Nice review, Reviewbran, thanks.

    I agree with KM about the forced nature of the wedding and also with Auli about the contrivance of the change in policy about relationships between agents.

    I thought it was too much screen time for us to hear every word of their vows. A 21-gun salute right next to a team of horses for an easy carriage ride? Who thought that one up, I wonder, because those horses would have taken off in fright like a freight train, being carriage ride horses, not war horses. It felt really disconnected to me. And the Just Married carriage ride was pure corn.

    I’m glad they’re married. The dress was just creepy, sorry. Recycling the dress you planned to marry a guy who betrayed from the start and tried to kill you, your boss, and all present and probably children? That’s got to be all kinds of bad juju, and speaks to Grace’s generally poor judgement as much as anything I can think of.

    I’m happy for the Rigspelt shippers, if there are any left, I never hear from them anymore. I think I’m just mostly glad to get them married off. I am not interested in their connubial blisses or woes and hope very much I won’t be subjected to them. I just want them to quit bothering me. We’ve got more important fish to fry here. Sorry to be so sour.

    Oh. And I’ll add that it has actually been four episodes in a row that pigeons have played a part. In Red John’s Rules 5×22, remember Lisbon telling her happy memory of her mother feeding pigeons whenever she hears MacArthur Park.

    Thanks again for your great review and for getting it to us on a Thursday! Yay!

  • III Frogs

    Didn’t want to get away without talking about my favorite scene, cinematically. McAllister standing on the roofline looming over Jane about to lose his grip and fall off. The night sky full of stars that filled the frame behind McAllister was overpowering. What a great shot! It was Hitchcockian.

    Plus it had the delicious twist that now McAllister was walking the heights easily while Jane was scrambling in front of him on all fours hurrying to get to the portico. My favorite Jane, running to protect himself from physical harm. Well, crawling in this case. The look of fear and vulnerability, even the little squeak he gave in deciding he had no choice but to put himself into the man’s power, grab his offered arm in order to be saved from a fall off the roof. What a masterfully done scene, all around!

  • C Hill

    III Frogs, you must be a good, honest person, because you are a terrible liar! 🙂

    “Plus it had the delicious twist that now McAllister was walking the heights easily while Jane was scrambling in front of him on all fours hurrying to get to the portico. My favorite Jane, running to protect himself from physical harm. Well, crawling in this case. The look of fear and vulnerability, even the little squeak he gave in deciding he had no choice but to put himself into the man’s power, grab his offered arm in order to be saved from a fall off the roof. What a masterfully done scene, all around!”

    There’s one reason you liked that scene far more than all of those you mentioned!!

    I didn’t mind the Rigspelt stuff that much. It was a nice little pause in the action of this season. And it’s like the appetizer you finish to whet your appetite for the main course.

    Love that “knock her up, too” line that Cho got on Rigsby. I agree, RB, about the oregano comment, too.

    Pigeons. Indeed the mystery of S6.

    Thanks so much, RB, for getting this up as soon as you did!

  • phoenixx

    Agree with Auli, wasn’t a big fan of this Episode either, I feel like we didn’t learn anything new on the RJ front.

    Jane and Lisbon tried to proof almost the whole Episode that the Sheriff has a fear of heights though Jane at one point even says it’s unlikey RJ told Sophie the truth here. So what was the point and the pigeon thing at the end just seemed like a huge red herring to me. If RJ were afraid of birds there’s no way he would have set a foot in the house he attacked Lisbon in.

    Also how convient was the whole policy change? I had to laugh ot loud when it was mentioned, they probably didn’t plan this wedding last year so that’s why they didn’t mention the change then but this just seemed so forced it was ridiculous.
    And since I never was a fan of VP anyway I found her talk with the bride so la la. Saying she couldn’t be with Rigsby because it would’ve destroyed her career? How? She just would’ve had to leave the Team for another (I doubt they would have been the first couple in the whole CBI to do that).

    And yeah the wedding dress…well…really just so they could put her in a real dress they came up with the reasoning VP kept it so she wouldn’t forget what hope feels like!? She was so dissapointed and angry after what happened back then the dress surely would’ve been the first thing to be destroyed.
    I really hope this whole rushing the wedding has another reason in later episodes.

    The good thing about this ep was the chemsitry between Baker and Berkley. Obviously the rooftop scene was funny especially because while thinking the Sheriff had a fear of heights during the whole Episode it turned out Jane was the one who’s scared. Hilarious Scene when Jane all but crawled back while the Sheriff calmly walked behind him. LOL

    @reviewbrain: “Jane responds that he sometimes gives off mixed signals.”
    Actually it hought this was interesting because right when he says that Lisbon shows up. Now maybe that’s just the shipper in me but I thought it was an interesting timing.

    Also someone on another Forum mentioned something I found very interesting in regards of “foreshadowing”, when Grace talks to the bride she mentiones “that with every year you close another door and at one point you’d wonder if anyone ever can open a door again and walk through to you” or something like this, can’t remember the exact line.
    Now at the end of the Episode when Jane watches them (is looking at love) trough the door and he walks away he tries to close the door but the door opens back up again, the camera catches this even.
    So could this be foreshadowing for Jane that after RJ he’ll be able to “move on”.

  • bloomingviolet2013

    What a lovely and awesome review, Reviewbrain! I *love* it! 😀

    About the wedding ceremony at the very end, I really liked that Cho was Wayne’s witness and especially that Lisbon was Grace’s. The two women have gone a long way since the very beginning of the show (Lisbon telling Grace that she doesn’t do personal) to Jane convincing Grace to chose her s a bridesmaid (that “Van Pelt must die” in the pink bridesmaid dress still makes me chuckle). That makes me think you were right that the younger agent must have visited her in the hospital in the previous episode: she choose her as her witness, it means Lisbon is an important person for her, she cares about her (she could have chosen Jane after all).
    Also, I may be over reading into it, but the fact that Jane left open the door he was hiding behind after the wedding connected for me to what Grace said to the bride: “It ended badly so I shut down inside. Closed doors to feel safer. Problem is, with every passing year you close more doors until eventually you wonder if anyone will get through”… Truth be told, Jane has been doing as much for the past decade; the fact that he was moved to tears and left that door open is pretty telling imho… 🙂

    Now, about the recycled wedding dress: I just though it was a plot device to explain how quickly they could get married. Plus, I don’t think it symbolised that much her failed relationship with O’Laughlin; given her words to the bride, I’d rather think that dress symbolised indeed her hope for happiness, a dream she caressed while she was with Rigsby and when she thought she was getting married to her perfect fiancé. The dress is more about her and her state of mind than about the relationship it happened to be associated with.

    Also, I wonder if that disturbing “anything with a face” from McAllister was meant to implicitly refer to human victims, to the smiley or to Lisbon’s blood-painted face in the premiere. Either way, ewww… Really clever detail also in making Jane pause before grabbing his hand on the rooftop: subtle reference to the handshake and Jane touching the hand of the serial killer.

    Plenty of religious references too along with the birds (ducks and pigeons, again potential preys for hunters and for more agressive birds)… I wonder if Jane telling that he has no wings (and the two angels, in front of the church and inside of it) weren’t also a nod to the theme…

    Last remark: I agree with III Frogs about the Hitchcockian atmosphere: the killer made Jane climb to the top of the church tower before falling to his death. It oddly reminds of Vertigo, in a way, even more since the film deals with fear of heights, obviously… 😉

    Thank you again for your awesome work! 🙂

  • bloomingviolet2013

    @ Phoenixx: just said basically the same thing about Jane and the door in my missing comment… LOL XD

  • Rose UK

    Like Auli, I can’t bear overt lovey-dovey stuff… Buuuuut…. although I was cringing in some scenes, I also realised that I was grinning like a loon. Because ultimately I’m glad that VP and Rigsby had their moment in the sun – they’ve been there, as part of Jane’s story, from the beginning and I think they deserved it. 🙂

    And Jane, Lisbon & Cho: three emotionally-repressed old softies, eh!? I did think that Jane should have been in the room with Cho and Lisbon – he was conspicuous by his absence. I understood the door metaphor (especially on the back of Grace’s comment), but he *is* family and it would have been nice for them to have all been together. In my opinion!

    Did anyone notice the “Seven Graces” thing at the back of the bar? I thought it was a nice reference to Grace in this episode, and possibly also to Violet’s Seven Sins/Virtues idea (the seven graces are apparently the seven gifts of the holy spirit). Wiki says the following:

    The gift of *wisdom* corresponds to the virtue of charity.
    The gifts of *understanding and knowledge* correspond to the virtue of faith.
    The gift of *counsel (right judgment)* corresponds to the virtue of prudence.
    The gift of *fortitude* corresponds to the virtue of courage.
    The gift of *fear of the Lord* corresponds to the virtue of hope.
    The gift of *Reverence* corresponds to the virtue of justice.

    As regards the hair fluff: oh so sweet! I viewed it as a gesture of possession (in a positive sense), possibly in unconscious response to the very negative and creepy possessive gesture of RJ painting Lisbon’s face. Also, I’ve noticed that all physical overtures have come from Jane so far. All the hugs, the hand-hold, hair stroking, coat-helping, etc… I can think of only one example when Lisbon initiates a physical gesture, and that was way back in season 1 when she gently places two fingers on his arm after Renfrew is found murdered in the bath.

    And finally, unrelated to this episode: with season 5 re-airing here at the moment, I noticed that Rigsby’s door number is “7” and that eagles are mentioned in Devil’s Cherry – in the sense of an “eage-eye view”, which helps Jane solve the case at hand, and also reminded me of posters’ comments about camera angles denoting surveillance!

    Thanks ever so much for the review, RB!!

  • Rose UK

    Sorry, regarding previous post: I meant physical gestures of affection from Lisbon; we know she’s not averse to punching him (or was, at least). 😉

  • Rose UK

    Oh, re: Grace’s wedding dress decision… To me it was primarily a convenient plot point, but otherwise I thought that her choice could actually be viewed as quite healthy. (Don’t haul me off to the loony bin!) In the episode, she explains her reasons for keeping it – and these ultimately have nothing to do with O’Loughlin. But even if they had, by wearing that particular dress she is deciding to replace a bad association with a good one. She doesn’t let it rule or dictate her actions. So that dress – and all it represented – has no power over her. She makes of it what she wants to make of it – something good. It’s a beautiful dress and she manages to retain its purity by associating it with a beautiful event. I think there’s strength in that. We also saw something similar when she decides to keep O’Loughlin’s necklace. Discarding it means that, somehow, it’s got the best of her. It is a reminder of a horrible event, but she can deal with its presence and therefore with the trauma. It shows that she has come to terms with the past and is not afraid of the feelings it evokes in her. That’s just my take! I’m afraid I’m not explaining it very well, though…

  • mosquitoinuk

    wohoo! I was waiting for this review.

    Just one comment, then I’ll try to comment further: we lie best when we do not steer too far away from the truth. Red John went to see Sophie Miller, who, as a trained psychiatrist could tell whether or not he was lying. A good liar he might be, but she had lots of experience. His choice of phobia was ‘acrophobia’, which as we know, is fear of heights. It wouldn’t surprise me at all that actually his real phobia is ‘close’ or ‘related to’ that. He couldn’t possibly tell the truth to Sohie Miller because that could potentially identify him, but, in order to lie convincingly *to her* he needed to stay ‘close enough’.

    In fact, she could tell that there were quite a few things ‘off’ with hhim, but she definitely thought that he had ‘a phobia’ (whether it is fear of heights or no, remains to be seen’.

    So…perhaps he’s afraid of birds, not heights and that’s my take on the appearance of those birds! I think the clue is definitely there.

    Incidentally, I think he did not finish Lisbon off when he got her *because* of the pigeons in the room. He’s afraid of birds. That’s my theory at least.

  • rita

    thank you for the reviewbrain and the lovely art work Chibi, you captured the happy couple really well.

    I have to say that whilst I agree with what you wrote, it wasn’t one of my favouite episodes, mainly as I sometimes find the Rigsby/Van Pelt stuff a bit tedious.

    The change in rules WAS a bit sudden, at the time I wondered if it was for Jane and Lisbon’s benefit in the future…I know that you said that Lisbon is Jane’s boss, but HE certainly doesn’t see her like that…he feels he is ‘Her equal…to the side’…..and of course he is ‘only’ a consultant…..I swear I actually squealled at the hair fluffing scene!

    It was sad to see Jane outside the door at the wedding, but it must have been an emotionally charged scene for him and I guess would bring back too many happy memories for him to cope with in front of other people.

    I have never seriously had the Sheriff down for RJ, but I guess time and the good Mr. Heller will show if I am right

    Sorry for any typos I have typed this with one hand following a shoulder op yesterday, this was a lovely surprise in my in box, and I didn’t want to miss any one’s replys, as they add enormously to my enjoyment of each episode.

    Thanks again for the first rate review

  • rita

    Oh and I forgot to say ~(that is if my comment ever arrives)…..was that ring that Rigsby gives Van Pelt the same one he tried to give Sarah????….sort of a second hand wedding if it was what with the dress!

  • Auli

    @mosquitoinuk
    The phobia about birds doesn´t make sense to me in the speculation of why he didn´t kill Lisbon because RJ was still able to kill Partridge in a house full of birds, ambush Lisbon and paint her face. Why suddenly was he spooked by birds and lost the ways to control his fear?

  • windsparrow

    One shippy thing: I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: When does a man help a woman get dressed again? Generally speaking, some time after he has helped her get undressed.

    @KM “Lastly, I know that California law allows only two witnesses, but I think Jane’s peeking in through the door is about his ability to share the joy of others. He chose to watch through the open door for the same reason he walked away after seeing the texted pictures of newborn Ben. Those moments are too bittersweet.”

    I keep seeing people mention that in California only two witnesses are permitted to be present in a wedding in a judge’s chambers as Jane’s excuse for not being in the room. That does not sound quite right to me. The cursory search of California law on weddings that I have done to verify this one way or another has lead me to find that only two witnesses are permitted to sign the marriage license. There is one place I find that it almost sounds like only two witnesses are permitted, period. So I think that may be where the idea came from. But it was clear to me when I read it that the context was specifically about signing the document, and did not mean there was a limit on how many people could be in the room. However, even if there were some law about not having more than five people in the judge’s chambers because that is all that can fit, or something like that – a judge’s chambers is hardly the only room in a courthouse. And it certainly is not the largest room in a courthouse. Now, my experience was all in Arizona – but when I worked as a court clerk, the judge never married anyone in her chambers. She always married them in the courtroom – whether they had brought family and friends with them or not. All that blather notwithstanding, I wholeheartedly concur with you about Jane’s need to have a little distance so he could have a little privacy in his own grief.

    @III frogs, “A 21-gun salute right next to a team of horses for an easy carriage ride? Who thought that one up, I wonder, because those horses would have taken off in fright like a freight train, being carriage ride horses, not war horses. It felt really disconnected to me.”

    Actually, that carriage was in the barn where the Civil War reenactor had his “private arsenal”. The implication is that he also keeps horses that he uses as part of the reenactment. Horses don’t know it’s fake – they can and do get as accustomed to hearing blanks get shot as they used to get accustomed to hearing the real ones in the cavalry.

  • mosquitoinuk

    @Auli: it could be that the pigeons got there afterwards. Or, as with many things on the Mentalist, this is just a red herring! LOL

    Now that you mention it, I was puzzled as to why, when RJ killed BP, there was no ‘crying smiley’. Agreed, This would have tipped off Lisbon no end, but, but, but, the truth is that we don’t see it anywhere and this RJ’s MO. Could it be that BP was killed in somewhere else? there is no sign of blood anywhere in that house (as far as I remember)

  • mosquitoinuk

    @Auli: Now, the other possibility here is that the one who killed BP and got Lisbon *is not* the real RJ!

  • Auli

    @mosquitoinuk. That crossed my mind too but then, there was this phone call to Jane. So basically, we have some options here:
    1. The bird phobia is a red herring
    2. The bird phobia is too and RJ some how managed to control his fear until he had to kill Lisbon
    3. Phobia true but RJ beat up Partirdge somewhere, locked himself to a toilet where there were no birds to wait Lisbon, tried to kill her but got spooked (the face pinat then doesn´t make sense)
    4. There are two RJ’s where the other one is affraid of birds and they might have different MO´s hence the different style of face painting
    5. RJ didn´t do it

  • mosquitoinuk

    I’m on a roll here, sorry, too many thoughts at once: Actually, it is an intriguing thought that BP might not have been killed by RJ. First of all, the crying smiley (missing). Second: when Lisbon asked Jane that BP had said ‘tyger, tyger’ Jane said: ‘that’s interesting’. Why would that be? because he thought already that BP was an unlikely suspect as RJ? because he knew that he couldn’t be?

    I have always maintained that I think Jane’s list has more suspects that the ones he truly believe are RJ. I’ve mentioned it before in this blog. Could this be it?

    When Kirkland went into Jane’s attic, Jane *knew* there had been a break in. He didn’t know who but he knew it had happened.This story plot ended there as far as I remember. We spent episode after episode watching Jane building that freaking whiteboard and then it just stopped after the break in. Who were the suspects that were identified in that break in? I always thought that Jane half-fabricated the RJ’s suspects list, but BH has said the list is real. Something to ponder.

  • mosquitoinuk

    @Auli: totally agree. We have far too many options and I think the truth is a combination of them. The crying smiley missing I think is a big give-away. And we have those birds…

  • reviewbrain

    Awesome theory. Fits with Jane saying “something spooked him”. And with the birds symbolizing something pure…

  • reviewbrain

    You explained this beautifully Rose and I’m inclined to agree.

  • bloomingviolet2013

    Actually, there was a « crying smiley » for Partridge: the one painted on Lisbon’s face. The only real difference in drawing with the usual ones was that it has vertical slots for the eyes instead of the horizontal ones that mean it’s closing its eyes while smiling. The horizontal lines also allows the blood to drip on the wall, making it appear as if it was crying: same with Lisbon’s, since the bloody vertical lines make it to her cheekbones making it look like tears (she was lying down, the blood wouldn’t have been dripping like on a wall). So, basically, there’s not much difference between this smiley and normal ones: we have one signature drawing for a dead person. The fact that is was painted on Lisbon’s face was a wink, a bit like the bloodied toenails were an added artistic macabre touch in Angela’s murder… even the detail that is was not the first thing Jane would see while entering the room was played with, since Lisbon was the first thing he would be looking for and seeing her bloodied face would be much more of a shock for him: he would see the smiley before realising that she was still alive if he was the first to enter the house.

  • KM

    @Windsparrow,
    I was referring to actual number of witnesses, not permitted number of guests in attendance. I hoped that I made it clear that I saw Jane being outside as his own personal choice and not because of some rule or because he was not welcome. Poor writing on my part. Sorry.

  • windsparrow

    @rita, I hope your shoulder heals quickly!

  • III Frogs

    All right, @C Hill, I was trying to be nice about it but just when I think I’m out, you drag me back in!!! 😀 Yes. The view was beautiful. Brought a tear to me ee. 🙂 Very moving, generally. Okay, I confessed. Happy, now? 🙂

  • Carla Oliveira

    Hahaha! You guys are great!

  • III Frogs

    @phoenixx and @violet Great catch on the door opening when Jane tried to shut if after peering in at the wedding. I love thinking about that!

    I don’t buy the sentimentality of the wedding dress and hope, never, with it’s history. And the idea that she had to have something to marry in? People get married in all kinds of clothing. The dress, although stunningly beautiful, was totally unnecessary, in my opinion. After all, Rigsby did fine without a tux, which you would expect when the bride is in a formal dress like that. Macabre, by any standards, in my book. I’m sure it was so Rigspelt shippers could see her married in it. But whatever. It’s over. And omg @rita, if Rigsby marries her with Sarah’s ring, this couple is jinxed for all time, hahahaha!

    @Rose UK Wow Grace as the seven graces. Almost makes her Saint Grace, doesn’t it? Great catch!

  • zee

    Count me in, RoseUK, as one of those grinning loons. It really surprised me! This is truly the shining moment for Yeoman and Righetti.

    Im getting the impression the writers are inspired by Hitchcock’s film ‘The Birds’ as well… and all these talk of doors, flocks and locks (hair too!) just adds to the crescendo of exciting mystery…

    Thank You, Reviewbrain!

  • Rose UK

    @ Frogs: “Almost makes her Saint Grace, doesn’t it?” ~ Heh. Even *I’m* not sure I’d go so far as to say that. 😉 But I do agree with you on “the view”. 🙂

    @ Zee & Frogs: You’re right, these writers seem to love Hitchcock! And yeah, Zee, I’m glad OY and AR got the chance to do a bit more this week (and TK by extension).

    @ Auli: “Jane and Lisbon, you are such a couple; Cho is awesome and HE SMILED!; I just love when they work as a team.” ~ Yes, yes, and yes!!

    @ Rita: Hope your shoulder is healing nicely!

    @ Mosquito: Hm. The List. I’d like the writers to pick that thread up again too. I find it odd, the fact that Jane seemed pleased at the break-in. If the Seven Suspects are NOT the real list, then why does Jane bother investigating them – apparently genuinely so? To keep up the pretense to RJ? And if it IS the real list, why the smile?

  • III Frogs

    @mosquito and @Rose UK I believe there are actually two lists. The fake one that Jane set up for whoever was spying on him (Kirkland) to steal and mislead. And then his own, real, list which is also the one Red John had Lorelei read on the DVD. The big question for me is, how did RJ figure out the real list? He obviously is not in cahoots with Kirkland or he’d give the false list of names on the DVD instead of the true list.

    Mysteriouser and mysteriouser.

  • Rose UK

    @ Frogs: Ah, good idea. That makes sense given Jane’s very serious and downbeat reaction to Lorelei’s list. If RJ had read out the fake names, he would’ve been hopping around in glee, I’m sure! I don’t necessarily think that Kirkland is in on it, but maybe RJ got the copy of the entire board from him and made the correct deductions, while Kirkland potentially makes the wrong ones (assuming he’s not RJ).

  • rita

    Thank you for your kind thought, I am spending my time wisely (?) trying to second guess the writers as to who RJ is, if I have any sudden revelations…I will share….but don’t hold your breath!!

  • III Frogs

    Hmmm. I actually do believe he was outside the room because of a rule about who could be in attendance. Sounds like a great question for the writers!

  • windsparrow

    @KM, yeah, I must have misunderstood what you meant. Sorry about that. We do certainly agree that Jane could have been fully in the room if he had wanted to. I have this image in my head of him volunteering to “coordinate” the carriage and reenactors for the 21-gun salute (and helping Cho persuade the guy to do it… maybe helping to pay or something) so that he would have some good excuse to not be in there.

    Poor Jane.

    (Poor LIsbon, too. Heaven only knows when or if that ridiculous man will get his act together.)

  • C Hill

    it seems we are getting a hair spoilery, but i go back to the “break in” episode. it looked to me that Jane changed something on the board before he left — i wonder if that was the list of names at that time. if so, it likely contained the “true” 7 plus others.

    sorry to call you out, III Frogs. 🙂 doesn’t it feel better to let it all out? cleansing of the soul and all that…

  • Lou Ann

    RB: I had made the following comment about Jane’s stroking Lisbon’s hair. Is this the post you referenced?

    “But Jane’s stroking of her hair as she awoke in hospital gave me a jolt. There is something just so intimate and sensual about a man touching a woman’s hair. Think of the many cultures in which a woman’s hair is covered or hidden, kept even from view of men, reserved only for the woman’s husband. A woman’s showing her hair isn’t so taboo in western culture, but even a few years ago, nuns gave up their hair upon taking vows. All women were expected to cover our hair in church for modesty. It was obviously a scripted piece of stage business, foreshadowing the direction their relationship is going.”

    Having had such a strong reaction to his gentle caress in the previous episode, seeing him again touch her hair in Wedding in Red just confirmed how comfortable Jane is with the familiar touch. And then he grabs her hand bag as they leave the office. That, too, seemed so significant to me. Do you think we’ll ever see Lisbon touch his hair?

  • mosquitoinuk

    @violet: you gave me something to think about but I disagree that RJ’s MO is the same and the signature is the same by painting the ‘crying smiley’ over Lisbon. Jane always explained ‘the first thing that anyone sees is the face on the wall. You see the face first and you know […]. Then and only then, you see the body of the victim’. It is always the same, very staged, almost theatrical…I don’t recall any other opportunity in which RJ did not do as he always does but I might be mistaken. I don’t think RJ stopped, he had to stop for some reason (in my view) or it wasn’t really RJ to start with. There is something off in that scene that I can’t really explain.

    There is the phone call though, that voice…but that voice is definitely not a natural voice, is a fake, otherwise Jane would have recognised it a long time ago. The police, FBI, Visualise and Homeland Security are all in too deep in this, we know. It could have been a ‘faked’ phone call.

    Anyway, we’ll find out soon enough but it is great fun to speculate!

  • Rose UK

    Well, being a symbolism nut, I’ve been thinking hard about the pigeon/bird stuff… I decided to cross reference this with William Blake, and several interesting tit-bits have emerged. It’s entirely possible that I’m making too much of it all, but it’s still fun to put my rusty research brain to work. 😉 (Sorry if I’m boring people, and wittering on.)

    There is a poem entitled Auguries of Innocence (not from the Tyger/Lamb collection), which contains the line:

    “A dove-house fill’d with doves and pigeons
    Shudders hell thro’ all its regions.”

    Make of that what you will! There are also references to various other motifs we’ve seen in TM (obviously could be a total coincidence) such as butterfly, lamb, flower, etc. As poetry is not my strong suit, various sites have helpfully explained to me that it’s all to do with the juxtaposition of innocence and evil, cruelty towards innocents and the disastrous repercussions. I guess that this would tie in nicely with Blake’s themes of duality in The Tyger and The Lamb (which I think have been discussed previously) and therefore to the ideas of duality, balance and coexistence (i.e. the you-can’t-have-one-thing-without-the-other thing) within TM.

    There are several other stanzas that I think apply nicely to Jane’s situation:

    “It is right it should be so;
    Man was made for joy and woe;
    And when this we rightly know,
    Thro’ the world we safely go.

    Joy and woe are woven fine,
    A clothing for the soul divine.
    Under every grief and pine
    Runs a joy with silken twine.”

    And:

    “Some are born to sweet delight,
    Some are born to endless night.”

    (Having copied that over, I have the strongest feeling that someone might have posted the ‘silken twine’ line somewhere before??? If so, apologies if I’ve stepped on your toes! I’ve genuinely just rediscovered the idea…)

    Incidentally, Blake also has a less famous poem called The Birds (separate from Songs of Innocence & Experience), which is quite sweet and about love. I think. 🙂

    And finally… aside from all of the above, I also associate pigeons & ducks with feeding – something often to do with children and a kind of innocent interaction with nature. The feeling became a little clearer with Jane actively feeding the ducks in this ep, but I don’t really know where I’m going with the idea!!!

    That’s all. 😉

  • Rose UK

    Hi all, quick question: when your comments are in moderation, are you getting the little notification on the page again? I had one earlier (reassuring), but this time there was nothing. Ruh-roh! It was a bit of a research-heavy post that I didn’t save (double ruh-roh) and I’m a bit concerned it’s gone for good. 😉 Don’t mind it being stuck in moderation; it’s just the reappearing/disappearing notification thing confuddling me… Ta!

  • North Coast

    Auli wrote “The phobia about birds doesn´t make sense to me in the speculation of why he didn´t kill Lisbon because RJ was still able to kill Partridge in a house full of birds, ambush Lisbon and paint her face. Why suddenly was he spooked by birds and lost the ways to control his fear?” That is a good point, but I had a thought. Lisbon opened a door and pigeons flew out and startled her. What if they could only get into that one room, until Lisbon opened the door? So the pigeons didn’t bother Red John while he was killing Partridge and setting the trap for Lisbon, but perhaps they flew by him while he was painting her face. Having said that, I still think RJ never intended to hurt Lisbon, and did exactly what he intended, to spook Jane and maybe warn Lisbon off from interfering with the ‘game’. The pigeon thing is becoming over the top, and may be a red herring. We’ll see soon!

  • windsparrow

    Rose the post I had in moderation from the review of “The Desert Rose” did not give me a notification.

  • reviewbrain

    One possible reason I keep forgetting to bring up i.e. RJ painting Lisbon’s face: unlike having his signature on the wall this smiley can be washed off very quickly clandestinely since Lisbon was hauled off to the ambulance before the CSI’s arrived. Could it be RJ did this on purpose to see if Jane would let out to public that Lisbon is now targeted? And could *that* be the reason Jane washed it off, along with how obviously disturbing the sight of it was? It’s like with Panzer, Jane kept insisting a copycat did it not RJ. But unlike with Panzer, at the time people thought RJ was dead. Here, they know he’s not. But I still think he’d want the latest spree of killings to be sort of a badly kept secret amongst law enforcers, not public knowledge.

    It’s not just Lisbon. Come to think of it, at Sophie’s crime scene the smiley was tiny, on a note, so unobtrusive I don’t think anyone would have noticed it other than Jane. And even he probably thought Sophie had drawn it herself and wanted to see hat was for dinner before the contents made it clear RJ had done it…

  • reviewbrain

    I think I finally found the method to wordpress’s madness. When you don’t get a notification it might meant that comment went directly to spam inbox; I don’t get an email telling me moderation is awaiting so it might take longer to show up. But I’m still checking all the inboxes regularly so it’ll still show eventually. Let me know if it doesn’t in 24 hours.

    By the way absolutely awesome discussion everyone! I had to get the review out quicker cause I’m traveling at the moment so it was then or never. But I’m so glad I did.

    @C Hill Despite what you say, I loved that Roof scene for all the reasons III Frogs mentions and was so glad for the elaboration since I was in such a hurry I forgot to mention it it 😉

  • windsparrow

    @III Frogs “Hmmm. I actually do believe he was outside the room because of a rule about who could be in attendance. Sounds like a great question for the writers!”

    May I ask where you got the information about that rule? I tried to find it and could not. If there is such a rule, it must be due to the limits of space. Not that I have been in many judges’ chambers, but the one I was in certainly was not as spacious as the one Grace and Wayne were married in. But if there is such a rule and Jane had wanted to be there, they could have used another room for the ceremony.

  • C Hill

    I see you are a good, honest person, too, RB! 🙂

    I appreciate the symbolism and imagery discussions. Also, I agree there was a Hitchcockian feel to the episode — certainly the steeple scene as well as the shots at the Bella Vista.

    And I agree with those that the whole dating rule change wasn’t just put in for RigsPelt — I wouldn’t be surprised if that came back.

  • mosquitoinuk

    @reviewbrain: I also kept thinking about Sophie’s death and the tiny smile on a piece of paper: I think this doesn’t really gel unless we disconnect Sophie’s death from the ‘ritualistic’ aspect of RJ’s killings. Sophie was a means to an end.

    We have been led to believe that RJ is a methodical, consistent and ritualistic killer. The ‘ritual’ aspect of it was present when Lisbon was the canvass to his crying smiley. Now, every time RJ kills as part of the ritual, his signature is there. When he doesn’t, it isn’t (?).

    Something I have never really understood is the evolution of RJ from serial killer to something else. Why would he have a desire to stop? (Around Panzer’s death). Why his targets? (Apart from Jane’s related). Popular culture has taught us that serial killers and predators don’t suddenly feel a need to stop; it is either a slow burn or a frenzy (or a transition between those). I don’t know enough about clinical psychology to conclude anything either but the fact that all these government agencies are involved indicates that perhaps RJ is not what we’ve been led to believe he is.

    Questions, questions!

  • C Hill

    Some serial killers do stop, either permanently or for a time. The most famous recent case of this was the BTK killer, upon whom Panzer was somewhat based, I think. He quit for a long time then the continued interest in the story drew him to websites devoted to finding him and also led to him to begin taunting the police again — leading to his capture.

    There may be some stressor or situation revealed in the show that led to RJ stopping.

    I think the idea that RJ is changing his MO can be traced back to the idea that Jane has the 7 names — the game is up unless everything can be tidied up before Jane and Lisbon catch/kill him. It’s a race against time now.

  • Valentine0214

    @Lou Ann You ask “Do you think we’ll ever see Lisbon touch his hair? To lighten up this very serious discussion, I would like to say running my fingers through Simon Baker’s gorgeous hair is one of my favorite fantasies. How could she NOT do it, if given the opportunity?

  • Rose UK

    @ Mosquito: “Why his targets?” ~That’s something I would have liked to see investigated by the team: looking at some of the past killings or following up old leads to link them to the current suspects. Jane evidently arrived at his list by cross-referencing the logistics of the crimes (or so I gather; please correct me if I’m wrong) rather than using any ‘routine’ methods. A common fan complaint is that he’s essentially ignored all previous evidence, which I understand. I know he’s the Mentalist and all, and he’s eliminating suspects in his usual tricksy manner, but I think it would show signs of character growth if he allowed the team to do their job in helping him i.e. do actual detective stuff as well. A bit of give and take: teaching Lisbon his own skills, but also learning and appreciating hers in return (if he doesn’t already). 😉 But I also realise that this isn’t that kind of crime show. 😉

    @ Valentine: Haha!

  • mosquitoinuk

    @Rose UK: indeed…but it is incredibly frustrating that we have been pretty much in the dark as to what are RJ targets (not related to Jane) or why he does it. A progressive solution would have been much more satisfying in my humble opinion. This aspect is so overlooked that I suspect it’ll take a good ol’ dose of ‘deus ex machina’ to explain 6 years of mystery in just a few episodes.

    However, I’m willing to give BH the benefit of the doubt and perhaps it’ll be awesome! 😉

  • bloomingviolet2013

    @ Mosquitoinuk wrote : « also kept thinking about Sophie’s death and the tiny smile on a piece of paper: I think this doesn’t really gel unless we disconnect Sophie’s death from the ‘ritualistic’ aspect of RJ’s killings. Sophie was a means to an end. We have been led to believe that RJ is a methodical, consistent and ritualistic killer. The ‘ritual’ aspect of it was present when Lisbon was the canvass to his crying smiley. Now, every time RJ kills as part of the ritual, his signature is there. When he doesn’t, it isn’t (?). »

    I don’t know much about clinical psychology either, but I wonder if there are not slightly different types of serial killers -like there are different kinds of people generally speaking. I mean, some are stirred by bloodlust and love of gore (like Partridge), even though their motivation for killing runs deeper, of course; others must be stimulated by their thirst for power. I think RJ would fall under the latter category: just like Jane, he seems to want to prove that he’s smarter and control people’s life (and death). If that’s the case, gore may serve a deeper purpose: RJ would show his domination on others, the ones whose bodies he’s playing with and whom he makes suffer, and the others who find the macabre show he’s left behind him… And it would be credible then that he would stop this little bloody game if he were to find another way to control the people around him: getting his own followers, entirely devoted to him and his word, would achieve to satisfy that thirst.

    In the same way, the ritual aspect may be nuanced a bit: it may not aim to satisfy a need of his to revel in the gore, but to make a greater impact. It’s once again a form of domination, allied to a dramatic sense of showmanship, since the smiley is the first thing to be seen and it aims to inspire terror to the person who enters the room, before the body causes even a greater shock… Therefore, the two last cases belong to the same kind of logic of control: the two atypical smileys are a wink, a mockery directed to Jane. The smiley on Lisbon’s face is a way to mark her and to inspire horror in Jane’s mind; the one on the fridge is a way to play with him and his emotions too, as it reinforces his shock at finding the head. There’s a subtle humor in sending those two smileys one after the other: the first one is pretty horrifying, yet what he did to Lisbon was pretty harmless (she was far more important for Jane than Partridge, obviously); on the contrary, the innocuous smiley on the fridge had a particularly awful conclusion… hence Jane being even more repulsed after first being relieved. Once again, it’s visible that RJ’s true goal is to assert his power over his adversary. Same with the normal smileys too: they are meant as a mockery, as an ironic contrast with the victims. To what extent then is the “ritual” really meaningful? Again, it doesn’t seem to satisfy a psychological need (like it did in ‘Psycho’, for instance, when the killer felt the compelled to stab women who attracted him because of his psychosis), but more to fit a cold calculation. It would be difficult then to assess if one case fit into the ritual criteria, even if the smiley is not involved in the usual manner: for instance, there wasn’t any smiley when Bosco’s team was murdered (by Rebecca), yet that ambiguity had an interesting effect when Jane found Icks’ body under the smiley because he was even more horrified… We can see the same sense of drama in Rosalind’s house: there wasn’t a smiley when they found the corpse stuffed in the closet (to test Jane’s willingness to hide that RJ was alive), yet the horror factor was present for the consultant -the phone call and the woman playing the piano. On the other hand, there was a smiley above her bed in the S1 finale, because he wanted to cause Jane a shock, as he did with the smiley on the sky at the crime scene.

    What I mean is that there are changes in his M.O. indeed, but the motivation behind remains the same. Plus, like C Hill said, time has become a fact, and let’s not forget there’s the question of anger too: he had to kill Lorelei because of Jane’s interference. It has become personal, like it was when Jane insulted him on TV and he took it out on the man’s family (altering then too his original MO with the two victims and the toenails) to win back his sense of power.

    (Sorry for my long and boring ramblings… I only hoe they make some sense! :P)

  • Rose UK

    @ Violet & Mosquito: …. Which still begs the question: why those particular victims, then? Did they all insult him in some way, like Jane? Was it to do with power plays? Did he know them? Or were they just randoms, simply for the experience or the ‘practice’? Will we find out that it was ALL because of Jane, right from the beginning? Like Mosquito, I’d be very interested to find out. I think a gradual discovery, over the seasons, looking at the old cases, would in some ways make the final resolution more satisfying. 🙂

  • bloomingviolet2013

    @ Rose: good call on the Seven Graces! (I thought I remembered seeing the name but I couldn’t spot the moment it appeared… :P) Great thoughts on Blake’s birds too… I need to think a bit more about it, but I really, really like your points, fellow “symbolism nut”! 😀

    @ Rita: arghh, I think I missed your first post in the stream of comments… I hope you’re getting better and that you will blessed with one of those sudden revelations you’re talking of… we’re in dire need of them! lol

  • bloomingviolet2013

    Argh! and I keep forgetting to congratulate Chizuruchibi: that drawing is just perfect and adorable and awesome! 🙂

  • bloomingviolet2013

    Rose wrote: « Which still begs the question: why those particular victims, then? Did they all insult him in some way, like Jane? Was it to do with power plays? Did he know them? Or were they just randoms, simply for the experience or the ‘practice’? »

    Well, we have at least an handful of semi-satisfying beginnings of answers, lol…
    First, there’s Jane’s case, indeed: he killed his family (and Eileen) to punish him, then the young couple who threatened him in S2 finale to protect him, and lastly Panzer to please him.
    It’s safe to say then that the recent cases are all linked to Jane’s investigation; for the older ones we have different leads…

    We know that he chose at least two victims because of one of his followers: Hardy wanted a girl, so RJ helped him take her and murdered her sister in order to lure Jane in, killing two birds with one stone. He might or might not have done the same with Hardy’s father, who was one of his known associate, possibly letting the other man choose the girls he wanted to hurt. After all, he let Carter and Lennon have their way with their own victims too, so I guess some of RJ’s official victims might have been selected by his men. At least I guess it’s possible…

    For his first victims in ‘The Red Barn’, he knew them personally. The question is why did he kill them? Was it a way to ensure the surviving farm boarder was convinced by his philosophy (a bit like binding the man to him by the power of a bloodbath, like an oath)? Were those men not willing to follow his rules? Or did he only want to hone his skills like he did when creating his signature smiley? In other words, they may have been a spur of the moment or a calculated move in order to create his future organization.

    Others had posed a threat: Renfrew, Bosco’s team, the second victim in the case they were investigating when they were murdered, Lorelei, Sophie Miller… Maybe Partridge too, who knows? And that could have been another motive for older murders (feeling personally threatened/offensed by someone, like he did after Jane’s “reading” of him).

    Then, we know he targeted Lorelei’s sister to get her to join him. Who’s to know he didn’t do the same with another of his more official victims too? He might have wanted to break someone by killing a relative (he thought he managed to convince Jane even though the man knew he killed his family; he could have done the same with someone weaker)… or he could have seduced someone to his views by killing an enemy of his, for instance.

    Thus, it seems that sometimes the murders have an ulterior motive (Miranda), still it’s impossible to tell yet if the others are a power play on victims chosen randomly or if they fit into the bigger picture. What’s worse is that I’m almost convinced, like Mosquitoinuk, that we’ll probably never know for sure, unfortunately… 😉

  • III Frogs

    @windsparrow It’s been a few days since the information passed by me on the electronic river, but I believe I was first corrected about it on Tumblr. Others corroborated it, but I have no idea their sources and experience. I live in Texas and have no clue what the rule about that is here.

    The correction by others was done in the context of people’s expressions of anger at the rest of the team for deliberately excluding Jane from the ceremony which was probably based on Simon’s own words in interview about the episode that probably they thought Jane “probably would do something stupid,” something I viewed as a toss-away remark because Simon didn’t seem to really know himself from the way he answered, like he had to think something up. Our own KM here confirms that only two witnesses may sign the marriage document, that is probably standard across the US.

    What still isn’t clear to me is the writer’s intent. Did they exclude him to be in congruence with CA or Napa law? Did they exclude him because they thought he “would do something stupid?” Or did he exclude himself because he just didn’t feel he could take it? I don’t think any of these questions have been answered definitively, people believing what feels right to them. That’s why I thought it’s a good questions to ask the writers themselves. I did so via Twitter. They have not yet answered, and who knows if they will.

    My personal take? The team would never expect Jane, the biggest Rigspelt shipper for years, to ruin their wedding by doing “something stupid” and would never exclude him. To me, such a slight and a wound to Jane is not to be imagined. Alternatively, Jane deliberately separating himself from the event, which he certainly did not and watched the whole thing through the opened door, is just not believable to me. He allowed himself the pleasure of looking at newborn Ben’s picture and suffered the pain it brought also, but he didn’t shy away or refuse to join in the team’s pleasure of it. Therefore, I go with the third reason for his behavior, that there were external forces that forbade him to be in the chamber, but he peeked in and watched anyway. Now that sounds like Jane. It’s much more believable to me. But it’s what I choose. I’m hoping to find out what the writers actually had in mind, directly from them. We’ll see.

  • Lou Ann

    Valentine: Has anyone ever touched his hair throughout the show? Is it the ultimate prize for Lisbon? Maybe it will replace turtlenecks some day.

  • III Frogs

    @windsparrow Clarification: KM says CA law allows only two witnesses to sign the document, but knows of nothing else that either admits or denies guests. The person who originally corrected me, and it may have been on TVFanatic, I can’t remember, was categorical that other than the couple, the judge and two witnesses, no other persons are allowed in the chamber for a JP wedding. Hence, I asked the writers what they had in mind. Hopefully, they’ll answer.

  • KM

    @ Entwife,@ Windsparrow and any person interested.

    The state of California does not have Justice of the Peace or courthouse weddings. Civil marriages in California are performed by the County Clerk. Some rules vary by county. Napa County California has no waiting period for licensing, requires a minimum of 1 witness (they will provide one if necessary). AND allows guests. From their own website.

    “If possible, we ask that the couple have at least one witness for the ceremony. If needed, our office can provide a witness for no charge. The room where ceremonies are held seats 14 people. Up to a maximum 20 guests can be accomodated if some guests stand. For larger groups, weather permitting and staff availability, the ceremony can be held outside by the Napa River or at the Hall of Records in the rose garden.”

    Provided The Mentalist stayed true to these rules (it is a fictional TV program), then Jane was not excluded from the wedding because only two were permitted in.

    This leaves the audience with two options. Jane was willfully excluded or he chose to participate from the distance. I personally think he chose to observe from a distance. I disagree that Jane did not shy away after looking at the texted pictures of Benjamin. He looked, agreed with Cho that Ben looked a little like Mao, agreed with Lisbon that baby Ben was gorgeous, AND then he left the rest of the team. He face was filled with sorrow and Lisbon watched him leave with a concerned expression. Thus, I think that Jane chose to witness their happiness from a safe enough distance, one that would prevent any of his own sorrow and grief to accidentally taint their joy. Because, that is who Jane is. That is who he has shown himself to be over the years, he withdraws. He withdrew from good moments such as Ben’s arrival, and sad from sad moments such as Bosco and team’s post funeral toast. Just my 2¢.

  • Lou Ann

    SPOILER, SPOILER, SPOILER.
    *
    *
    tv.com has the titles of all the episodes through number 10. Don’t go there if you hate spoilers.

  • windsparrow

    @III Frogs, thanks for the clarification. I’m about as sure as I can be without combing through the actual statutes that someone, somewhere got confused about the phraseology of “no more than two witnesses” and thought it meant more than just to sign the document.

  • windsparrow

    KM, thank you for hunting down those details.

  • Rose UK

    Thanks for your nice comment, Violet. 🙂 And for summarising RJ’s motives for the more recent killings – I hadn’t considered the idea of ‘converting’ people to his ideologies. Makes sense! As to the early crimes, yeah, we’ll probably never know! Shame!

    @ Frogs, Windsparrow & KM: I was quite shocked to read that some people thought it was a deliberate exclusion – that thought would never have entered my head in a million years! Sounds like a jokey, flippant remark from SB to me. You’ll have to let us know if the writers answer you: I’m not a Twitterer myself so these things pass me by. 😉

  • III Frogs

    Yes, thanks KM, that does narrow it down. I didn’t mean to say Jane wasn’t affected by seeing Ben’s picture, nor did his pain in walking away escape me. I was only stating that he didn’t refuse to look, even carefully, and participate in enjoying the picture. He did leave when he felt he was being overcome. So of the two choices left for why Jane wasn’t in the chamber, I would definitely choose that he may have excluded himself.

  • zee

    Sorry for jumping in on the ‘Smiley or not to Smiley’ bandwagon. I have always thought that Red John’s MO is pretty clear cut.

    1) Standard Smiley for those he wants to punish, so he can ‘purify’ the people he wants. (Eg; Lorelei’s sister murdered, so he could ‘recruit’ her.)

    2) No Smiley, if he wants to cover his tracks. (Rebecca, Coroner, Partridge.)

    *I must say though, Red John seems to be having new styles of Smiley just for Jane. I like to believe the smiley was meant for Lisbon, not Jane. But since she was somehow too special to sacrifice, he used a ‘Clowny Smiley’ instead.

  • windsparrow

    @zee “1) Standard Smiley for those he wants to punish, so he can ‘purify’ the people he wants. (Eg; Lorelei’s sister murdered, so he could ‘recruit’ her.)”

    I don’t believe there was a bloody smile painted for Miranda. If there had been one, then Lorelei would have never questioned that it was indeed RJ who killed her sister.

  • bloomingviolet2013

    I agree with Windsparrow: the only indication that it was RJ who tortured Miranda was the name “Roy” she scrapped on the ground.

    As for the part “No Smiley, if he wants to cover his tracks. (Rebecca, Coroner, Partridge.)”, I’m not so sure it works either: the Coroner was indeed killed without a calling card, so to speak, because RJ wanted to test Jane’s willingness to hide that he was alive from Darcy. Yet I don’t think she -or anyone else for that matter- was fooled, since Rosalind was his known lover. The only thing the subterfuge achieved was to make Jane appear suspicious, to the extent that Darcy began believing that he may have been RJ. And the Coroner had *nothing* on RJ: he only knew that Jane was trying to tamper with evidence in the Panzer case.
    Same with Rebecca, killed right after confessing she was working for the serial killer. He was trying to cover his tracks alright, but there was just no way anyone would have doubted he was the killer; so basically, Rebecca was in the same position than Renfrew (silenced before they had the occasion to talk) and than Todd; and there *was* a smiley for Renfrew…
    Last, not least, Partridge had a smiley at his crime scene: that it had been for him or solely for Lisbon is another question, the fact remains that the cops at the crime scene knew it was him; besides we can’t be sure either that he had needed to cover his tracks with Brett, it could have been RJ taking a dig at Jane’s list.

  • zee

    Aww shucks, I remember it now! Now that you’ve mentioned it, I think it should have been;

    1) A Standard Smiley for people he punishes.

    Which brings to surface that he might have a different or special MO too for people he wishes to “recruit”.

    (Boy, this is some murderous OCD…) Thanks Windsparrow.

  • mosquitoinuk

    Hi everyone, still going bananas about this Red John thing. I wanted to mention something I noticed in this episode. When Sheriff McAllistair helps Jane on the roof, it is odd that he gives Jane his left hand. In the ‘desert rose’, Red John (if we accept that it is the real RJ) is holding the knife with his left hand. Coincidence? Also, in the final episode of season 4, don’t we see a police car that many assumed was RJs? A police car…and then in the last episode of season 3, there is a man in a sheriff uniform in that mall.

    Now, I’m not saying that Sheriff McAllister is RJ necessarily, but these are interesting details, right?

  • Rose UK

    Interesting details indeed, Mosquito! I also noticed that RJ was holding the knife in his left hand – and randomly wondered if that could be a clue to Mancini of all people (! – apparently the word is derived from the Italian for ‘left’), but then I dismissed the idea as a) being too outlandish even for my standards, lol; and b) as it was only so RJ could use his right hand to draw the smiley. But the other points you mention are also interesting… McAllister definitely seems to be playing with Jane with the afraid-of-heights thing… I think season 1’s Red Hair & Silver Tape is definitely worth a re-watch. 😉

  • Rose UK

    Oh, isn’t there an episode called His Red Right Hand? Probably figurative (referring to Rebecca) though, I suppose?

  • mosquitoinuk

    @Rose: yes, there is an episode called “his Red Right Hand” …could this be an indication that he is left handed and his right hand(s) do awful things for him? Arrrrrggggghhhhh…too many red herrings, too much over interpretation but still…

    I can say only one thing: if indeed, Sheriff McAllistair is RJ I personally will find that terribly dissapointing as there has been no indication until now that he was involved and he has just re-appeared. When I saw the ‘list’ I thought: really?

    The interactions between Sheriff McAllistair and Jane are diabolically good and they have great chemistry but still, if he ever was RJ…I don’t know, it would feel (to me) that it was totally made up.

    Let’s wait and see…

  • III Frogs

    @mosquitohawk Been thinking about this handedness thing. I’m right handed. But if I’m, say, washing or drying a knife, I hold the knife in my left hand while using my right to do the work of cleaning it. But I would never try to actually use the knife with my left.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: