Guest myonlyvice Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 Its plot was too complicated for the 48 minutes allowed it. After an untold number of viewings I feel like I understand it less now than I did after the first time. For those who think they understand everything in this episode do you feel that it adequately addresses all the facets of the story or are there inconsistencies? I remember a thread a while back devoted to this episode but I didn't find it very helpful in my understanding. Will the experts please stand up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christine Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 In my opinion, there are some unanswered questions, but I could imagine that the makers had thought about another appearance of Frank Zappa in a later ep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DefinitelyCrockett Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 Yeah this is one of those episodes that needs further delving into. It's on our screens this weekend, so perfect opportunity to watch carefully and ask myself if I *really* understand it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leigh Burne Posted September 28, 2011 Report Share Posted September 28, 2011 I always thought, confusing or not, this episode had one of the best plots. I always enjoy fiction where the hero has the least idea of what's going on around him, and it was great to see Zappa as the kingpin. Chuck in a neat Jan Hammer tune and plenty of Crockett's Theme and this episode's one of my favourites. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arsanat Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 Totally AgreePayback has a great film noir plot. I agree that they could have devoted another hour to fleshing it out--maybe made it a season opener or closer.Michael Mann probably should've just used it as the plot for his feature version instead of what he went with because it makes a helluva lot more sense and was far more entertaining than what I sat through last weekend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Hanna Posted June 11, 2013 Report Share Posted June 11, 2013 Well Mann did use a little bit for the movie. Where Crockett sells back the coke to the owner but in the film, they give it back for free as like a goodwill gesture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.