CliqueClack TV
TV SHOWS COLUMNS FEATURES CHATS QUESTIONS

For Jackie, at what age is it appropriate to throw drugs at a problem?

nurse_jackie_episode 1.4

I’m not a fan of the show (though I’ve hidden it well, right?), so clearly these things don’t sit particularly well with me, but what in the world is with this ridiculous storyline on Nurse Jackie? Grace (Ruby Jerins) may have some sort of emotional (or whatever) problems, so Jackie and Kevin are called in to discuss options for therapy and medication?

Sure, the show’s been “building” towards this, but are we meant to feel sympathy for a mother whose focus is so stretched? Or for a woman who deals with life and death at work, and must now worry for her daughter on top of that?

Or, should we just be disgusted with the whore who gets disgusting text messages (“me so horny”) from her lover while she’s with her husband? So much so that she gets a second “cheater” cell. Wow! What a symbol of the modern-day woman! So evolved. So much growth.

And so much love for her husband, that when both phones ring at the same time, she answers them simultaneously, telling both men that she loves them. No triage, no putting your partner in life and the father of your children above the pharmacist you sleep with to get drugs. Nope, both on the same level. Classy.

I’d say that this was a wasted episode for Steve Buscemi to direct, but I’m not quite sure what would have been a better choice. Then again, the art of directing is lost on me, so I can’t really say something like, “Wow, the movement in that scene was awesome; too bad I can’t stand her.” No, I can only process the fact that he “directed” the episode, whatever that means. Therefore, my only lament is that he connected his name to this series in the first place. Unfortunately, he chose to do it at least twice more, so what can you do?

Did anyone else notice that the show has apparently chosen to do a slow motion montage whenever any kind of powder appears onscreen? Before the meeting at Grace’s school, Jackie stopped in the bathroom to apply some makeup. The way it was done, we all could have been excused for thinking that she was about to snort something, until we saw her place her makeup brush in the substance. Is that really the thing this show wants to be known for?

The one part of this episode that spoke to me was when Mo-Mo (Haaz Sleiman) was telling Zoey about the twin brother that he lost as a baby. I actually felt, for a moment, that someone on this series might end up having some depth to them, something beyond the ugly exterior that could hold our interest, and leave us feeling at least the slightest bit of empathy. Of course, he shot that to hell by moving right on to discussing hair styling, but I can excuse him for trying to protect his own emotional well being. At least this time.

You know, there are many languages out there that are not meant for saying, or singing, soothing words and sounds. The Semitic languages, along with the Baltic and Slavic ones, are high on that list of no nos for sweet nothings. I wonder at the thought process there; maybe the moment where Mo-Mo sings to the kid speaks to his own longing for his twin, and he’d only do something like that in his native tongue, which I guess is an Arabic language. That’s all well and good. However, Arabic doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue. It has a lot of harsh consonants … just saying.

On the other side of the emotional spectrum was O’Hara, not surprisingly. I’m just not clear on why the writers feel it important for the doctors on the show to be so opposite of what we’d want caretakers to be. Do they fear that without the stark contrasts, we won’t get that Jackie’s supposed to be a wonderful healer? I mean, I won’t anyway, because of how despicable a person she is, but still. O’Hara has to be either autistic (which she’s not), or emotionally stunted (which, believe it or not, is not so likely, since bedside manner actually is something that’s evaluated before a doctor gets licensed), to be so uncomfortable as a human.

I know you could easily say that I’m making a big deal out of nothing, or blowing a funny moment out of proportion, but her almost fear at being hugged by a little boy whose twin brother she’d just saved? Come on. It’s okay if O’Hara has some idea of what type of life form a child is. The writers really shouldn’t be afraid that upping O’Hara’s child understanding will lower Jackie’s; it’s not a finite thing.

Anyway, that’s my two cents. Anyone else have something to say?

Photo Credit: Showtime

Categories: | Clack | Episode Reviews | General | TV Shows |

23 Responses to “For Jackie, at what age is it appropriate to throw drugs at a problem?”

June 30, 2009 at 6:48 PM

Gotta say, no matter how horrible the character, I’m not really down with women being called whores. Even if they literally have sex for money, they’re prostitutes. That turned me off of this whole review.

June 30, 2009 at 9:03 PM

I realize that we all have our own particular predilections, but a “whore” is either (a) a prostitute (not true here), (b) a person considered sexually promiscuous (yup), or (c) a person considered as having compromised principles for personal gain (check). While I’m sorry if you find the term distasteful, it is an accurate label in this case.

June 30, 2009 at 11:22 PM

That’s fine, but one person’s accurate is another’s offensive (see: racist terms for people of another ethnicity than oneself). I doubt you’d call a man who did the same thing a whore, so its not just about her actions.

That said, I’m not into censorship, I just thought I’d point it out because I didn’t know if you knew that some people might find it distasteful.

June 30, 2009 at 11:58 PM

Point taken, although I would, and have, called male cheaters whores. But that’s neither here nor there.

In all honesty, it never occurred to me that anyone might be offended by the label, but I probably could have given it some thought (which is not necessarily to say that I would have done anything differently, but still). Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

June 30, 2009 at 7:51 PM

Excuse me…. “whore”????

Considering your level of vitrol I don’t see why you write about the show at all. You don’t like it….fine, we get that. Why poison the site with something so negative….again and again. Whatever, I think that was the last of your pieces that I care to read.

June 30, 2009 at 9:06 PM

First of all, see my comment above.

As I’ve said before, there is something about the show that interests me, that keeps me watching. But, even if there wasn’t, I think it rather extreme to say that I’m poisoning the site. Do you truly believe that if a review can’t be glowing, or even positive, it shouldn’t be written? Where’s the integrity in that?

June 30, 2009 at 8:41 PM

Do yourself favor and please stop reviewing this show. It serves no purpose other than to tell us how much you dislike it. Who wants to read that every week?

June 30, 2009 at 9:11 PM

I actually take exception to that. My primary argument with the show is Jackie. I’ve voiced positive opinions about O’Hara and Zoey (as a pair), Mo-Mo, and several other things. While I wouldn’t list Nurse Jackie under shows I love, that doesn’t mean I don’t want to watch it, or share what I have to say about it.

It might be of interest to note, that no one else has offered to cover the show instead of me. While that may mean CliqueClack should just ignore Nurse Jackie, I think there are shows that deserve better than that, whether for the good or the bad. As little an Edie Falco fan as I am, she deserves the respect just for her being cast on a show like The Sopranos, alone.

June 30, 2009 at 11:17 PM

I haven’t watched the last couple episodes, but can we get someone to review the show who doesn’t despise it?

June 30, 2009 at 11:55 PM

Et tu, Brute? I thought we had something special :-(

July 1, 2009 at 7:28 AM

Dear Leo (joke joke),

I wonder if you come from religious background and that’s why you despise Jackie so much.
You must have known what the series was about, so I don’t really see the point in criticizing Jackie for something that’s obviously central to the plot. It’s like condemning Nancy Botwin for dealing drugs or Dexter Morgan for being a serial killer.

However the show is called Nurse Jackie, and she is a good and compassionate nurse, don’t you think? I spent some time in hospitals and never once met a nurse like her. Not in the public health care system anyway.

What I don’t understand, and the show fails to explain, is why a woman who’s married to a handsome younger guy (that’s obvious), hard working and a devoted dad, would WANT to cheat on him considering they still have hot sex on the kitchen floor? After all, she’s using Eddie just for sex and drugs, right? But he won’t be able to give her drugs anymore, so where does it leave him?

In his blog Alan Sepinwall wrote about NBC Kings: “I can’t be bothered reviewing it, so talk amongst yourselves.”
I prefer a negative thoughtful review than a dismissal, so thanks for taking the time.

July 1, 2009 at 11:35 AM

What’s the Leo thing mean?

You know, I did know what the show was about, in general terms, but you actually make my point for me. I don’t condemn Nancy Botwin for dealing drugs … maybe because she has some other redeeming qualities, maybe because I can understand that she does it for pure reasons. I don’t watch Dexter, but I know enough to know that he’s murdering criminals. But where’s Jackie’s redeeming value? What’s the reason for her drug abuse that we can take as excusable, at least to the extent of our excusing Nancy and Dexter?

I see her as caring and compassionate, something I’ve pointed out in the past. But I still question how that makes her a nurse, and not a candy-striper, or hospital volunteer. She’s certainly not being a responsible medical professional by treating patients while under the influence of narcotics.

I have the same question as you about her relationship with Eddie. I just don’t know.

Thanks for the appreciation!

July 1, 2009 at 4:15 PM

I thought your name comes from Hebrew. It sounds like it, hence the “Leo”. Sorry if I was wrong, no disrespect intended.

July 1, 2009 at 4:23 PM

Also, killing criminals doesn’t make Dexter less of a murderer and even with redeeming features Nancy is still a drug dealer.
You don’t watch Dexter? You’re totally missing out.

July 1, 2009 at 5:20 PM

No, you’re correct. I was just completely not expecting anyone to make that connection, so I didn’t take for granted that you had. Definitely nothing wrong with it.

July 1, 2009 at 5:23 PM

While their respective reasoning doesn’t make them any less criminals, at least both Dexter and Nancy do what they do for a greater good, in some sense. I’m not defending them, just differentiating their actions from someone like Jackie.

I watched Dexter when it premiered, and something about it just wasn’t for me, or my wife. I recently went searching for it again, to try and give it another chance, and it isn’t currently airing from season one. When it does, I will give it a second shot.

July 1, 2009 at 9:25 AM

I like Nurse Jackie. I have a few close friends that are nurses in busy hospitals, and though I hope that they don’t share all of Jackie’s traits, they certainly share a few. They both are tough on the exterior and darkly funny and sarcastic with their friends but they can certainly turn the smiles and charm on their patients. Working in a hospital sucks the life out of you. All of that sickness and sadness coming at you all day and you want to be able to be oompassionate with your patients. Not too many people can keep that up on a daily let alone yearly basis. I think Edie Falco does a wonderful job converying the complexities of juggling hospital life with home life..and the things that she feels she must do to get by in her world.

July 1, 2009 at 11:40 AM

I’ve known nurses, from an unfortunate stay my son took in the ER and hospital recently, but not from a personal side, so I can only agree that Jackie provides the same caring that they did. But, if I discovered that one of them was treating him under the influence of drugs? Are you kidding me?

I can also only imagine the terrible toll the work must take on hospital personnel, but are you pointing that out in defense of her drug abuse and cheating on her husband? I’m not sure I can see that as a valid argument.

July 1, 2009 at 12:06 PM

wow… she’s a flawed character on a dramatic show. see walter white, tony soprano, nancy botwin, nate fisher, dexter morgan, doug ross, and on, and on, and on. that’s kind of the point, or it might get boring to watch. this review is just kind of odd – i have no issues with someone pointing out problems within a show in a post, but this was just a hate-fest. someone that enjoys the show should really be reviewing it, otherwise it seems like a waste of time on both ends.
I wonder if arabic-speaking people would be turned off by the ‘harsh consonants’ in that sweet sounding (even to my white-ass ears) song? seems a little racist.
…just saying

July 1, 2009 at 12:32 PM

I speak a Semitic language, and I 100% recognize the difference in the auditory tones between them and the Romance languages, as an example. It’s okay to love something and still acknowledge that it has some faults.

July 1, 2009 at 12:58 PM

the ‘racist’ thing was a little over the top – i was just still flabbergasted by the review ;-)

July 1, 2009 at 5:25 PM

No worries.

I’m flattered … just kidding; I know you don’t mean that as a good thing! ;-)

Powered By OneLink