CliqueClack TV
TV SHOWS COLUMNS FEATURES CHATS QUESTIONS

Was Leverage’s Parker on antidepressants an unnecessary gimmick?

leverage-parker2

In last night’s episode of Leverage, “The 12-Step Job,” Parker, Nate and Sophie went undercover in a rehab facility as patients and psychiatrist, respectively, to get info from a guy who stole a bunch of money from a charity and has a major addiction problem. Did I mention they’re the ones who brought him to rehab to keep him safe from all the gangs he also stole money from? I thought that was pretty clever of them.

When I saw them all sitting in that therapy group, talking about their problems, I couldn’t help but be amused by the fact that in the real world, Parker and Nate really do belong in rehab. Parker’s got kleptomania, and Nate is an alcoholic. At the same time though, rehab proved a pretty scary place for both of them, for different reasons, and both were also rendered pretty much useless to the team during this episode. Parker being put on antidepressants, and the 180º personality flip that ensued, bothered me for a couple of reasons. Let me explain:

First of all, in context of the show, I like my Parker crazy, as I’m sure most of you do as well. I understand it was supposed to be funny to see her suddenly acting semi-normal, and it kind of was. I try to take Leverage with a grain of salt and enjoy it for the fun ride that it is. However, the idea that you take one antidepressant and all of a sudden you’re sharing your feelings and laughing and hugging everyone just seems ridiculous to me. Its Zoloft (or whichever), not ecstasy.

Also, as crazy as Parker is, I don’t think she’s depressed. She seems to like herself the way she is, and love what she does. The whole thing seems to undermine her character a little bit by planting what I’m sure is a completely unintentional suggestion that there’s something wrong with her. Was it all just so we could see her hug Hardison at the end, and hear him say he liked it?

Am I taking this all too seriously? We’ve seen Leverage blur the line between the believable and the unrealistic before, but usually in terms of the tricks they pull during a con. To me, this one was just silly, and I would’ve rather seen Parker be her regular self. Your thoughts?

Photo Credit: TNT

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

9 Responses to “Was Leverage’s Parker on antidepressants an unnecessary gimmick?”

February 4, 2009 at 3:49 PM

In the real world, antidepressants (SSRIs)take weeks to begin doing their job. I think in the case of a TV show, however, we can give them a pass especially considering this isn’t a show devoted to a serious examination of mental illness.

February 4, 2009 at 5:27 PM

Other than agreeing with Franklin’s point that it happened quickly (TV Cute as my mom used to say), the plot really didn’t bother me. In fact, I thought it was just another manifestation of her quirkyness.

She continues to be my favorite character on the show.

February 4, 2009 at 5:43 PM

I really like that Parker was happy and semi normal. The best part I about Parker last night was when she bumped into the gangsters and she accidentally stole the gun. So funny that she steals by instinct.

February 4, 2009 at 5:44 PM

It didn’t bother me. The show was focusing on Sophie, Nate, and Nate’s real problem which I think is guilt (drinking is the result) just based on the hallucinations he had of Sterling. Talk about creepy.

What did bother me was the interaction between Eliot and Hardison. It just didn’t feel right to have those two pairing up, but then again, maybe that was the point.

Hyundai product placement anyone? Ugh.

February 4, 2009 at 7:08 PM

I might be the only person, But I liked the Hyundai placement. I liked the car and I was curious about it after seeing the Super Bowl commercial. It wasn’t so over the top that I gagged, but TV shows have to pay for themselves some how.

I also liked when Psych did a product placement for Red Robin, but only because I love their burgers.

February 4, 2009 at 8:44 PM

I wouldn’t mind if the actress would do a better job… sorry but she’s the weak link in this lineup, I simply think she’s either over- oder underacting. Some lines she delivers are worthy of cuecards…

February 4, 2009 at 9:23 PM

I really disagree… I think what are probably well thought out affectations are coming across wrong.

I liked this show at first, but its really been the last two that I think its really beginning to shine.

February 5, 2009 at 1:31 AM

I understand why it was necessary – not for Parker’s character development, but because with the very real (and scary thanks to Timothy Hutton) situation of Nate dealing with rehab. They needed a bit of comedy relief to keep the show light.

Maybe they could have handled the comedy better, but without it Nate’s story was just depressing. It was good, though. I especially liked his hallucination of Sterling, and the fact that they avoided the obvious “Nate checks into rehab again and his problem disappears by next episode” gimmick.

February 5, 2009 at 2:29 AM

I think you are absolutely right. I like Parker be her regular self way better. The 12 Step Job was just boring. I like the blur between unrealistic and real, after all it’s just a show but the last episode missed everything that makes Leverage good and different.

Powered By OneLink