NCIS Los Angeles review: “War Crimes”

Photo credit: @NCISLA

Here’s my review of NCIS Los Angeles season twelve episode “War Crimes.” Please note that this isn’t a recap of what happens. I’m assuming that you’ve already seen the episode. There are spoilers in this review.

“This was a big day.” Or so I was told, multiple times throughout this episode. “War Crimes” revisits the plotline from last season’s “Code of Conduct,” showing us the fate of the war criminal Chief Petty Officer Argento after the team helped put a stop to his heinous acts. But with all the emphasis on how important this case was, the episode itself was quite a disappointment.

If you’re familiar with the writing process, you’ve probably often heard the phrase “show, don’t tell” as a piece of advice to improve. It means you focus on getting your characters to show what they’re feeling or thinking through actions rather than simply saying all that information. My biggest concern about this episode is that it was a lot of “telling” and not enough “showing.” Like I mentioned earlier, several characters emphasized how important this case was and how nervous they were, but it’s never really shown. They just say it several times.

And that makes for a pretty dull episode, despite a whole search for a missing witness. Not every episode of NCISLA needs to have something explode during an intense action sequence, but if you’re going to skip all that, the episode should at least focus on the characters instead. A quiet episode is a good opportunity for a character-driven story.

“Code of Conduct” was a pretty important episode for Agent Rountree (his first out-of-country mission with the team, along with the experience of learning from his mistake) and it was an important episode for Sam (who provided the crucial encouragement for the others to do the right thing.) Since “War Crimes” is a follow-up episode, you’d think these two characters would get the bulk of the focus. It would have been a great time for the audience to get to know Rountree better. For Sam, we could have gotten some perspective about what it means to be an honorable soldier or something along those lines. Unfortunately the episode gave more screentime guest characters and struggled to juggle plot between all the main cast. I was a bit disappointed.

“Code of Conduct” was a meditation on justice, and on how difficult it can be to do the right thing. “War Crimes” also tried to explore these themes through the witness tampering storyline, and even though I think this episode ultimately fell short, I did appreciate the attempt. (Again, perhaps a more character-focused story would have made the storyline make more sense. I never felt like I really understood why Cole and his father did what they did. Too much of the characters saying doing the right thing is hard but not showing us exactly why.)

All in all, “War Crimes” didn’t live up to my expectations. But in the end, at least justice prevailed. “It was a big day” after all.

Notes from the Boat Shed

• I try not to judge an episode solely by its writer, but I just cannot get into this particular writer’s style. She writes as though NCISLA is a sitcom. That may work for some people but it doesn’t work for me.
• A positive from this episode: the opening truly baffled me, so I ended up googling what “reveille” means and discovered it’s kind of like a wake up call. I do enjoy learning new things so thanks for that at least!
• I would have enjoyed watching Deeks and Rountree disassemble/reassemble their guns blindfolded. Maybe a future episode will deliver!
• I complained a lot about “telling” in this episode, but I would like to point out that I did like the flashbacks showing what happened during Lt. Col. Castro’s opening statement. That made the necessary recap less boring.
• I am neither a lawyer nor judge, but the judge being unable to continue the case until at least the next day seemed unrealistic. But I don’t know!
• I’ve already forgotten the annoying defense attorney name, but her best line was describing her suit as “Nancy Reagan red”
• On the opposite end of the spectrum, the “Shakespeare can’t write this” line was eye-roll inducing. Oh well, you win some, you lose some.

So what did you think? Like it or hate it? Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments.