This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.
alliterator: Could someone who has seen this show (more than I have, which is only about five minutes) please rewrite this entry so it's less of a Take That!. (Yes, it shares similarities with Psych, but I don't think there's any out and out plagiarism.)
Bossman: I'll take the case!
MOD: It might be favorable if someone with solid knowledge on NLP, hypnosis, cold reading or psychology in general would also note at some point if the show is an example of Viewers Are Geniuses for spotlighting methods widely unknown, resulting in a made up impression (Reality Is Unrealistic, as we all know). Sadly I only have a basic understanding of how they are supposed to work. So while I have those "that's probably supposed to be..."-moments, I have little to no experience with those methods being applied to real people. I still need to watch Psych to compare, but I think that's also something that could make a clear difference between the shows.
Sorator: I'd disagree with that definition of the Five-Man Band... I would say that Jane (The Mentalist) is in fact the Hero, while Lisbon is supposed to be the hero and might believe the is the hero but is actually The Lancer. The show is named after Jane; that kind of settles the debate over whether or not he is the Hero or the Lancer. While Lisbon has higher rank and authority than Jane (in theory, at least) and, as I said, is "supposed to be" the hero, she is actually the Lancer - Jane solves the mysteries and Lisbon handles the paperwork. One can certainly make the case that Jane is actually The Smart Guy and Lisbon the Hero, but then you have no one who fits the position of The Lancer, and Cho simply becomes an unusually intelligent (and physically unimposing) Big Guy (instead of an unusually stupid Smart Guy). Thoughts? I'd rather discuss before changing.
- I agree with Jane-as-hero. This is like saying Cuddy is the hero of House MD. There's a very clear "Jane is the Bunny-Ears Lawyer that's really awesome, and Lisbon is his super cool spunky Deadpan Snarker sidekick" dynamic.
- I don't think any of them perfectly fit the archetype, to be perfectly honest. Cho isn't especially intelligent, Rigsby can be pretty dang clever when he wants to be, and Van Pelt does her best to shut emotion down for important things. Jane is a hero, but an extremely off-beat, irresponsible, and authority-hating one. If anything, he's a Lancer Hero. Lisbon would be a straighter example of the 'hero' archetype, but the truth is in action she's more of a dogged authority figure and Obstructive Bureaucrat. If you ask me, just trying to get either one to fit either role is a bit of a Square Peg Round Trope.
- Your Mileage May Vary but, judging by the caracter's behaviour, this troper sees the things this way:
| The Hero | Teresa Lisbon | ||
| The Lancer | Patrick Jane | ||
| The Big Guy | Wayne Rigsby | ||
| The Smart Guy | Grace Van Pelt | ||
| The Sixth Ranger | Kimball Cho | ||
| The Chick | Grace Van Pelt & Virgil Minelli |
bkbroiler: Is it really appropriate for Lisbon to be described as a person "who'd rather not have Jane around but grudgingly accepts how useful he is"? It seems to me like she sticks up for him quite a bit, and almost always follows his advice. They definitely get along. She's just more "by the book" than he is. I'm not really sure how to put it, but does anyone have any ideas? The current description just isn't right.
- That was more accurate at the start of the show, when she appeared to genuinely dislike having him around and resented accepting his help. Now, however, she has a tendency to follow much of his advice without a second thought, defends his wackiness as her knee-jerk reaction, and is overall lenient. Perhaps 'disagrees with his methods and wishes he could be useful without the unnecessary obnoxiousness' would be a better alternative?
pensive: Is "murderer fangirl" even a trope? I added spoiler text for the time being, though my first inclination was to delete the reference altogether.
Mmm... what do you guys think about the page quote courtesy of Psych? I don't know, it seems to me like yet another unnecessary 'plagiarism' Take That!, but before the actual article. Does it really tell us anything? Waiting a few days, then deleting.
Go ahead and nuke it. The Psych folks seem bent on messing with this page with endless Take That! edits. It's pretty tiresome. In other news: maybe we can hunt down a good cast photo, or a cap of Jane being his Trickster self?
In Blood In, Blood Out Cho is lampshaded as The Stoic, but at the same time he has so many Not So Stoic moments in it that it's difficult to be fully accurate in detailing this. Having an entry for Not So Stoic saying 'Blood In, Blood Out was brimming with Not So Stoic moments for Cho' and an entry claiming he's The Stoic (particularly one going so far as to say that he has no expressions) at the same time would seem weird. Suggestions?
