Tue 3 Jul 2012
A TV Review by Mike Tooney: NUMB3RS — The JOHN BUCKLEY Episodes.
Posted by Steve under Reviews , TV mysteries[9] Comments
NUMB3RS. CBS. Two episodes: “Jacked.” Season 5, Episode 12. First broadcast: 16 January 2009. “Con Job.” Season 6, Episode 9. First broadcast: 20 November 2009. Regular cast members: Rob Morrow (FBI agent Don Eppes), David Krumholtz (math genius Charlie Eppes), Judd Hirsch (Alan Eppes), Alimi Ballard (FBI agent David Sinclair), Dylan Bruno (FBI agent Colby Granger), Navi Rawat (computer whiz Amita Ramanujan), Sophina Brown (FBI agent Nikki Betancourt), Aya Sumika (FBI agent Liz Warner), Peter MacNicol (Dr. Larry Fleinhardt). Guest star: Fisher Stevens (John Buckley). Writers: Don McGill (“Jacked”); Cheryl Heuton & Nicolas Falacci (“Con Job”). Directors: Stephen Gyllenhaal (“Jacked”); Ralph Hemecker (“Con Job”).
You might remember uber-conman Lewis Avery Filer from two episodes of Hawaii Five-O, reported on here.
Evidently the producers of Numb3rs felt that a brilliant but warped mind like Filer’s shouldn’t go to waste and used a similar character twice in the show’s final two seasons: John Buckley, an absolute genius at the con. Like the Five-O episodes, the results were a lot of fun.
It would be unfair to relate too much of what happens in these two episodes, since both are replete with twists and turns, crosses and double crosses and triple crosses, so minimalism will be our watchword here.
In the opening credits of “Jacked,” we see the following: “24.9 million tourists per year” / “128 bit encryption key” / “18 million dollars” / “4 hours.” All of these do come into play during the course of the show.
A busload of tourists has been kidnapped by a vicious John Buckley (Fisher Stevens) and his handpicked team. Buckley wants a ransom from the FBI, or he’ll start shooting people — and he proves he means it by killing one of his hostages at random.
But what lead FBI agent Don Eppes (Rob Morrow) doesn’t know going in is that he’s dealing with a con artist of the highest caliber — and absolutely nothing is what it seems.
Despite all the potentially lethal firepower the authorities could bring to bear in this situation, Buckley survives but winds up in prison.
Buckley turns up again in “Con Job,” which opens with: “3 gunmen” / “16 million dollars” / “26 hostages” / “1 con.”
Nearly a year has elapsed when a gang of heavily-armed criminals takes over a diamond exchange with dozens of hostages. The methodology this bunch uses reminds Agent Eppes of Buckley, so Eppes enlists his assistance.
Buckley admits he confided some of his secrets to one of his cell mates, including the diamond exchange takeover — and the security cameras confirm the leader of the gang is that very individual.
Working closely with the FBI — and ingratiating himself with everyone in sight — Buckley helps Eppes & Co. plan how to foil the robbery.
While he is suspicious of Buckley’s motives, Eppes seems to have a handle on the situation, but the truth is that from the very beginning — in fact, even before the robbery took place — things have been completely out of his control….
Some actors can steal every scene they’re in, and Fisher Stevens (born 1963) is one of them.
Numb3rs ran for six seasons on CBS (2005-2010, 119 episodes). The premise of using mathematics to solve crimes might be unique. Except for PBS’s Mathnet (“The story you are about to see is a fib, but it’s short. The names are made up, but the problems are real”), if anyone knows of other math-based mysteries, please inform us.
July 3rd, 2012 at 5:23 pm
Numb3rs began a few years after I retired from teaching college level math, and no one was more surprised than I that it became a big hit. Well, popular enough that it was on for six years.
I found the math aspect of the series more interesting than the people, but I suspect that I was in the minority in this regard.
From what I understood at the time, the producers used quite a few math experts to make sure what they used on the show was as accurate as possible.
I missed a lot of episodes when they were first aired, but my wife and I bought the DVDs as soon as they came out. She’s watched them all, I think. This review of Mike’s may nudge me into starting them.
July 3rd, 2012 at 7:25 pm
I was a huge fan of Mathnet, the zany Dragnet spoof.
But have only seen a few episodes of Numb3rs. Keep meaning to watch more!
This review might give me a nudge too.
MathFiction is a huge database of math stories of all types, including some mysteries:
http://kasmana.people.cofc.edu/MATHFICT/
There is a ton to learn there.
Some years ago I read Mark Cohen’s mystery novel THE FRACTAL MURDERS. Good math background – but the mystery plot had some holes…
July 3rd, 2012 at 7:32 pm
PS.
Think Fisher Stevens was the villain in HACKERS, too.
He was good as the hero’s weaselly friend in EARLY EDITION.
July 4th, 2012 at 12:36 am
Mike
You’re quite right about Fisher Stevens being the villain in HACKERS, which I reviewed here this past Sunday.
You might think this was deliberate on my part, but not this time. I never saw the connection until I read your comment just now.
A strange coincidence, that’s all!
— Steve
July 4th, 2012 at 12:45 pm
My experience of NUMB3RS is pretty much the same as Mike’s. I watched some episodes and enjoyed them, but I never had that ‘I’ve got to watch this next week’ feeling that I have with my favourite crime shows. Steve felt the mathematics elements were stronger than the human element. My maths skills go so far, and no further, so I’m not really fit to judge that element, but the human element seemed a little lacking. It’s a shame, as it’s the sort of programme that I feel that I should like, but there’s just something missing.
July 4th, 2012 at 1:30 pm
That’s three of us, now, that need a nudge to watch what we think should be must-watch material for us. All we need is someone to tell us why that should be so!
July 4th, 2012 at 3:07 pm
Bradstreet says “the human element seemed a little lacking,” which is ironic since the NUMB3RS producers tried hard — perhaps too hard — to give the main characters individual personal lives and quirks.
In the latter seasons, they would occasionally introduce characters even geekier than Charlie, as if to “normalize” him more.
July 4th, 2012 at 4:23 pm
Mike
I’ve been thinking about this, and all I’ve come up with so far is that while you’re right, the producers tried hard to humanize the characters, none of them were people I’d really like to hang out with. Given that as a starting point, my next question to myself is, why not? And there I’m stuck, at least until I start watching the show again. It’s been too long since I watched one, I’m afraid. (Perhaps, as you say, they tried too hard.)
— Steve
July 4th, 2012 at 11:09 pm
I’ve just watched the pilot episode. They did a good job bringing in the math (to help pinpoint where a serial rapist might live) and not making it too scary for most people.
I’m still not crazy about the leading characters — I still think the guys in charge are trying too hard in giving them lives of their own — but I’m going to take back part of what I said in the previous comment.
I’m going to work my way through the box set, and see if hanging out with Eppes & Company as the first season goes on works out better than watching the various episodes hit or miss, as I did the first time around.