Did H&McC have direction?

[theyankeeclipper]

Watching Season 3 right now, i've started to really kind of reflect hard on the series, in comparison heavily to Cannell's other shows.

What i'm starting to wonder is that, Hardcastle & McCormick didn't really seem to have any direction. Sister shows at the time, such as "The A-Team", "Hunter" & "Riptide" had better direction imo, and even Cannell's shows in the 90's... it seems "Renegade" had more focus than H&McC, even though it was a piss-poor focus.

What i'm saying is, outside of the pilot movie "Rolling Thunder", the series never had any direction. Other than maybe a couple times in Season 1, did our boys ever go after 'the 200 cases that got away', despite the fact the narration appeared all the way through Season 2, yet had no bearing on the current status of the series at the time.

By the time we hit the second-half of Season 1, all stories seemed to involved either Hardcastle or McCormick or both stumbling into criminal situations, some old friend on hard times showing up, some old friend who's committing crimes getting discovered, and by Season 3, almost gimmicky episodes with escapist plots like "Games People Play", "Mirage A Trois" & "In The Eye Of The Beholder" just to name a few, with only the latter ever really getting it 'right'.

Other shows seemed to have more focus. "The A-Team" remained throughout four seasons about the team as merc's on the run from the military. In the show's 5th & final season they were captured, tried, found guilty, and worked off the rest of their debt as government agents. "Hunter" of course was pretty simple, two LA homicide detectives solve murders, and other circumstances around the murders, such as drugs, prostitution, illegal guns, etc. And "Riptide", they were actually private investigators.

Other than the pilot, and the show's series finale "A Chip Off The 'Ol Milt" did we ever discuss Mark's parole, and even "When I Look Back On All The Things" seemed to only approach it as a joke.

So what do you think? Keep in mind, a few lines here and there scattered obscurely throughout three seasons, doesn't count.

[Coyote Queen]

Sorry, I gotta disagree. While they did "stumble upon" cases here and there, there WAS direction and continuity throughout the series. It is quite clear in each and every episode just why Mark was at Gulls Way. Watching a good story is like reading one. You have to do a little thinking and imagining on your own. Pay attention to the dialog and interactions between Mark and Milt. They speak volumes. The show wasn't just about the 200 cases. Hardcastle and McCormick was also about Mark getting "rehabilitated" a la Judge Hardcastle. It was also about a man so dedicated to the to justice, that even in retirement, he still fought IN-justice. Odd circumstances are what made the show great. It wasn't the same-old regurgitated plots week after week. Murder, arson, rape and drug dealing are not the only types of crimes out there, you know.

Hunter was a great show. I loved it. I haven't watched any episodes in a few months. I think it was consistent with the direction, continuity, and themes of most Cannell shows of the 80's: Riptide, Tenspeed and Brownshoe, Stingray, Wiseguy, and Hardcastle & McCormick. In true Cannell fashion, these shows had great writing.

Renegade I really can't compare. TV really started to change when it debuted: scripts, plots, special effects, camera angles, editing,... the whole nine yards.

A-Team is bad example for any type of comparison to H&M. I think it was a lame-ass kiddie show and it just plain sucked (IMHO). The Greatest American Hero would have fallen into the same category had it not been for the genius of Mr. Robert Culp. He single-handedly kept that series afloat.

Keep in mind, Hardcastle and McCormick was also cancelled very abruptly too. For all we know the whole Mark going to law school thing from "Chip Off the Old Milt" may have been planned as an ongoing theme for season 4, had there been one. We'll never know.

So what do you think? Keep in mind, a few lines here and there scattered obscurely throughout three seasons, doesn't count.

...Do you realize that you are asking for an opinion and telling people what to think in the same sentence???

[cann]

I think H&M had a great deal of direction all through out the three seasons, it was always about Justice and rehab for Mark. With some good old fashion friendship tossed in, Milt helping Mark and Mark helping Milt. I think Cannell did a great job keeping the show on target.

[theyankeeclipper]

Good points, but my ears turned off as soon as you called "The A-Team" - 'lame ass kiddie show'.

Even people in the biz will tell you beside "Rockford", it was probably Cannell's best written & quality series, and I agree with that assessment.

Even if H&McC is massively underrated and should be right up there with it in people's memories.

And as for my comment, what I was trying to do, is for anyone that replied to give a good statement of what you thought, as you did. Not to say something in-general like.... "well Mark had to get a job in YOU AND THE HORSE YOU RODE IN ON. So that means he was getting tired of going after 200 cases", or something like that.

Even though the show was indeed about, in the Judge's words, "grinding the rough edges off the kid", the show never ever ever once followed a regular and recurring point like "The A-Team" or "Hunter". Not ever.

If they show was just going to be a redneck judge & former race car driver partner up and stumble into criminal activities ala "Murder, She Wrote", why keep driving home the plot & basis of the series for two years with the opening narration? The A-Team had their narration, and they stuck by it. H&McC didn't.

This isn't to say the show didn't have continuity. Despite holes at times, they show kept great continuity, and always gelled.

Maybe it's just me. Personally I feel the whole 'stumbling into crimes' thing was tired and way too predictable by Season 3. On that same breath, you could say the exact same thing had they went after the 200 cases, BUT at least with the 200 cases it would've stayed true to it's foundation, and made more sense to me.

The show is my favorite of all time, and I love it. But this is the one thing for me as a fan, that really sticks out as it's major flaw.

[owlcroft]

Well, I never watched the "A-Team" because I saw the adverts and it seemed to me that the network was pushing it as a kind of cartoonish, let's-blow-things-up-but-with-a-sense-of-humor show. But Rockford was genius. The casting, the direction, the writing. Still, the main question here is did the HC&McC production crew follow through on the premise, right? I think they did and here's why. The main point of having Hardcastle go after the bad guys who slipped through the cracks ran into trouble, as we all know, when it was pointed out that it could be illegal, viewed as harassment, invasion of privacy, all kinds of stuff. They had to make real sure the bad guys were _currently_ involved in something they could be nailed for, not just past activities that had gone by the boards. They did pretty well in those constraints, I think, although there was a little too much coincidence.

However, the real point of the judge's character was that he wanted to "get the bad guys". Most people finding themselves involved in a white slave trade (Stranglehold) or recording fraud (Pennies) would turn it over to the cops. But Hardcastle does it himself, dragging McCormick right along with him. And they stay consistent to that part of the judge's character all the way through. Real life doesn't hand most of us so many chances to hunt down criminals, but then we're not career legalists.

Two more points before this post gets really long (whoops, too late!). There were several episodes that had the guys working with the cops and from the judge's files -- "Rio" comes to mind immediately, as does "Killer B's" and "Black Widow". After the first season, though, I think the writers felt they had to establish more of the characters and relationship, so veered away from the "here's the next file, kiddo; read fast and get your car keys" stuff. Also, even when the encounter with the criminals seemed coincidental, there was always more info about them in the judge's files and from his contacts in the force. I do think they ought to have cut the narration after the first half of the first season, but maybe the honchos liked it. I think it was a waste of time when we could've been listening to some give-and-take with Hardcastle and McCormick.

There. That's my 1 and 1/2 cents.

[theyankeeclipper]

Interesting points Owlcroft, and I see what you're saying.

I always thought "Drive" was out of place by mid-Season 2, and especially Season 3. Not only was the narration pointless to the direction of the series by that point, but "Back To Back" was much more fitting and suited to the series' current state.

Other than maybe "Faster Hearts", the show was no longer about the Coyote and Mark's racing days. The show had become about two friends hunting down injustice, and "Drive" just didn't make much sense anymore.

[blk95ta]

owlcroft said:

Well, I never watched the "A-Team" because I saw the adverts and it seemed to me that the network was pushing it as a kind of cartoonish, let's-blow-things-up-but-with-a-sense-of-humor show. But Rockford was genius. The casting, the direction, the writing. Still, the main question here is did the HC&McC production crew follow through on the premise, right? I think they did and here's why. The main point of having Hardcastle go after the bad guys who slipped through the cracks ran into trouble, as we all know, when it was pointed out that it could be illegal, viewed as harassment, invasion of privacy, all kinds of stuff. They had to make real sure the bad guys were _currently_ involved in something they could be nailed for, not just past activities that had gone by the boards. They did pretty well in those constraints, I think, although there was a little too much coincidence.

However, the real point of the judge's character was that he wanted to "get the bad guys". Most people finding themselves involved in a white slave trade (Stranglehold) or recording fraud (Pennies) would turn it over to the cops. But Hardcastle does it himself, dragging McCormick right along with him. And they stay consistent to that part of the judge's character all the way through. Real life doesn't hand most of us so many chances to hunt down criminals, but then we're not career legalists.

Two more points before this post gets really long (whoops, too late!). There were several episodes that had the guys working with the cops and from the judge's files -- "Rio" comes to mind immediately, as does "Killer B's" and "Black Widow". After the first season, though, I think the writers felt they had to establish more of the characters and relationship, so veered away from the "here's the next file, kiddo; read fast and get your car keys" stuff. Also, even when the encounter with the criminals seemed coincidental, there was always more info about them in the judge's files and from his contacts in the force. I do think they ought to have cut the narration after the first half of the first season, but maybe the honchos liked it. I think it was a waste of time when we could've been listening to some give-and-take with Hardcastle and McCormick.

There. That's my 1 and 1/2 cents.

not sure if its true or not but i heard somewhere that the ACLU was all over H&M during the beginning of season 1 about the "200 cases" and how them going after the people acquitted amounted to double jeopardy and then they only went after them for current crimes, which is why the series shifted away from the 200 cases thing....

not sure if its true or not but i read it somewhere

[theyankeeclipper]

Then they totally missed the point. Hardcase was talking about dirt bags who got off on technicalities, and go after them for current crimes, from the very beginning. The '200 cases' simply represented which criminals he was speaking of.

[owlcroft]

Actually, they did have a slight problem with the ACLU after the pilot and before the show aired in September. After that they made it plain that the guys tackled criminals who were actually engaging in illegal activities at the time, and that they were not being chased down for the crimes they got off on those famous technicalities. That would have been double jeopardy and the judge could've been prosecuted for harassment and invasion of privacy if nothing else. It wasn't a big deal. They just had to emphasize that the baddies in the files were continuing their crimes and that the technicalities gave him an extra incentive to bring them in.