Skeletal remains of a young boy missing for 30 years are found in an apartment building, and finding the killer may ride on Dr. Olivet's ability to uncover a possible witness' repressed memo... Read allSkeletal remains of a young boy missing for 30 years are found in an apartment building, and finding the killer may ride on Dr. Olivet's ability to uncover a possible witness' repressed memories of the incident.Skeletal remains of a young boy missing for 30 years are found in an apartment building, and finding the killer may ride on Dr. Olivet's ability to uncover a possible witness' repressed memories of the incident.
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaThis episode appears to be based on several cases/incidents:
- The 1990-1991 George Franklin case. In September 1969, Susan Nason disappeared from her hometown of Foster City, California. Her body, discovered outdoors a few months later, showed signs of a violent death, including a crushed skull and a smashed ring that seemed to indicate she was warding off a blow. A bloodstained rock was found nearby. Police never made an arrest for her murder. Twenty years later, during an hypnosis session in the early 1990s, Eileen Franklin claimed that she remembered repressed memories of being with Susan Nason and her father George on the day of the murder. Eileen said that she had watched her father rape and kill Susan and that he had threatened her, Eileen, too. Franklin was initially convicted of first-degree murder, but the conviction was overturned once the court learned that Eileen was hypnotized prior to recovering this memory and that Eileen's recollections matched erroneous newspaper accounts rather than the true series of events.
- The 1963-1968 Stanley Rice case. Rice was an American serial killer and child rapist who was responsible for sexually abusing numerous underage boys in Canada and the U.S. during the 1960s, of which he killed at least three. Tried and convicted for one murder committed in Florida, he was sentenced to life imprisonment and remained incarcerated until his death in 2007.
- The controversial recovered-memory therapy practice. Recovered-memory therapy (RMT) is a catch-all term for a controversial and scientifically discredited form of psychotherapy that critics say utilizes one or more unproven therapeutic techniques (such as psychoanalysis, hypnosis, journaling, past life regression, guided imagery, and the use of sodium amytal interviews) to purportedly help patients recall previously forgotten memories. Proponents of recovered memory therapy claim, contrary to evidence that traumatic memories can be buried in the subconscious and thereby affect current behavior, and that these memories can be recovered through the use of RMT techniques. RMT is not recommended by mainstream ethical and professional mental health associations.
- GoofsThe detectives are informed by their medical authority the skeleton is about 9 years old and a male. In fact, it's impossible to differentiate between boy or girl's skeleton until after they've gone through puberty and the pelvic structure has changed.
- ConnectionsReferences BUtterfield 8 (1960)
Featured review
Cold memories
At this early stage of 'Law and Order's' run, it was a truly riveting and high-quality show. To this day, it is still one of my most re-visited shows. But the Briscoe-Curtis onwards episodes are aired far more than the early seasons so it is easy to forget, or overlook, the early seasons, a shame because when this period was at its best, the episodes were quite brilliant. Even when the period was not quite on form, the weakest episodes were still very decent.
There was the odd pre-Season 6/7 episode that did leave me a little cold while still appreciating them. "In Memory Of" was one of them. Does that mean that it is a bad episode? No, not at all. In fact, much of "In Memory Of" is very well done and a lot works. A large part of me wished that the episode explored its difficult subject more and connected with emotionally more, for early 'Law and Order', it was slightly on the bland though still intriguing side.
"In Memory Of", as aforementioned, has a lot working in its favour. It is slickly photographed and doesn't make its small number of locations too claustrophobic. The music is only used when needed and and doesn't go too heavy on the melodramatic-sounding tone that some similar shows can do during revelation points. The theme tune, like all the 'Law and Order' franchise theme tunes, sticks in the head for a while.
Writing is thoughtful and is neither too simplistic or too complex, the viewer is treated with respect while not having jargon or such going over the head. The acting is very good, Paul Sorvino has settled well and his chemistry with Chris Noth continues to increasingly gel with each episode. Michael Moriarty makes the most of his juicy material and dominates all his scenes without it being too much of a one-man show. The episode did make me think, the moral dilemma intrigues, some interesting questions regarding repression are raised and yes it is a sad case.
Part of me did wish though that "In Memory Of" explored its difficult subject further, everything with the repressed childhood memories while intriguing somehow didn't feel followed all the way through and raised questions but not enough answers. Although the case is a sad one and not an easy watch, other episodes connected with me a lot more because they didn't play it as safe and wasn't as careful to not offend too much.
Did not know what to make of the denoument, which relies too heavily on one major plot point that would make or break the outcome of the case and treated it indifferently somewhat at the end. It is a complicated issue absolutely and it was good that it was not over-complicated by the writers but the ending felt almost too convenient and rushed through. Some of the pacing in the early parts could have had more momentum.
Concluding, well done but left me a little cold by the end. 7/10
There was the odd pre-Season 6/7 episode that did leave me a little cold while still appreciating them. "In Memory Of" was one of them. Does that mean that it is a bad episode? No, not at all. In fact, much of "In Memory Of" is very well done and a lot works. A large part of me wished that the episode explored its difficult subject more and connected with emotionally more, for early 'Law and Order', it was slightly on the bland though still intriguing side.
"In Memory Of", as aforementioned, has a lot working in its favour. It is slickly photographed and doesn't make its small number of locations too claustrophobic. The music is only used when needed and and doesn't go too heavy on the melodramatic-sounding tone that some similar shows can do during revelation points. The theme tune, like all the 'Law and Order' franchise theme tunes, sticks in the head for a while.
Writing is thoughtful and is neither too simplistic or too complex, the viewer is treated with respect while not having jargon or such going over the head. The acting is very good, Paul Sorvino has settled well and his chemistry with Chris Noth continues to increasingly gel with each episode. Michael Moriarty makes the most of his juicy material and dominates all his scenes without it being too much of a one-man show. The episode did make me think, the moral dilemma intrigues, some interesting questions regarding repression are raised and yes it is a sad case.
Part of me did wish though that "In Memory Of" explored its difficult subject further, everything with the repressed childhood memories while intriguing somehow didn't feel followed all the way through and raised questions but not enough answers. Although the case is a sad one and not an easy watch, other episodes connected with me a lot more because they didn't play it as safe and wasn't as careful to not offend too much.
Did not know what to make of the denoument, which relies too heavily on one major plot point that would make or break the outcome of the case and treated it indifferently somewhat at the end. It is a complicated issue absolutely and it was good that it was not over-complicated by the writers but the ending felt almost too convenient and rushed through. Some of the pacing in the early parts could have had more momentum.
Concluding, well done but left me a little cold by the end. 7/10
helpful•55
- TheLittleSongbird
- Mar 11, 2020
Details
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content