"Mayans M.C." Rata/Ch'o (TV Episode 2018) Poster

(TV Series)

(2018)

User Reviews

Review this title
3 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
The Aftermath of Sheer Devastation
Dan1863Sickles11 December 2019
The previous episode of MAYANS features some of the most shocking violence you will ever see on television. And it's only natural that this episode mostly deals with the aftermath. Nevertheless, it's a classic in its own right. Tough biker, (and Iraq War vet) Johnny "Coco" Cruz has a speech that lasts for a good five minutes where he literally explains the entire meaning of life to Club Prospect Ezekiel "EZ" Reyes. And he does it while sitting over the corpse of his own murdered mother. This should be a joke on so many levels, but the writers nailed the dialogue and the guy who plays Coco completely sells it as hard-won wisdom instead of cheap serial-killer rationalizations. If only the episode could have ended there!

Unfortunately, the weakest character in all of Season One, Super Duper Secret Agent Lincoln Potter, hogs up most of the rest of the episode. This Ray McKinnon guy is a terrible actor -- it's like's channeling a smarmy, precious Donald Sutherland trying to play a corrupt bureaucrat who thinks he's Oscar Wilde. Sooo many witticisms that just fall flat. And the WASP mannerisms that are so broad and so patronizing. At one point Danny Pino, as Galindo the tough drug lord, literally looks at him and says, "yes, uh, that's very profound. Could we move on now?" And it doesn't feel like the character is annoyed, it's the actor showing annoyance with the other guy's mannered performance.

But still . . . that speech about the meaning of life. Coco for President!!
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A few minutes of very good dialog...
silverton-3795928 July 2023
Warning: Spoilers
The monologue by Richard Cabrlal as Coco is the best writing in this series so far, IMO. Cabral is a talented actor who usually just gets to play a minor role as a gang member or a bystander, but in this role, he shows what he can do. That talk that he gave EZ about what's real and what is just noise in life was pretty profound, and Cabral did it up exactly right, although the talk was made over the body of his mother who he had killed.

Ray McKinnon's character is pretty insufferable, even if he is seeming to lean toward burning another insufferable character, Bowen. McKinnon is pretty well typecast as a lunatic in a position of authority. He has that lunatic look about him with his disconnected eyes, so that character is believable, but his role, as written, is so far over the top that it's cringeworthy.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Episode casts shame on set's legal advisors, inaccurate and unrealistic
warthogcc13 September 2019
Warning: Spoilers
Emily gets arrested for failing to report her child's abduction when she is discussing it with the federal agent. Okay, so let me briefly explain the law and you can see how laughable this is, and why the writer should have been tarred and feathered. Just a little common sense would tell you how ridiculous this whole scenario that unfolded, is. It just doesn't make any sense why the kid would be taken away yet a 3rd time!

There are 2 sets of laws in existence here, both with completely separate definitions and jurisdictions. Child Abduction laws and Kidnapping laws.

"Failure to report a Child Abduction" is what the initial DEA Agent accused her of and arrested her for. Child Abduction laws are State controlled, not Federal. A DEA Agent (Federal) has no jurisdiction with State law.

Also, this law applies to the parents. When the parents are estranged, separated, or divorced, and one parent takes the child from the other. This law does not apply in any way to a 3rd party taking the child from parents/legal guardians that are currently together. Miguel and Emily have obviously been together throughout this ordeal.

"Failure to report a Kidnapping" is later what Lincoln Potter called it. This IS under Federal jurisdiction, but it requires "active concealment" for it to be a violation. Meaning, they have to purposely be trying to hide the truth of what happened from the authorities. Merely failing to report the incident, by itself, is not a crime.

When the DEA agent was trying to sympathize with Emily about the incident, Emily had no issues or concerns sharing her feelings with the agent. Sure that may be deemed an acknowledgement of what happened. But this is essentially "active REVEALment", the opposite of concealment. If Emily purposely stayed silent and avoided the conversation or lied about what happened, then that is concealment. But that is exactly the reverse of what happened.

Now, can you charge a parent, currently in custody of the child after the child was recovered/rescued, with failing to report the incident, and separate them once again? (This is the ridiculous part.) Um, no.

The "Failing to Report" portion of Federal Kidnapping law specifically applies to person to whom it is their duty to report such crimes in the first place, such as government officials, federal agents, municipal officers, etc. Meaning, if a police officer, social worker, or other public servant failed to report the taking of a person against their will, then they can be charged with "failing to report". Because it is their very job to report in the first place.

Technically by the letter of the law, the DEA agent who initiated this, as well as the other agents ordered to take the child, can actually be charged with kidnapping themselves. Because the case of "failing to report" cannot be, in good conscious, legislatively backed. Violating their duty, this momentarily relieves them of their police powers, leaving them legally unprotected by their own actions. Therefore the actual charge of kidnapping can be brought upon them.

I mean this whole thing really is a farce. It would be similar to charging someone with Failure to Report a Fire. And the Fireman's immediate response to this is to put the person back into the fire and let them burn until things get worked out.
5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed