Touch “1+1=3” Review March 23, 2012 Reviews, Touch ‘1+1=3’ is the second episode of Touch and it builds on the premise laid down in the pilot episode. Martin Bohn continues to follow the trail of numbers his son, Jake, leaves, although now he’s actively trying to help someone. Who? Even Martin doesn’t know at first, although the answer turns out to be fairly simple: it’s the man he was trying to help right from the start of the episode. The players this week were: an Indian man trying to find closure by spreading his father’s ashes at Yankee Stadium; a flight attendant looking for a lost dog; a teenage wannabe-magician with no friends; a violent moneylender; the desperate man trying to repay said moneylender; and a pawnbroker with cancer. Compared to the pilot episode, ‘1+1=3’ wasn’t as tight and the links didn’t seem as complex. This isn’t necessarily a criticism; the pilot episode was so good that I think it’ll be hard for the series to live up to it, especially on a weekly basis. Actually, after the pilot I was wondering just where this series can go, and I think this episode answered that question for me: unless a bigger overall plot comes into play, I’m not sure it has anywhere to go. With a little retooling, the pilot episode could have been a really good standalone movie. But I’m worried that after a few weeks of watching Martin run around like a headless chicken, while Jake (as adorable as he is) spouts numbers and hatches escape plans, the premise could wear thin. At least there’s a sign that some of the characters will be recurring — the two bubbly Japanese girls were back this week, cutting through New York on their way to LA. Presumably we’ll be seeing them again, possibly in relation to Kayla (the singer from the pilot). It’ll be interesting to see how that eventually ties back to Martin and Jake. Maybe the pawnbroker from this week will turn up again too; Martin promised to be his friend and if his tenaciousness this week is any indication, Martin isn’t one to renege on a promise. What did you think of ‘1+1=3’? Let us know in the comments below! Share this:Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window) Grnwltr Fox may be fortunate that it has substantial foreign commitments to run this show because from what I have seen there is nothing compelling about the series. It is a static premise with underdrawn characters (and a wasted Danny Glover), contrived situations and manipulative atmospherics. THe premise of a mute child may have seemed thought-provoking during the original pilot conference; however, it appears unsustainable on a weekly basis. Absent the international commitments, it is my belief that this series would be cancelled within a month. http://twitter.com/criticalmyth Critical Myth It all comes down to execution, and what came to mind while watching this episode is that the central conceit is actually a built-in excuse for the writers to be sloppy. It might seem difficult to make all these various plot threads come together in clever ways, until you realize that the very point of the story is that the threads aren’t supposed to intertwine in recognizably logical ways. It’s supposed to be out of left field. So the writers are actually able to do whatever the hell they want, because in the end, it’s just a matter of suggesting, in however flimsy a manner, that there was a hidden order to it all. Both the pilot and this episode came very close to feeling that way. Anonymous Hi there. Just a note to let you know that I’ve referenced this comment in my review for episode 1.03 ‘Safety in Numbers’.