The other day I saw someone comment on Believe Pt. 1, saying the episode should’ve been more focused on Zoë like Unbelievable was. I don’t really agree with that idea given that:
1) Nearly every moment of Believe ties directly into Zoë’s plot,
2) I’m a believer that an “outsider’s” POV doesn’t automatically make it less valuable than the primary character’s POV, and
3) Believe is on track to have more direct Zoë POV than Unbelievable, which spent most of its episode trying to piece together what actually happened to Zoë through Becky’s POV.
I don’t feel it’s absolutely necessary to spend 22 solid minutes swimming in the psyche of Zoë Rivas, especially with a story that has several moving parts. One of the major complaints you hear from fans about this show is a “lack of depth” and a tendency to spend time developing only a few characters. Well here we are, watching a storyline that involves the perspective of many characters who are now dealing with their own personal issues because of this one character’s situation. Is it more important to simply hone in on one character’s struggle, or effectively display how someone’s situation can not only devastate them, but also create a ripple effect that impacts people around them?
To me, Becky Baker’s storyline in this episode carries just as much value as Zoë’s (No, I’m not comparing Zoë and Becky’s plot to determine “who has it worse;” it’s asinine to do so when both situations suck). Becky has been placed in a very crappy situation. She is perfect for this dilemma because, thanks to her strong values, I buy that she’s conflicted. Zoë’s dealing with a different struggle; she’s scared because it’s difficult to have faith in the judicial process when the other side is intentionally trying to trash your credibility, as if she deserved what happened to her.
Frankie and Keisha’s POV were tremendously important to show in a situation like this. They’re young and represent an ignorance about sexual assault that, unfortunately, some people carry even into adulthood. The hope for them is that they’re able to learn something through Zoë’s situation and not have to learn by going through it themselves.
We’ve had a week to digest what Drew said to Becky in the woods in Believe Pt. 1. If you take it at face value, it’s as if Drew endorses Becky defending her brother, but I’m now looking at it from a different angle. What Drew said about Adam is absolutely correct: Adam would never give up on him. But I have a hard time believing Adam would compromise his own integrity to protect Drew in a situation as serious as what Becky’s facing. By “not giving up” on Drew, Adam wouldn’t give up on the idea that Drew could be a good person, a guy who carries himself with pride and does the right thing. Ultimately, I think Adam would want Drew to grow by facing the consequences of his actions, and I want to believe Becky will feel the same way toward her brother Luke when she finally testifies.