Justice: 9/06/06 ***SPOILERS***

BriGuy20 · 09-06-2006, 09:32 PM

No thread on this show?

First: I REALLY REALLY hope I have a Series 3 by the time Lost starts again. Would love to be able to record both shows, but Lost would win if I had to pick one.

Second: All that lawyer money, and Victor Garber's character can't get a good hair dye?

Third: I hereby define shows of this type to be "glosscedurals", or glossy procedurals. Almost as pretty as CSI: Miami in HD.

Fourth: I was right to predict he threw the money at her (none of her fingerprints on the wallet, but the money was missing), but I bought the D.A.'s story that she got angry at him for breaking up with her. One out of two ain't bad.

Fifth: I think the "how it happened" at the end (along with the always-reliable Victor Garber) really makes the show.

Martha · 09-06-2006, 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BriGuy20

Fifth: I think the "how it happened" at the end (along with the always-reliable Victor Garber) really makes the show.

IMHO, that is the only thing making this show. I thought this week was less interesting than last week. The TV chick has the most annoying voice in the world and I cringe everytime she's on air.

I truly found myself watching to the end just to see how it actually happened.

P.S. Wasn't that girl Lily on Veronica Mars?

I know (hope) there are going to be so many shows on this fall that I want to watch, and I kind of find myself hoping this isn't the best there is. (Along with Vanished).

Rob Helmerichs · 09-06-2006, 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martha

P.S. Wasn't that girl Lily on Veronica Mars?

I knew I knew her from somewhere!

I just hope they don't all (or mostly) turn out to be innocent. That would taker a lot of the drama out of the show, especially considering that they always (or almost always) have to win.

JETarpon · 09-07-2006, 12:45 AM

HELP. Mine cut off right after "date younger men." CAn someone recap the what really happened bit?

And yeah, as soon as I saw her I said "That's Lily Caine!"

vertigo235 · 09-07-2006, 12:59 AM

Essitially it happened like she said in the end.

But he thew money off a table at her.

He went to attack her with a bottle and she held the knife up stabing him in the chest.

She made sure to get all the money off the floor before she left though, so she obviously wasn't too upset about it, but it was self defense.

BriGuy20 · 09-07-2006, 04:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martha

IMHO, that is the only thing making this show. I thought this week was less interesting than last week. The TV chick has the most annoying voice in the world and I cringe everytime she's on air.

My guess is she's modeled after Nancy Grace, and at least she's more palatable than Nancy (easier on the eyes, a bit less shrill). Nancy seems like the de facto model for these characters (I remember seeing one such character on CSI).

newsposter · 09-07-2006, 06:57 AM

i thought she was on invasion/threshold or some other type of show like that too?

i guess indeed the news program is a permanent part of this show...sigh...

I'm glad she had bruises to show for the camera..was getting worried none on the face as your typical male abuser usually does hit the face from what they show me on tv all the time. I noticed they really downplayed the jury selection this time. I'm glad. If they kept on focusing on the same stuff every week, would get mighty boring.

Amnesia · 09-07-2006, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by newsposter

i thought she was on invasion/threshold or some other type of show like that too?

She's also on Big Love...

busyba · 09-07-2006, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BriGuy20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martha

IMHO, that is the only thing making this show. I thought this week was less interesting than last week. The TV chick has the most annoying voice in the world and I cringe everytime she's on air.

My guess is she's modeled after Nancy Grace, and at least she's more palatable than Nancy (easier on the eyes, a bit less shrill). Nancy seems like the de facto model for these characters (I remember seeing one such character on CSI).

L&O:CI also had a Nancy-esque character on one of their episodes (the one with TNG's Chief O'Brien as a creepy judge).

If you don't like her voice, just thank your lucky stars they didnt' model the character after Rita Crosby.

Just thinking about her makes me want to have a lozenge....

newsposter · 09-07-2006, 12:02 PM

big love yes...just like invasion

Thanks for the memory jog

can't wait for that to go back on

AJRitz · 09-07-2006, 12:06 PM

I liked this one. I liked the way that they had to shift strategy, however subtly, on the fly. I liked seeing their weaknesses. And I liked that their "innocent" client really wasn't quite so innocent - just not guilty of the crime with which she was charged. Early on, when they showed her reaction to older men (and commented on it more than once) I was waiting for them to at least consider a "battered woman syndrome" defense. But that's MUCH harder to prove and requires very early notice to the prosecution of intent to proceed in that manner.

ebonovic · 09-07-2006, 03:30 PM

I do hope they keep the "model" for the show....

It is similar to L&O:CI in it's first season. (where they showed you the crime, and then you could see if they where going to figure it out).... but over the years, they blended it back to the original L&O model.

We liked it, I still need to track down the pilot as we didn't know it started last week till Thursday.

etemple · 09-07-2006, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amnesia

She's also on Big Love...

and was on love monkey as the pregnant sister

bpurcell · 09-07-2006, 06:50 PM

I think this is a very promising show. I did think the pilot was better than the second episode, though (more believable).

They did fix one thing that was a mistake in the pilot. When reading the verdict in California, the clerk ALWAYS reads the verdict. In the pilot, the jury foreman read the verdict, which would never happen in California (I know different states do this differently). I understand it was good for suspence, since he was the questionable juror, but it still took me out of the faux-reality of it. In the second episode, the clerk correctly read the the verdict (although technically it wasn't in the correct words, but that is extremely minor).

Overall, a good to very good show that is worth staying for a full season.

willbhome · 09-07-2006, 07:09 PM

What I don't understand is why some shows' directors seem to think the camera has to bounce around so much. To me, this makes a show unwatchable - I have difficulty following an otherwise good story while thinking how MUCH that pisses me off. This MTV-type camera work totally destroys the enjoyment for me, and is the reason I could not watch Homicide: Life on the Streets and Battlestar Galactica.
This is the second Season Pass I've already canceled this year for a Fox show; the other is Vanished, half-way through the pilot. This one made it past the opening credits, anyway.

Chapper1 · 09-07-2006, 07:15 PM

Another good outing in my mind. I will echo earlier sentiments that I liked seeing the case, warts and all. It was nice to see that they had a client who did it, but were able to defend her successfully. The twists in the case by the client not being forthcoming was great. Word of note to anyone in a similar situation: Tell your attorney everything that may be even remotely related!!! Let them figure out what is important and what isn't!

Jesda · 09-07-2006, 09:46 PM

I thought this was a LOT better than the first episode. I also like Amanda Seyfried.

Cearbhaill · 09-08-2006, 04:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willbhome

What I don't understand is why some shows' directors seem to think the camera has to bounce around so much. To me, this makes a show unwatchable - I have difficulty following an otherwise good story while thinking how MUCH that pisses me off. This MTV-type camera work totally destroys the enjoyment for me, and is the reason I could not watch Homicide: Life on the Streets and Battlestar Galactica.

It annoyed me too.
I get what they are trying to convey, but do it with pacing and story, not cameramen. It makes me feel seasick.

classicX · 09-08-2006, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cearbhaill

It annoyed me too.
I get what they are trying to convey, but do it with pacing and story, not cameramen. It makes me feel seasick.

I actually like the camera work, especially the special effects that they use for the end-story retelling. The effect is as it should be in this type of story - transparent. I didn't even realize that the camera was moving around like the Matrix until the scene was over.

Good episode, I actually liked this one better than the pilot, although the pilot had more memorable and funny lines (usually by Victor Garber).

"Is he going to crack? They crack sometimes, you know."

"Do you care if he guilty?"
"No, but you do. You're better when you believe they're innocent. Call it a fatal flaw."

I'm paraphrasing but it was hilarious to me. I'm actually saving the pilot to show my brother this weekend.

jacobp · 09-08-2006, 10:08 AM

I cannot stand shows where the writers believe the audience is too dumb to figure out the implications of what is happening on-screen. It seems that almost all of the dialogue is aimed to telling us the ramifications of the testimony or trial tactics. Just a little too condenscending for me. Season Pass removed.

ebonovic · 09-08-2006, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jacobp

I cannot stand shows where the writers believe the audience is too dumb to figure out the implications of what is happening on-screen. It seems that almost all of the dialogue is aimed to telling us the ramifications of the testimony or trial tactics. Just a little too condenscending for me. Season Pass removed.

I am no new ninny-on the block when it comes to some of these things...

But I found it very intresting when explained why X,Y,Z wouldn't work, and why they had to have A,B,C

Now.. If they do that EVERY episode, it might get a little tiresome, but being the 2nd episode, while we are still getting our feet wet with the style of the show, the characters....

newsposter · 09-08-2006, 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jacobp

I cannot stand shows where the writers believe the audience is too dumb to figure out the implications of what is happening on-screen. It seems that almost all of the dialogue is aimed to telling us the ramifications of the testimony or trial tactics. Just a little too condenscending for me. Season Pass removed.

watch the new million dollar show on bravo...the have pop up bubbles that tell you what an open house and what a broker is

willbhome · 09-09-2006, 12:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by classicX

I actually like the camera work, especially the special effects that they use for the end-story retelling. The effect is as it should be in this type of story - transparent. I didn't even realize that the camera was moving around like the Matrix until the scene was over.

When transparent, I can agree; I didn't notice the camera bouncing around so much in The Matrix. Perhaps it was so integral to the story-telling that it wasn't as noticeable there. In most TV shows, however, when it makes me nauseous and interferes with the story-telling, as I found it to do in this case and others I mentioned, it's hardly "transparent" - it's so opaque, I cannot see the story anymore. And refuse to try.

drew2k · 09-10-2006, 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vertigo235

Essitially it happened like she said in the end.

But he thew money off a table at her.

He went to attack her with a bottle and she held the knife up stabing him in the chest.

She made sure to get all the money off the floor before she left though, so she obviously wasn't too upset about it, but it was self defense.

I missed the pilot but caught this episode, and I think the "official" recap of the crime is a nice touch. This wasn't bad, so I've already set up a season pass, but I have a few questions:

Why didn't the girl tell the lawyers that Stein came at her with a bottle and was towering over her when she stabbed him with the knife? Did she truly not remember what happened?

According to the DA, Stein withdrew $10,000 from an ATM that evening. Most banks have ATM withdrawal limits, and I know you can request higher limits, but ... wouldn't $10,000 have cleaned out the ATM? (Not to mention throw up a red-flag to the bank and the IRS!)

Where did the girl hide the money after throwing the knife away and seeking out the lawyer? The female lawyer took her purse and obviously didn't find the money. It would have been nice to see a footnote about the money...

Finally, as I missed the pilot I'm curious: Is it standard practice for TNT&G to have a night receptionist page one of the partners after hours and for that partner to interview the potential client in the lobby? I chuckled at that, wondering if all the conference rooms were tied up at that hour!

KRS · 09-11-2006, 09:26 AM

I sort of liked the pilot, but the forced frantic pace and Victor Garber's constant barking at people got really annoying fast.

Needs less Bruckheimer.

classicX · 09-11-2006, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drew2k

Most banks have ATM withdrawal limits, and I know you can request higher limits, but ... wouldn't $10,000 have cleaned out the ATM? (Not to mention throw up a red-flag to the bank and the IRS!)

No. ATMs have surprisingly large amounts of money in them, which is why people try to rob them all the time.

As far as the IRS, taking $10,000 of your own money would not throw up a red flag. If you deposit more than $10,000 in cash or try to purchase something for $10K or more in cash, then you get the red flag.

jeff125va · 09-14-2006, 09:15 AM

I missed the pilot. I really liked this. A few things annoyed me, particularly the subtitles telling you what was going on. Especially since they had pretty much said it already. I hope they drop these. I loved seeing what had really happened at the end, I remember that from "The Jury" which I was really bummed that they cancelled.