(S04E05) "It's not everyday you encounter compelling characters, is it?" - Patrice Kelly
There's been a lot of talk about the rhetoric that Boston Legal has concerned itself with lately. It seems a lot of you have an opinion on the political views taken by the show. In an effort to "reach across the aisle" let me point out something that I'm sure we can all agree on...Boston Legal has some of the most original storylines on TV.
Personally, I am hard pressed to think of any show wherein a character asks one of the stars to advise her on how to be found "not guilty by reason of temporary insanity" before committing the murder. This episode had me on the edge of my seat from the very first scene.
For all Alan's protestations, he sure followed instructions when he got in the courtroom. It's refreshing to see Alan so passionate on a case where I am totally on his side. The temporary insanity defense is bull and has been ever since the Harvey Milk trial. I'll pause for a moment to allow some of you to Google.
Now correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Paul Dooley play a judge on Ally McBeal? I'm pretty sure he had a different name but this is the second time I have seen an actor from another DEK show in a different role. My feeling is that when you cross over your shows and their subsequent spinoffs, you have got to keep things straight.
As for the case, I have a hard time blaming the town for wanting sex offenders gone. The storyline reminds me of an episode of Picket Fences in which a similar plotline occurred. In the end, the new resident ended up killing himself (instead of being murdered) when even Douglas Wambaugh wouldn't take his case. I understand the point being made here, but as a parent, I prefer to err on the side of caution and if a few people have to be sent packing to keep all the children safe, so be it.
Thank heaven for Carl Sack. He was able to come up with the perfect solution by looking at the case with a non-biased point of view. In other words, being a good lawyer. Sack is quickly becoming my second favorite character on the show just for his awesome head of hair alone. If he and Denny go head-to-head and a toupee joke is made, Sack takes the top spot.
I'd like to comment on the scene between Alan and Lorraine, but unfortunately I fell asleep shortly after it started. I really have a hard time mustering up sympathy for a character like Alan, who spends a lot of time and energy bedding beautiful women and then suddenly tries to make it seem like some kind of pathological problem.
Aside from the Winningham storyline, which was wisely spread out over more than one episode, this particular offering was a disappointment. Maybe next week will be better. After all, hope springs a kernel!
The TV Squad Podcast: Vik Sahay of Chuck, Oprah talk, brutal timeslots, and more!
TV Squad Ten: Top Ten ESPN shows from worst to first
Andy Richter: The TV Squad Interview
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
10-31-2007 @ 10:09AM
Judy said...
I was thrilled with last night's episode. It had me glued to the screen every second. Welcome back to the OLD Boston Legal. My faith has been renewed if only for this episode. I'm sure next week it will be back to political comment as usual.
Reply
10-31-2007 @ 10:10AM
Oreo said...
It's satire, and I think this episode was handled well because it wasn't "left wing" or "right wing" views, it was something that everyone could be in favor of or against.
I thought when they added Carl Sack that the show would go to hell, but he's not over used, but is used perfectly.
But whatever happened to the cross dresser? I thought he was going to be a secondary charter this season.
Reply
10-31-2007 @ 10:12AM
shawn said...
the washington character wasn't a threat to children. so i don't see your point there.
if the person was a legally register molester of children, i could see your point.
and boston legal continues to prove to be one of the best shows on television with the most solid acting and writing across the board.
the cases and topics they bring up are relevant and interesting. and if they didn't have a liberal spin on it would be realistic. but i prefer it with their perspective. it's trying to have a message and meaning behind the action and the storylines. and there is nothing wrong with that. it's not just trying to be entertainment. it's food for thought as well.
Reply
10-31-2007 @ 10:12AM
shawn said...
and i wasn't disappointed at all :)
Reply
10-31-2007 @ 10:28AM
Dave said...
My only disappointment was that for whatever reason, my DVR failed to record it. It recorded last week's last-minute pre-emption (so I have 20/20 for no reason) but ABC must not have changed the description to reflect that the 10-30 show was really a new episode and not a repeat. At least that's what I figure. SOunds like I missed a good one.
Reply
10-31-2007 @ 11:19AM
Bob Jones said...
Well Washington was never a child molester ... he was for a time, a rapist but when that was over turned the town still didn't want him there and someone even killed him ... Child molestors? Hell yes, keep out ... Rapists? Perhaps. Innocent citizens? No.
It certainly seemed like the Picket Fences you mentioned, of course that go a whole lot more interesting when the molester in question turned out to be Judge Bone's son.
Reply
10-31-2007 @ 12:02PM
MIMI said...
We enjoyed the episode -- and totally disagree with any notion that it is alright to ostracize an INNOCENT* person just because it will make some other members of a community feel safer or more comfortable. This could easily serve as camouflage for outright class or racial discrimination.
*The fellow did not commit murder; and, as a teenager himself, had consensual sex with another teenager. A lot of male teenagers across the country would be banished from society, using your logic!
Reply
10-31-2007 @ 1:05PM
James said...
by far this was the best episode of the season. The only thing that would have made it perfect is if Bethany would have popped in.
Reply
11-01-2007 @ 4:45PM
Jason said...
Anyone know the song playing at the end? Why ABC doesn't simply list the music for each episode with the summary I'll never know....
Reply
11-02-2007 @ 2:23PM
rvermi said...
I'd like to find the name/singer of the song that played in Oct. 31st episode also.
Reply
11-03-2007 @ 2:29PM
Todd said...
The song at the end of the show was called "Walk With Me" by Other Desert Cities. It is a great new band out of Seattle. This could be the start of BIG things for them. Check out their full album on iTunes.
Reply
11-04-2007 @ 9:06AM
Barb said...
In the balcony scene at the end of the show, what was the saying, something to do about corn, that Denny butchered?
Reply
11-07-2007 @ 7:47AM
Jim said...
I missed last weeks show, which was to take place in Middleton MA if anyone taped it please let me know.
Thanks Jim
Reply
11-07-2007 @ 9:50AM
miriam said...
last night's episode was my last. it was blatantly anti-semitic. james spader rants in the courtroom and the script conveniently has no place to fit in an opposing viewpoint. i'm tired of it.
Reply
11-27-2007 @ 2:02PM
lj said...
"As for the case, I have a hard time blaming the town for wanting sex offenders gone." "I understand the point being made here, but as a parent, I prefer to err on the side of caution and if a few people have to be sent packing to keep all the children safe, so be it."
There comes a point where being a "concerned parent" opens the door for all kinds of discrimination. He wasn't a threat to children, and the conviction against him was vacated.
For anyone to watch this episode and to feel anything but compassion for this man and anger towards the way he was treated, shows a great flaw in character and a truly selfish nature.
You may prefer to "err on the side of caution", but I would much rather make myself aware of the facts, before condemning someone to a lifetime of hardship and prejudice.
Oh well, as long as the children are safe.
Reply