Jim Belushi's new legal show "The Defenders" surprised me pleasantly. I watched the premiere yesterday, expecting a run-of-the-mill drama, and got something a little better than that. First of all, while the plot was average--a client shoots someone menacing his brother during a fist fight and decides to fight the charges rather than take a plea--everyone in the cast turns in a good acting job. In particular I like the character of Lisa Tyler (Jurnee Smollet) as the newly hired associate sent into battle without much in the way of instruction from her bosses, and I like Ms. Smollet's take on Lisa. She's bewildered and understandably annoyed, until Pete Kaczmarek (Jerry O'Donnell) explains that the firm, particularly name partner Nick Morelli (Jim Belushi) has confidence in her, and moreover, she has to get her feet wet, and all she has to do is enter a plea. "Not guilty. Got it?" Well, yes, although the kind of unstructured, fly by the seat of your pants training she's getting here is reminiscent of a legal aid office, not of a private firm. Is that what clients are paying for? I also like Ms. Smollet's confidence and air of competence in later scenes as she analyzes the murder case. She's obviously good; we know why Nick and Pete hired her, in spite of her lack of experience in the courtroom. Score one for the image of the competent, successful female African-American lawyer.
What I'm not so happy about is the quite obvious disdain that prosecutor Meredith Kramer (Natalie Zea) shows for Ms. Tyler, a former stripper, especially since Ms. Kramer is having an affair with Mr. Kaczmarek. Seriously? Bad attitude. Bad ethics, if they're on opposide sides of a case, which they are or will be. This sort of behavior is yet another example of the kind of thing that tv lawyers seem to indulge in all the time, and tv writers seem to think real lawyers do, and get away with. Some real lawyers do, but here's the thing. They get caught. Zap--for the image of the blonde female prosecutor--yet another member of the Popular Culture Bar Association.
Onward. Morelli fails in getting the judge to agree to a jury instruction on involuntary manslaughter. When the jury sends out a question which amounts to whether it can find his client guilty of just that charge, he "plays poker" with the judge, who becomes furious with him, fining him, again refusing the jury instruction. The jury ultimately acquits his client. Clever, but the audience can see the result coming a mile away. Is this ploy something a real attorney would engage in? Maybe. We do see Morelli and Kaczmarek discussing what is happening with their client, and presumably they discuss exactly what they plan to do in their conference with the judge with their client (although we don't see or hear the exact plan of action--that would be giving away the plot).
Ultimately, as I say, I like this show so far, and I'm eager to see what future episodes bring. Morelli and Kaczmarek have unveiled an enormous billboard to bring in more clients and we see some of them turn up in the waiting room. Let's see what kind of cases they've brought with them.
Recent Comments