3pipeproblem (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
3pipeproblem) wrote2008-04-22 10:03 pm
3pipeproblem) wrote2008-04-22 10:03 pm
Entry tags:
(no subject)
Warning: tl;dr. And probably squee-harshing. For the record, I really did enjoy last week's ep, and the ep the week before.
Last year, I saw a case argued before the Supreme Court as part of my Constitutional Law and Free Enterprise class. We were originally going to see an employment discrimination case (because it, well, had something to do with free enterprise), but it was dismissed or settled or something, so we ended up watching oral arguments for Panetti v. Quarterman, a death penalty case. Basically, the Panetti understood that he'd committed a crime. He understood, moreover, that he was going to be executed, but he couldn't make the connection between the two--he thought he was going to be killed for preaching the gospel. Our professor distributed some background materials (ahahaha, which we passed around in the van on the way there), and it was pretty clear to me that the guy was mental ill. I don't remember much of it, but I do recall that in his original trial, he represented himself and tried to call JFK and the pope as witnesses.
But, compelling as that fact was, it was mentioned only in passing, because the Supreme Court's mandate is to decide constitutional law. A lot of time was spent arguing over whether the Court had jurisdiction at all.
I just...ugh. Yes, it's television. Yes, it's Boston Legal, and I can write off Denny making eyes at Ginsberg and so forth, but Alan would never have been able to get away with lecturing the members of the Supreme Court on their duty to the country, on their duty to society, on how children react to rape, on how many executions he's witnessed...it's simply not relevant. And he went uninterrupted for a good five minutes, which, unless he'd appalled everyone into silence, never would've happened. The members of the Court are extremely intelligent people. I don't necessarily admire Scalia, but the guy is really fucking smart. He would've torn Alan to pieces. After season after season of buffoonish judges, Boston Legal finally had a chance to showcase a compelling legal debate (not that that's what most viewers are interested in, but whatever), and instead Alan's self-righteousness trumped all.
I can understand Alan trying to personalize the case rather than argue the constitutional basis for it. That's who he is, and he didn't have a lot of time to prepare, and he was nervous. But to then be--unanimously--applauded for it? To be called noble and a credit to the profession? He lost the case, as far as I'm concerned. A man's life was in the balance and rather than do everything in his power to save him, Alan decided to go on an ethical tear before the Supreme Court.
It's exactly the opposite of what Alan Shore would've done on The Practice.
The Clarence Thomas bit was good, though. And Denny was adorable throughout.
Last year, I saw a case argued before the Supreme Court as part of my Constitutional Law and Free Enterprise class. We were originally going to see an employment discrimination case (because it, well, had something to do with free enterprise), but it was dismissed or settled or something, so we ended up watching oral arguments for Panetti v. Quarterman, a death penalty case. Basically, the Panetti understood that he'd committed a crime. He understood, moreover, that he was going to be executed, but he couldn't make the connection between the two--he thought he was going to be killed for preaching the gospel. Our professor distributed some background materials (ahahaha, which we passed around in the van on the way there), and it was pretty clear to me that the guy was mental ill. I don't remember much of it, but I do recall that in his original trial, he represented himself and tried to call JFK and the pope as witnesses.
But, compelling as that fact was, it was mentioned only in passing, because the Supreme Court's mandate is to decide constitutional law. A lot of time was spent arguing over whether the Court had jurisdiction at all.
I just...ugh. Yes, it's television. Yes, it's Boston Legal, and I can write off Denny making eyes at Ginsberg and so forth, but Alan would never have been able to get away with lecturing the members of the Supreme Court on their duty to the country, on their duty to society, on how children react to rape, on how many executions he's witnessed...it's simply not relevant. And he went uninterrupted for a good five minutes, which, unless he'd appalled everyone into silence, never would've happened. The members of the Court are extremely intelligent people. I don't necessarily admire Scalia, but the guy is really fucking smart. He would've torn Alan to pieces. After season after season of buffoonish judges, Boston Legal finally had a chance to showcase a compelling legal debate (not that that's what most viewers are interested in, but whatever), and instead Alan's self-righteousness trumped all.
I can understand Alan trying to personalize the case rather than argue the constitutional basis for it. That's who he is, and he didn't have a lot of time to prepare, and he was nervous. But to then be--unanimously--applauded for it? To be called noble and a credit to the profession? He lost the case, as far as I'm concerned. A man's life was in the balance and rather than do everything in his power to save him, Alan decided to go on an ethical tear before the Supreme Court.
It's exactly the opposite of what Alan Shore would've done on The Practice.
The Clarence Thomas bit was good, though. And Denny was adorable throughout.
no subject
Yeah, you're right--this was the pinnacle of something, which is maybe one of the reasons I'm so critical about it (and it makes me wonder whether DEK knows something we don't about the show's fate). What can Alan strive for professionally, now that he's bested the Supreme Court? Hahahaha, I really, really would've liked for him to lose, I think. (Because while he might've lost the case, he met with so much approbation that it might as well have been a win.) I've been watching some West Wing lately (they were selling entire seasons for $20 at Best Buy), which may also have something to do with my discontent. I mean, it's another show that takes place in liberal fantasyland, but the Republicans are portrayed as intelligent and as people. It would've been nice for Alan to have engaged with the members of the SC, rather than just railing at them.
too freaking lazy to resign in
and it makes me wonder whether DEK knows something we don't about the show's fate
I'm saying yes he does...but not in a negative way. I think he wants to have an endgame that fits with the quality of the show and if that means "quitting" before he's "fired". I believe that he is gearing up for next season to be the last. I believe he already has a good idea about next season's order and he's putting the pieces in place to play it out. At least I hope this is what's happening I know I've been out spoken about CJ's unceremonious cancellation....but that has nothing to do with the actual episodes and everything to do with Hollywood deal making. CJ was a true procedural with a few lingering arcs. BL is a arc driven show with a few procedural elements tossed in there. It and the audience deserve a proper ending.