Covering 1–21 January 2016
Legal shows are apparently back in vogue (or at least the true crime variety). Netflix’s Making a Murderer and soon-to-air American Crime Story: The People v OJ Simpson (not to be confused with the also airing American Crime—which is also worth a watch if you are a L&O: SVU fan) are examples of television shows riding the popularity of the genre. Also airing is a newcomer scripted financial crime drama Billions, which joins an already bloated schedule including The Grinder, The Good Wife, Law &Order: SVU, How To Get Away With Murder, and soon-to-be-returning Suits. Good news for the legal TV fan, but massive headaches for amateur television review columnists.
Rankings:
Making a Murderer: A
The Grinder: A
The Good Wife: B+
Billions: C
L&O: SVU: N/A—too much Order, not enough law
Spoilers for Making a Murderer, The Grinder, The Good Wife, and Billions below
Making a Murderer
Making a Murderer is the hit Netflix show that everyone is talking about. It centres around Steven Avery, who in his early twenties was convicted of an attempted rape but on DNA evidence is exonerated after spending eighteen years in prison. After his release, Avery then launches a civil suit against the County for his wrongful imprisonment. In a “you wouldn’t believe it, if it didn’t actually happen” in the midst of the civil suit, Avery is accused of the heinous murder of a young woman and is prosecuted by the same County he is suing. The series goes on to follow Avery and his nephew, Brendan, who gets implicated in the murder, and the Avery family through the trial with Avery maintaining his innocence all along the way.
A lot has already been written about this show and the subsequent doubt over the veracity of Avery’s conviction. The show presents a number of troubling state actions against Avery from compromised investigations, planted evidence, coerced confessions and questionable forensics. Perhaps more troubling is the treatment surrounding Brendan, particularly at the hand at his pre-trial lawyer. What is depicted is shocking and anger inducing. It is hard not to feel for the Avery family and what the show is clearly pointing to, multiple injustices. But that doesn’t mean I don’t have serious problems with the show.
From a television standpoint, the show is incredibly plodding; it really could have been half as long. Secondly, I feel the show has a muddled message. Is it trying to prove Avery innocent… well it never goes that far. Is it about the truth… well, no it is too deep in Avery’s corner. Is it about exposing the flaws of the system? Is it about indicting the sheriff’s department? While I think the show does a little of everything, it never goes deep enough or have enough conviction to go beyond subtle nods and yelling “j’accuse.”
Also, for a show ostensibly about unfairness against Avery, it is ironic that the show itself wasn’t necessarily fair. It never presents the State’s case against Avery in full, at least not the way the jury heard it. I can’t help but compare Making a Murderer to the podcast Serial and see a more honest and fair approach to telling a real-life story. It is too easy to dramatize true crime, too easy to vilify, to root for the underdog, and forget that humans are not so easily defined. So Making a Murderer gets a half-hearted recommendation; watch the first three episodes to see if it grips you and don’t feel bad if it doesn’t.
The Grinder
I was surprised to see this show return with a back half after the Winter break. Again, I will complain that the show underuses its premise and is really just an odd-couple sitcom. That said, The Grinder always had a penchant for going meta—both about television generally but also legal television specifically, and is where the series shines. Fortunately, the first two episodes of the new year are heavy on the meta, making it some of its better stuff. If you’re looking for light comedy, The Grinder is worth catching up on.
The Good Wife
OMG, Zack Florrick lives! Other than that huge bombshell, the show continues its middling quality ride through the seventh season. As usual there are some flashes of brilliance—smashed plates and Grace channeling her lawyering skills—but also some real clunky scenes—the Iowa Caucus count; the discrimination complaint. While the show always had some clunky, its getting to a point of more clunky than brilliant theses days.
The show appears aimless in its old age. While it is fun to see the characters exasperated by whatever wacky legal challenge is put before them, the tropes are getting tired and the twist less creative. The writers too often dip into misunderstanding ink well; usually Alicia thinking she’s being backstabbed or people thinking she’s backstabbing them, to create drama. The Good Wifeis still enjoyable but not quite what it used to be.
Billions
Billions is the new “legal drama” airing on Showtime. Paul Giamatti (recently seen as the Rhino in The Amazing Spiderman 2) plays heartless US Attorney Chuck Rhoades, who has a flawless record of prosecuting financial crime. Damien Lewis (of Homeland) plays hedge fund wizard and general rich guy Bobby “Axe” Axelrod who is half Mark Zuckerberg, half Steve Jobs in personality and for some reason talks with a mild-Donald Trump accent. The premise is these two titans clashing when Rhoades launches a criminal investigation against Axelrod for insider trading.
Here’s what I want this show to be: Game of Thrones’ Little finger vs. Varys, set in financial New York. Wouldn’t that be awesome show? That’s probably how they pitched this show. Unfortunately, Billions fails on execution. The tone of the show is erratic; I can’t tell if it’s being purposely cartoony with its atrocious dialogue and perplexing scenes or trying to say something serious about power and money. The potential of a battle of wits and money is intriguing, but both main characters are so unlikeable that I don’t particularly care who wins. Billions is not worth your time; do not watch.