TiVo Community Forums Archives - Practice

TiVoCommunity.com
(c)opyright 1995-2005 All rights reserved
indexcheckTC
This area is a static history of posts in the TiVo Community Forum Archive.
This archive history was made for the simple indexing of search sites like Google.

Pages:1

Practice - 3/07 *Possible Spoilers*
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: Nightfall

Wow! Incredible ending to the three part storyline. Next week there will be another new episode where Alan and Eugene clash. I just hope Alan doesn't get fired off the show. He is the entire reason why I have enjoyed it so much.

Posted by: Peter000

Shore: "You hate Godless whores, and you're a fan of vengeance."
Witness: "I am a Christian, dear."

I'm in the process of watching it now... what a fantastic character Alan Shore is.

Posted by: Rob Helmerichs

quote:
Originally posted by Nightfall
Wow! Incredible ending to the three part storyline. Next week there will be another new episode where Alan and Eugene clash. I just hope Alan doesn't get fired off the show. He is the entire reason why I have enjoyed it so much.

I doubt it, since he's the lead...and he hasn't been around long enough to drain the budget like the last lead did!

Posted by: GoodN

Didn't the first episode of this story arc start with the Patrick Dempsey character walking in to find the body with a shocked look on his face? It looked like he was discovering the murder scene, and not like he was getting ready to make a getaway. Did anyone else feel cheated?

And I read that ABC is trying to work with David E. Kelly to create a spin-off to replace "The Practice" featuring the Alan Shore character.

Posted by: ADG

As I recall, it opened with him looking down at the body. Don't remember a "shocked" look on his face, more one of sadness. But it was a month ago so I wouldn't swear to it ;)

Posted by: c3po33

Alan has made this show fun again. That was a great 3 part episode.
Betty White needs here own show again, she's great!

Posted by: daperlman

This type of ending seems to be their ace in hole.

Formula for the practice:

Spoiler Alert! (highlight to read)
Trial spans over multiple episodes, so viewer learns to believe in... even to like the defendant and pull for his/her acquittal. Practice lawyer(s) become obsessed with exonerating the defendant in their pursuit of justice. Then in the last few minutes of getting the guy or gal off... they realize they have been tricked... manipulated by the defendant or a defense witness. Thus they've just unleashed a murderer into the street.

The frequency of this sort of thing just makes me wonder if we are supposed to eventually come to the conclusion that these attorney's have terrible judgment. One thing is for sure, I sure as heck saw it coming.

Posted by: TampaThunder

quote:
Originally posted by GoodN
Didn't the first episode of this story arc start with the Patrick Dempsey character walking in to find the body with a shocked look on his face? It looked like he was discovering the murder scene, and not like he was getting ready to make a getaway. Did anyone else feel cheated?

It actually opens with us hearing someone in the bathroom being sick. Then Patrick Dempsey comes out and looks at the body with an expression that could have been shock, panic, etc.

Posted by: ybrew

quote:
Originally posted by daperlman
This type of ending seems to be their ace in hole.

Formula for the practice:

Spoiler Alert! (highlight to read)
Trial spans over multiple episodes, so viewer learns to believe in... even to like the defendant and pull for his/her acquittal. Practice lawyer(s) become obsessed with exonerating the defendant in their pursuit of justice. Then in the last few minutes of getting the guy or gal off... they realize they have been tricked... manipulated by the defendant or a defense witness. Thus they've just unleashed a murderer into the street.

The frequency of this sort of thing just makes me wonder if we are supposed to eventually come to the conclusion that these attorney's have terrible judgment. One thing is for sure, I sure as heck saw it coming.

Not me.

I was duped.

What I was expecting...

A guilty verdict, then the announcer comes on the screen and says Jessica Tate did not kill Billy Campbell, but one of these people did (oops, not jessica tate, but you get the idea!), then they'd show pics of the guy's mom, his wife, his lunatic neighbor, the priest, and throw a black butler in the mix for good neighbor (or a wacky gay guy).

It just had that whole "feel" to it. I was sure this was directed by Susan Harris.

Posted by: daperlman

quote:
Originally posted by ybrew
Not me.

I was duped.

What I was expecting...

A guilty verdict, then the announcer comes on the screen and says Jessica Tate did not kill Billy Campbell, but one of these people did (oops, not jessica tate, but you get the idea!), then they'd show pics of the guy's mom, his wife, his lunatic neighbor, the priest, and throw a black butler in the mix for good neighbor (or a wacky gay guy).

It just had that whole "feel" to it. I was sure this was directed by Susan Harris.

I actually thought that he'd be found not guilty and then the Priest would admit to having evidence that he committed the murder.

Posted by: Rcrew

Interesting ybrew. I've been a huge fan of Soap since watching it in prime time. I try never to miss the soap marathons when they run. But I didn't get any connection to that at all.

daperlman, sorry you were disappointed, so far you seem to be the only one. Although I see the similarities you outline, watching the show unfold, I didn't get that. Because of my viewing experience, I would have to say that it was a well crafted tale that was very intriguing, and took us all, well most of us, down the path they intended.

Now that this show has revived, sorry to say, if someone has to go, I hope it's Eugene.

Posted by: daperlman

quote:
Originally posted by Rcrew
daperlman, sorry you were disappointed, so far you seem to be the only one. Although I see the similarities you outline, watching the show unfold, I didn't get that. Because of my viewing experience, I would have to say that it was a well crafted tale that was very intriguing, and took us all, well most of us, down the path they intended.

Well I started watching 2 seasons b/f this one. The 'twist' was always after the not guilty verdict they'd get 'the call' which let them know their defendant they freed just finished what he'd started by killing witnesses or finishing off a victim or in one case gunning down a DA. This happened almost every episode.

Back to last night's episode... I don't think I have ever seen that effeminate prosecutor dude before. Something about the way he spoke just bothered me like nails on a chalkboard.

Posted by: DancnDude

I agree - they usually have the twist where in the end the guy gets off and it is revealed that he did it. Or he's found guilty and it is determined that someone else did it or he was taking the blame for someone else. But that doesn't make the show any less enjoyable for me. The twists are still surprising even if I know something is coming, so that's all that really matters.

Posted by: harvscar

quote:
Originally posted by daperlman

Back to last night's episode... I don't think I have ever seen that effeminate prosecutor dude before. Something about the way he spoke just bothered me like nails on a chalkboard.

I kept expecting him to flash the "W" sign with his fingers, roll his eyes and say, "What-ever!" He was extremely annoying and distracting. I am soo glad that Jimmy was brought in from Boston as second chair, his line of dialogue added a lot to this episode. While I love what Spader has done with the show, I do miss the ensemble feel of seasons past.

Posted by: omnibus

quote:
Originally posted by daperlman
I don't think I have ever seen that effeminate prosecutor dude before. Something about the way he spoke just bothered me like nails on a chalkboard.

He's Rick Hoffman. He effectively played a prosecutor in the too short lived series "Philly" playing opposite Kim Delaney an NYPD blue alumnus .
http://ia.imdb.com/media/imdb/01/I/70/05/53m.jpg

Posted by: Rcrew

I feel like he's been on the Practice for a while.

In retrospect, he did a pretty weak cross examination on the defense wittinesses in general. Perhaps it's too bad that for a 3 part episode the actual trial was only part of on ep. They could have done a lot more with it. But since the writers wanted an innocent verdict, guess they had to short change the prosecution somewhere.

Don't get me wrong, I liked the show. Just in reviewing it after the fact, one area that's a bit weak is the cross exams of the Paul and Veronica.

Posted by: ybrew

quote:
Originally posted by harvscar
I am soo glad that Jimmy was brought in from Boston as second chair, his line of dialogue added a lot to this episode. While I love what Spader has done with the show, I do miss the ensemble feel of seasons past.

almost forgot Jimmy was in it.

What was his line? The prosecutor was convincing?

Shame.

Posted by: smak

Why do they need a spinoff, this seems like it's already a spinoff with some cameos from the Practice regulars.

Don't get me wrong, the show is much better than it has been the last few years, Spader is fantastic in the roll, and the writing for him is great.

I don't think i've ever seen a new character on the show dominate it so much. It seemed like the producers realized it early on, and it's more and more Shore.

-smak-

Posted by: Peter000

I'm tired of the "Oops! We got the killer off" ending as well. But they pulled it off admirably.

I like Eugene, and I hope they keep him around. They're underutilizing Jimmy as well, in favor of Shore. They need to explore Shore's relationship with the rest of the firm as well... which hopefully will happen in the next few episodes. That's where the show really shines.

Posted by: Rob Helmerichs

quote:
Originally posted by smak
Why do they need a spinoff, this seems like it's already a spinoff with some cameos from the Practice regulars.

Don't get me wrong, the show is much better than it has been the last few years, Spader is fantastic in the roll, and the writing for him is great.

I don't think i've ever seen a new character on the show dominate it so much. It seemed like the producers realized it early on, and it's more and more Shore.

I disagree completely--I think on the whole the character has been criminally underused (the last three episodes being an exception). There have been far too many episodes this season focusing on the "old school" characters, where Alan just smirks and cracks a joke once in a while. For most of the season, he's been less of a presence than Bobby (whom he replaced in the cast, if not in the firm) was.

Posted by: Crrink

quote:
Originally posted by Rcrew
....snip....

Now that this show has revived, sorry to say, if someone has to go, I hope it's Eugene.

Whoa! No way, if someone has to go for some reason, it's Eleanor first and Jamie second. They add the least to the show, IMO.

Eugene is a major Bad-a**, and it's too bad that it's been a long, long time since they've let him shine. The series could explore some really interesting territory if they were to play Eugene and Alan off against each other in a substantive way - Eugene is principled and tough as nails, Alan is willing to do whatever it takes, and also tough as nails. Both men would choose very different paths to reach the same outcome.
I'd love to watch an episode in which the two are united by their cause, but separated by their methods.

Then again, maybe it's just me ;)
But Eleanor stinks - that much I'm certain of!:D

Posted by: Rcrew

I don't disagree with you Crrink, but it seems like the decision that one of them was going to go was made during this 3 part episode. Don't remember if it was the 1st or 2nd, but Eugene said to Eleanor when this is over, he goes. IIRC.

I suppose with Alan facing having gotten a guilty man free, he could come around some, and reconcile with Eugene. Possible, likely ??

As for Eleanor leaving, she's friends with Alan. I think it's more likely they would go off together.

Posted by: tomr

Does anyone believe that Spader was supposed to take over as the lead in practice or did it just evolve. I wonder how far out they shoot/write each episode. They obviously brought in Sharon Stone at the beginning to keep viewers tuned after such a massive character change.

It seems to me that Spader has the lead from the beginning. Maybe 1-2 episodes didn't feature him.

Posted by: pwsteele

It seems that the majority of posters here actually *liked* the ending. I felt totally ripped off! This kind of "Oops, oh he really IS guilty" has been done far too many times and this one wasted three episodes to come up with something completely unoriginal. They even duped the audience with that first scene where it looked like he had found the dead body. The Alan Shore character has been great this season but the conclusion of this trial was a joke.

Posted by: lew

quote:
Originally posted by tomr
Does anyone believe that Spader was supposed to take over as the lead in practice or did it just evolve. I wonder how far out they shoot/write each episode. They obviously brought in Sharon Stone at the beginning to keep viewers tuned after such a massive character change.

It seems to me that Spader has the lead from the beginning. Maybe 1-2 episodes didn't feature him.

Bobby was originally supposed to come back for 4 episodes. I read that Spader did so well they killed the idea.

Posted by: tomr

Well, he had to be guilty or innocent when you only have two choices there is not a lot to be done afterwords. Shock the audience showing he got off, Someone else confesses send him to jail, etc.

All trials have only two results guilty or not. What they do after may be somewhat anti-climatic.

Posted by: tomr

quote:
Originally posted by lew
Bobby was originally supposed to come back for 4 episodes. I read that Spader did so well they killed the idea.

I remember that now. With Spader gaining such popularity maybe there should be a cross-over with Stargate SG1 :D It needs the help!

Posted by: Rob Helmerichs

quote:
Originally posted by tomr
Does anyone believe that Spader was supposed to take over as the lead in practice or did it just evolve.

Yes, he was specifically hired to replace Dylan McDermott.

Posted by: tomr

quote:
Originally posted by Medieval Guy
Yes, he was specifically hired to replace Dylan McDermott.

The Actor or the character. I know they hired Spader to replace McDermott. But I don't think did they intended for Alan to replace Bobby as the lead.

Posted by: Rob Helmerichs

quote:
Originally posted by tomr
The Actor or the character. I know they hired Spader to replace McDermott. But I don't think did they intended for Alan to replace Bobby as the lead.

They intended Spader to replace McDermott as the lead. Obviously, Alan did not replace Bobby as head of the firm...

Posted by: TiVoPony

Also felt cheated by the ending...it does feel like the lawyers get duped every other episode.

In this case it was very surprising and yet disappointing. It was Alan's friend. And the other 'plan B' suspects seemed much more feasible than in the past. It didn't feel like they were grasping straws as much to create doubt. I wouldn't have been surprised at all if Betty White or the mom actually had done it.

They did a great job developing characters and creating doubt...only to fall back to form. :(

But I am glad that the show is still around to have this discussion. :)

Alan Shore is a great character. I don't know if he'd work in a spinoff though. A lot of the fun is watching Alan shake up what had become a very stale cast/situation. :)

Pony

Posted by: fmowry

You all knew who it was right when they were sitting in the treehouse, drinking the beer, right? At that point I looked to my wife and said, "Guess what Alan finds in the treehouse?".

Frank

Posted by: Rcrew

Absolutely right Frank! I believe I had it just before Alan starts to look for the marryjane.

Come on you guys, this was a very good 3 part episode. Alan jumping Jimmy. BW really slamming Jamie with the 'oral whore', Veronica dumping Elenore, then taking on Tara.

I thoroughly enjoyed all 3 episodes. The coming battle between Alan and Eugene has plenty of potential.

I'm saying again though, Alan's first criminal trial, for his childhood, and best friend, ending the way it did could impact his legal attitudes, and affect a reconciliation with Eugene.

Posted by: sherylking

In one of the early episodes, they mentioned a tree house with a hiding place. Dead givaway! And since the murder weapon was not found, that was the only place it could be. Thus Paul had to be guilty. You just have to pay attention!

Posted by: tgr131

Yeah,

Wonder why the prosecutor and the police didn't think to go to the treehouse.

Just for the record -- I loved the story arc, but felt gypped by the ending.

Posted by: scooterboy

Did they mention a treehouse with a hiding place, or a treehouse as a hiding place? I don't remember, but there's a big difference.

The police may have visited the treehouse - the hiding place was nailed shut when Alan went to it. The police may have just thought the nailed wood was part of the structure, not the cover to a hole.

Posted by: Rcrew

quote:
Originally posted by scooterboy
The police may have just thought the nailed wood was part of the structure, not the cover to a hole.

Agreed, but Alan does say the nail looks new. So is that new to him, or just new looking. Either way you could make a case for sloppy investigation.

Posted by: sherylking

The way I remember it was Alan was remembering about the tree house, and it was he who mentioned that the tree house had a hiding place. I don't think the police ever said anything about either the tree house or its hiding place. But Alan should have thought to look in it!

Posted by: HTH

quote:
Originally posted by ybrew
almost forgot Jimmy was in it.

What was his line? The prosecutor was convincing?

Shame.

And that Alan's closing was good.

And on whether a jury not looking at the defendant meant a conviction, "Yes," contradicting Alan.

Posted by: Rcrew

quote:
Originally posted by sherylking
But Alan should have thought to look in it!

It's not Alan's job to try and find evidence to convict his client.

Paul openly admitted that he went out to his tree house the night of the murder. It should have occurred to the police to do a thorough search. We know they went to the house and picked up several other hammers. The police were desperate for some physical evidence. Their bad...

As for the final scene, Alan says something about smoking some pot together, and that he'd hidden some away years ago. When he moves things around to get to the hiding spot, he discovers a board covering it, with a new looking nail.

Posted by: Idearat

Put my down on the side that the twist was too much the Practice formula. I expected a twist ( I'd wished it was Betty White that did it ), but the "oops, guilty instead of not guilty" wasn't as good as I've seen the show be.

I was expecting the twist in the treehouse, but what caught my eye was that Patrick Dempsey was wearing leather gloves. For a brief moment I pictured him going after Alan.

Posted by: Rcrew

Lets go back to the 3rd episode, 3/7, for just a bit.

Because I've made some copies recently, I've had occasion to re-watch this ep.

Even the 3rd time through, I was captivated by the court room dialog. Alan shredded the detective, and destroyed Betty White. Paul did well, and got in a couple of big points under his cross. Alan's revelation with Veronica on the stand was a heart stopper, and her cross was non-existent.

Finally, the closings weren't even close Alan was tip top, while the prosecutor virtually flailed about.

I sitting here wondering why anyone who went through the trial was ever even remotely concerned the jury wasn't going to come up with a not guilty verdict!

I have only one minor disappointment, with as good as all that was, I wish they hadn't spent so much time on the flash backs to the previous two episodes, and had done more in the court room!

Posted by: DreadPirateRob

quote:
Originally posted by Rcrew
As for the final scene, Alan says something about smoking some pot together, and that he'd hidden some away years ago. When he moves things around to get to the hiding spot, he discovers a board covering it, with a new looking nail.

I'm sure the police looked at the treehouse - it was part of the timeline that Paul testified about. Remember - both Alan and Paul implied that there were *numerous* hiding spots in the treehouse. Maybe that was the best one.

And I don't believe that Alan said it was a "new-looking nail". I seem to recall him (from finally watching it last night) looking at it, Paul commenting that the nail looked old, and then Alan looking up and realizing that Paul was relatively far away and that the nail was in the dark, and that Paul hadn't even attempted to come over and look at the nail - and it dawned on him that Paul knew about it.

If Paul was smart - and it appeared he was - he would have used an old nail when covering his tracks.