Dramatic attorneys

July 2, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Today's post was written by Managing Editor Elizabeth Brockett. 

In her opening remarks, the deputy prosecutor told the jury that real trials are nothing like what people see on TV or in the movie theaters.

“Oh yes it was! It was exactly like it!” laughed my friend as he told me about his experience serving on a jury.

He said that prosecutor especially was oh-so dramatic in her presentation and arguments. I can’t even remember what he said the case was about because I was so struck by his impression that has stayed with me for several years. As a former police and court reporter, I’ve covered murder and other criminal trials and a few civil trials. Rarely are they as dramatic as they seem on the screen, although I can think of two trials I covered that were … perhaps that’s another blog.

Yes, we’ve talked with some of our readers who say lay people get a bad impression about lawyers and judges from TV shows and movies. But not all of those characters are buffoons or greedy, unethical cads. On the good end of the scale of legal characters, most people would mention Gregory Peck as Atticus Finch in “To Kill a Mockingbird” or Denzel Washington’s Joe Miller in “Philadelphia.” Or Albert Finney’s Ed Masry in “Erin Brockovich.” I admit I don’t watch a lot of TV so I can’t recall at the moment any “good” lawyers on TV shows or in recent movies. But back to my friend’s experience … let’s recall some of the worst legal characters – lawyers and judges – in TV and movies.

In recent years, consider the attorneys of “Boston Legal” – bad attorneys or just overly zealous and quirky? How about Jim Carrey’s character in “Liar, Liar.” Richard Gere’s Billy Flynn in “Chicago.” Although I haven’t watched it, Glenn Close’s Patty Hewes in “Damages” is a supposedly revered litigator … one that also is being investigated by the FBI.

What about Paul Newman’s alcoholic Frank Galvin in “The Verdict.” Sean Penn’s Dave Kleinfeld, a drug-addicted lawyer in “Carlito’s Way.” Of course there’s always Joe Pesci’s Vincent Gambini in “My Cousin Vinny.” The partners at Tom Hank’s law firm in “Philadelphia” beginning with Jason Robard’s character. There of course are the likeable ones who do bad things, like Robert Duvall’s Tom Hagen in “The Godfather” movies. There are more than I could even name here … there are research papers, and maybe even books, on this topic!

So, while you’re standing around the grill with your favorite beverage in hand or while you’re waiting for the fireworks to start, start the conversation, “Hey, who’s the worst lawyer ever on TV or in the movies?”
ADVERTISEMENT
  • Who could be worse than Al Pacino\'s John Milton in The Devils\' Advocate?
  • Tom Cruise\'s closing argument in the midst of crossing Jack Nicholson in A Few Good Men is always amusing.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. The ADA acts as a tax upon all for the benefit of a few. And, most importantly, the many have no individual say in whether they pay the tax. Those with handicaps suffered in military service should get a pass, but those who are handicapped by accident or birth do NOT deserve that pass. The drivel about "equal access" is spurious because the handicapped HAVE equal access, they just can't effectively use it. That is their problem, not society's. The burden to remediate should be that of those who seek the benefit of some social, constructional, or dimensional change, NOT society generally. Everybody wants to socialize the costs and concentrate the benefits of government intrusion so that they benefit and largely avoid the costs. This simply maintains the constant push to the slop trough, and explains, in part, why the nation is 20 trillion dollars in the hole.

  2. Hey 2 psychs is never enough, since it is statistically unlikely that three will ever agree on anything! New study admits this pseudo science is about as scientifically valid as astrology ... done by via fortune cookie ....John Ioannidis, professor of health research and policy at Stanford University, said the study was impressive and that its results had been eagerly awaited by the scientific community. “Sadly, the picture it paints - a 64% failure rate even among papers published in the best journals in the field - is not very nice about the current status of psychological science in general, and for fields like social psychology it is just devastating,” he said. http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/aug/27/study-delivers-bleak-verdict-on-validity-of-psychology-experiment-results

  3. Indianapolis Bar Association President John Trimble and I are on the same page, but it is a very large page with plenty of room for others to join us. As my final Res Gestae article will express in more detail in a few days, the Great Recession hastened a fundamental and permanent sea change for the global legal service profession. Every state bar is facing the same existential questions that thrust the medical profession into national healthcare reform debates. The bench, bar, and law schools must comprehensively reconsider how we define the practice of law and what it means to access justice. If the three principals of the legal service profession do not recast the vision of their roles and responsibilities soon, the marketplace will dictate those roles and responsibilities without regard for the public interests that the legal profession professes to serve.

  4. I have met some highly placed bureaucrats who vehemently disagree, Mr. Smith. This is not your father's time in America. Some ideas are just too politically incorrect too allow spoken, says those who watch over us for the good of their concept of order.

  5. Lets talk about this without forgetting that Lawyers, too, have FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND ASSOCIATION

ADVERTISEMENT