free counter with statistics "The Good Wife" Review | Pajiba - Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People

the-good-wife.jpg
Objection Overruled. But You're on a Short Leash*


"The Good Wife" / Dustin Rowles

TV Reviews | September 23, 2009 | Comments (16)


We get down on the proliferation of cop procedurals and legal shows on network television around here, which is as it should be. There are too many of them, and few of them are worth the effort of picking up the remote. But if you take a gander at the Fall 2009 television season, you might notice something surprising: There are six medical shows (not including “Scrubs,” which returns at mid-season), 17 shows that involve some sort of law enforcement figure, and only two shows that take place largely in a courtroom. One of those is “Law and Order,” which nobody watches anymore, except in syndication (hence, its spot on Friday nights), and the other is a show that most people probably didn’t even realize was a legal drama until they tuned in last night: CBS’s “The Good Wife.”

I, for one, like to have a decent legal drama on the schedule somewhere — they’re televised comfort food. Granted, I do prefer legal shows of the David E. Kelley variety or at least those that deftly combine humor, pathos, and moral outrage (“Boston Legal” will be sorely missed), but for those who need their courtroom fix, you could do a lot worse than “The Good Wife.”

If you’re familiar at all with CBS’s pervasive television campaigns for “The Good Wife,” you’ll probably feel a little mislead if you watch the show. It looks like a nighttime soap that revolves around a politician’s wife (Julianna Margulies) dealing the aftermath of her husband’s very public, very embarrassing affair with a prostitute, as well as the scandal that surrounds his abuse of office charges. However, that aspect of “The Good Wife” is introduced and, mostly, disposed of within the first minute of the pilot. In the opening scene, Julianna Margulies, who plays Alicia Florrick, is shown standing next to her husband during a press conference in which he admits the affair and asks for forgiveness.

Cut to six months later, and Alicia has just started a new job at a corporate law firm as a junior associate, where she’s been assigned to pro bono cases (because, of course she has: There’s no dramatic element to corporate law). She hasn’t practiced in 15 years, and it turns out, in fact, that she’s competing with another junior associate (“Gilmore Girls’” Matt Czuchry) for the position. Christine Baranski plays her bitchy, uppity mentor at the firm (has anyone ever seen Christine Baranski, Jessica Walter, and Susan Sullivan in the same room? No, of course you haven’t. They’re the same person), and Josh Charles plays her boss, Will Gardner. Back in the old days, Will and Alicia were young colleagues together (and Josh Charles, the primary reason I decided to watch “The Good Wife,” is damn near as boyish as he was back in Dead Poets Society. If I were of a certain persuasion, I’d eat that man up with a spoon.).

The rub, here, is that Alcia is coming into the position with a lot of baggage. In addition to being a much older junior associate, she not only has to deal with her embarrassing public image as a stand-by-your-man pol’s wife (who is now in prison), everyone in her field seems to hate her husband (who was attorney general), not least of which is the slimy District Attorney, who leaked the sex tape that resulted in her husband’s (Chris Noth, in a guest role) downfall. Add to that being a mom, living with her husband’s mother, and raising two teenagers coping with their father’s infidelities at high school, and you’ve got a decently compelling premise with a modicum of staying power.

“The Good Wife,” comes from executive producers, Ridley and Tony Scott, and the pilot episode shows it. It doesn’t have their frenzied editing styles, but it’s certainly glossy. It’s also a straight-up, heavily scored and humorless legal drama. The first case — about an ex-wife accused of killing her husband — also turns on evidentiary matters, instead of legal ones, as I suspect most of the show’s cases will. It’s a shame, too, because cases that revolve around evidentiary matters aren’t that much different than police procedurals (it’s all about finding the real killer, and not about using the law to get the suspects off, a far more interesting and difficult storyline).

Still and all, it’s a well-made, competently-written courtroom drama that’s excellently acted and features a strong cast of television veterans. It’s not exactly must-see television, but it may be the best thing on on a weak Tuesday slate of programs.


(*apologies for the lame headline. It was just too appropriate to pass up).


The Next Catchphrase You're Going to Love Before You Hate | Andrew Niccol Directs Stephenie Meyers' The Host



Comments

"(and Josh Charles, the primary reason I decided to watch “The Good Wife,” is damn near as boyish as he was back in Dead Poets Society. If I were of a certain persuasion, I’d eat that man up with a spoon.)..."

-------------------------------------

DUDE!...dude.

*shakes head*

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at September 23, 2009 5:14 PM

Christine Baranski, Jessica Walter, and Susan Sullivan are not the same person. If you are an actress of a certain age, there are basically two kinds of roles available to you: sweet grandmotherly types and wacky,kooky grandmother types with varying amounts of bitch thrown in. Jessica Walter gets the really bitchy roles. Christine Baranski mostly gets the bitchy divorcee with no kids/grandkids roles. Susan Sullivan has range; she can play really bitchy (Dharma and Greg) or almost not bitchy at all (Castle).

Posted by: Three-nineteen at September 23, 2009 5:16 PM

Some care to explain the headline joke to me?

Posted by: Doric at September 23, 2009 5:17 PM

I agree that the promos are misleading. I was interested in the scandal aspect of the show, only to see that the concept is completely dropped in the first 5 minutes. I only saw about 15 minutes of The Good Wife, but I'll try to tune in for the replay. But if ends up being another generic legal drama, then I'll pass. The Practice was the only legal show that had me hooked.

Posted by: Brie at September 23, 2009 5:17 PM

And when did Juliana morph into Famke Janssen?

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at September 23, 2009 5:18 PM

God, TV sucks... more and more, every year. People... go outside!!!! roll in the motherfuckin' grass.

does barbadoslim have a blog? if so, i'd like to read that. He/She/?/It makes me laugh.

Posted by: Todd at September 23, 2009 5:24 PM

Three-nineteen, that reminded me of a quote from Goldie Hawn in the First Wives Club: "There are only 3 ages for women in Hollywood: Babe, District Attorney, and Driving Miss Daisy."

And it's still true.

Posted by: Brie at September 23, 2009 5:24 PM

Oh, for a moment I thought this was a remake of the British miniseries "The Politian's Wife" where Juliette Stephenson takes down her cheating hubby and ends up winning his cabinet post.

Posted by: BWeaves at September 23, 2009 6:01 PM

If there's one thing I like about Julianna Margulies, it's that she keeps fucking that chicken.

Posted by: Brittany at September 23, 2009 6:06 PM

The hell... Josh Charles is in this? If I knew that I probably would have caught it. He wasn't in any of the promos. I love a good legal drama, and the lack of E. Kelley this season is palpable.

But I find Julianna Margulies absolutely insufferable, so that might be a challenge.

Posted by: Cruise at September 23, 2009 6:30 PM

Eh, it was OK. I like J. Margulies. And the men are worth looking at... Josh Charles.... swoon...

The show is formulaic. It's actually a lot like "Judging Amy," except it doesn't have the excellent Tyne Daley to class it up. Oh well. Maybe it'll get better as it goes along.

Posted by: Slash at September 23, 2009 6:35 PM

i love Christine Baranski. granted, she is often type-cast as the rich cold-hearted bitch, but she's managed to escape this character enough times over the last few years to prove her talent as an actress and overall performer. she is a fabulous singer (fantastic as Mrs. Lovett in Sondheim's "Sweeney Todd), dancer ("Mamma Mia") and has perfect comedic timing (anyone that was lucky enough to see her in Boeing-Boeing on Broadway last year can attest to her deadpan hilarity).

anyway. i watched last night with baited breath praying that the pilot wouldn't fall into the predictable constrains of The Legal Drama, and i was pleasantly surprised. Chris Noth played a great sleaze-bag cheater that one still had an ounce of sympathy for.

and you're right, Boston Legal will be greatly missed.

Posted by: nnire at September 24, 2009 1:09 AM

My thoughts reading this review, in chronological order: Matt Czuchry? Yeah, I liked him on Gilmore Girls. Might be worth a watch.

Oh, and Christine Baranski? Huh, I really like her.

Wait, JOSH CHARLES is in this show? HE HAS A STEADY JOB AGAIN, PRAISE GODTOPUS! To the torrents!

(Hey, I live overseas. I am weak in the face of Josh Charles.)

Posted by: Sarah at September 24, 2009 7:49 AM

Thank you for reviewing this - I had no idea that it wasn't about the politician's life after the scandal (stupid promo monkesys), so I didn't bother to check it out. But Josh Charles on a weekly basis? Yes, please.

Posted by: PallasJay at September 24, 2009 8:46 AM

Slim,

I was thinking the exact same thing about both Rowles and Marguiles.

Since I wasn't a fan of Marguiles original looks I am in favor of the morph. Comment diversion: what other actor/actress could use a good morphing?

Posted by: ed newman at September 24, 2009 9:52 AM

Mickey Rourke needs to morph into 1984 Mickey Rourke and take the goddamn baseball glove off of his face already. And she does look spot on Famke in that picture. Or at least the love spawn of Famke and Sandy Bullock.

Posted by: John Denver's Wingman at September 24, 2009 10:35 AM





Post a comment

 (required)

 (required)


Preview of your comment: