Observations of a Misfit: Boston Legal: The Rare Feast in a TV Fast

« The Narcissist as Beast - Part II | Main | Panning Copperfield »

April 18, 2007

Boston Legal: The Rare Feast in a TV Fast

Long-time readers of this blog may recall that I usually don’t watch television. (Since I have recklessly divulged a vast amount of personal information in the past four years, some of you probably know my shoe size and blood type, as well.) My television fast is not out of some affected snobbery, but rather my aversion to annoying banality and useless content that is often insulting to my sensibilities; I eschew mainstream media, especially television. I don’t even have a TV set within earshot these days, unlike during the Peterson case when I had Fox, Court TV or MSNBC on in the background religiously; instead, I rely on selected web sites for excerpts of news, commentary and the latest celebrity scandal. Thus, it may come as a surprise to some of you that I have watched every episode of "Boston Legal" on DVD or download since acquiring the first season back in late December.

"Boston Legal" is the best show to come out since M*A*S*H. It has all the ingredients of a perfect hour of entertainment: a compelling and varied framework (the ever-popular law firm), brilliant social commentary, a really talented ensemble cast, absurd but hilarious dialogue, unrealistic but riveting courtroom drama, and the most irresistible hook for me: James Spader. Yes, I’m a sucker for James Spader and have probably seen every movie in which he starred. Spader has even made delicious cameo appearances in my dreams. When Spader joined the cast of that lackluster, predictable show, "The Practice", predecessor of "Boston Legal", I tried, without much success, to reserve Sunday nights at 10 to watch.

With the availability of most popular television series on DVDs and downloads, I can watch blocks of episodes without commercials at my convenience, and if I’m interrupted (which is often the case), I can hit the “pause” button instead of missing a witty bit of dialogue or a climactic verdict from the jury. This is the best way to watch a show like "Boston Legal", because it is written like a serial. You can’t watch an episode in isolation or you miss most of the references and history of events. The only problem with this arrangement is when you run out of episodes, it can be a real letdown; you feel like a drug addict craving the next high. I eagerly await my next set of episodes from the current season to get my BL fix.

While I have always adored James Spader and admired Candace Bergen, I was never a big fan of William Shatner’s until now. His remarkable portrayal of the eccentric egomaniac, Denny Crane, fortunately eradicates his dubious distinction of being forever typecast as Captain James Kirk. Denny Crane is such an over the top, off the edge, wildly ridiculous caricature, it’s amazing that Shatner can pull it off with a straight face. I’d love to see the reels of outtakes where he (and everyone around) cracks up. Cut!!

Normally, I’m the only one in the group hopelessly lost during conversations about television shows like “American Idol,” “Survivor,” “Desperate Housewives,” “The Sopranos,” and pretty much you name it. Therefore, my enthusiastic recommendation of BL is that much more significant. I’m like that little kid, Mikey, on the Life Cereal commercial: let Loretta watch it! She doesn’t like anything! Hey, she’s watching it! She likes it!

I love this show. If they cancel it, I will surely cry.

Posted by lorelei on April 18, 2007 11:27 AM | Permalink

Comments

Stellar show. I've been hooked since the very beginning.

I'm surprised they didn't have a trial for Lincoln Meyer (David Dean Bottrell) after he murdered the Judge and kidnapped Shirley Schmidt. He was a hoot.

"I've been damaged!"

Posted by: Nadine | April 18, 2007 01:50 PM

BL is some of the best writing on prime time television.

I love Shatner's character and agree 100% on James Spader. I can't wait for the balcony scene each episode.

Posted by: CountryGal | April 18, 2007 02:22 PM

J & moi are certified addicts as well. We quickly savored seasons one and two and are now awaiting the netflip of season 3. It is on my waiting list. I am too impatient for commercials.

All of the characters are marvy, but Shatner and Spade are the stars.

Posted by: moi | April 18, 2007 02:58 PM

I love the courtroom scenes between Spader and that nutty Judge with the big glasses. It's hysterical.

Posted by: Nadine | April 18, 2007 03:02 PM

~sniff~

I feel left out. It's sports or History Channel during prime time at our house. I guess I could get it on DVD and play it on my computer.

It sound as if it might be worth the effort!

Posted by: vero | April 18, 2007 11:20 PM

It's worth it Vero and you'll be laughing so hard it will make those men jealous!

Posted by: moi | April 19, 2007 12:53 AM

http://www.allhatnocattle.net/64.jpg

Is this real? Very funny if actual.

Posted by: loretta | April 19, 2007 10:45 AM

And apologize they should!

Priceless.

Posted by: Nadine | April 19, 2007 01:02 PM

Snopes says it's photoshopped.

http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/weblog/comments/3813/

I still say Conneticut owes the nation an aplology.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 19, 2007 01:07 PM

That was me. My info went poof.

Posted by: Nadine | April 19, 2007 01:08 PM

About Vero's prime time situation: Two TV's in the house will solve that problem.

Posted by: Nadine | April 19, 2007 01:10 PM

RE: apologies. dotz, I think Geo HWB and Big Barbara are the ones who owe everybody an apology for even gibbon burf to that boy.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 20, 2007 12:26 AM

Two teebees we got. We need expanded cable in Boy's room. We have the digital in the living room, but Boy has no cable, meaning no ESPN in his room.

Posted by: vero | April 20, 2007 01:53 AM

So THREE teebees, then.

Boston Legal's on Broadcast.

Posted by: Nadine | April 20, 2007 12:18 PM

Cable in Boy's room will do it. My problem is that I don't want to go to another room to watch TV. I have my computer set up so that I can talk to Husband, watch TV and keep an eye on the washing machine, or dinner, at the same time. Suits.

Posted by: vero | April 21, 2007 10:13 AM

Cho's writings and actions reflect what he was being taught. It takes great literary balls for those sick, commy English profs to be "shocked" by Cho's writings and actions given the nature of his reading assignments. While we're in the process of cleaning up our gun acquisition laws by the mentally disturbed, perhaps we need to retool our English Departments across America.

Posted by: Captain Joe | April 22, 2007 09:24 AM

Great article on VT English Department professors and their books.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/04/was_cho_taught_to_hate.html

Posted by: Captain Joe | April 22, 2007 10:00 AM

I guess what I'm objecting to is the dearth of literature of redeeming social value on Cho's reading list. Whatever happened to the great books that used to be on the reading lists of college students that produced an adult populace worthy of the fruits of liberty. The last vestiges of Marxism and Nihilism live apparently within our educational system. I guess my generation of the Fifties is somewhat different from today's generation.

Posted by: Captain Joe | April 22, 2007 01:19 PM

Off topic, but on an upbeat note:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Peru's 'Mermaid' Walks On Her Own After Surgery

http://cbs13.com/health/health_story_111125326.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That story made my day. She can dance now!

Posted by: Nadine | April 22, 2007 03:26 PM

Cap'n, I have to weigh in on this one.

Is there actually any actual proof that any of that stuff in on an actual reading list, to be studied, dissected, and reassembled for the edification of our youth?

I was in Freshman English (20th Century Poetry, Prose, and Darma--three seperate classes) in 1967. Here's what I remember of our lists:

"Island." It was assumed we had already read "Brave New World" and "1984"
"A Separate Peace"
"Heart of Darkness"
"The Secret Sharer"
"A Passage to India"

"The Lovesong of J Alfred Prufrock"
"The Wasteland"

"Waiting for Godot"
"The Balcony"
"The Marat-Sade"
"The Caretakers"

I'm sure there was more that I have just forgotten.

It seemed to me, at the time, that the purpose of Freshman English was to shake us poor provincials out of our small-town complacency and make us look at the wider world.

Perhaps that is what is going on at VTech.

I rarely enjoy what are know as "good books," I have tried to read "Moby Dick" on three seperate occasions, and given up every time. I freely admit to being an intellectual lightweight.

I should point out that there is nothing listed in your link that I would just run right out and read, either.

What was on your list?

Posted by: vero | April 23, 2007 09:31 AM

There have always been, in every generation, required reading in college English classes that could be categorized as "subversive."

Blaming the Dept of English at any school for the behavior of an individual is absurd.

In fact, blaming "Academia" for anything is absurd.

All this generalizing and blaming is just stupid. People are nuts. They shoot people. End of story. Have a nice day.

Posted by: loretta | April 23, 2007 09:43 AM

I got an email from a yahoo group I joined, quoting a blogger who said that Cho was controlled by space aliens.

I unsubscribed from that group, pronto. I can't believe anyone would be seriously discussing that!

The only thing for which I would blame V-Tech is for admitting him with his almost non-existent skill with English. How could he get so far while writing so badly?

Posted by: vero | April 23, 2007 10:41 AM

You mentioned that you were a viewer of television during the Peterson trial, I have read your book and was wondering if you have written any others?

Posted by: Anonymous | April 23, 2007 11:23 AM

My readings in "Bull" at the US Naval Academy were somewhat more conservative but did include "Moby Dick" and several works by Shakespeare, Shelley and Keats, and Byron. I got a lousy 2.35 in that course.

Posted by: Captain Joe | April 23, 2007 06:53 PM

Shoot! We did Shelley, Keats, et al in high school. At least, far enough into them for me to know that I wanted to read more. We also did three Shakespeare's plays in depth. Since then, I've acted in two of Willie the Shake's efforts and teched on several more. Nothing like actually performing a play to help understand it.

But, "Moby" leaves me totally cold!

Posted by: vero | April 25, 2007 12:39 AM

Kucinich Introduces Impeachment Articles Against Cheney

CQ Transcripts Wire
Tuesday, April 24, 2007; 6:09 PM

REP. DENNIS J. KUCINICH, D-OHIO: Thank you very much for being here.
We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights; that, among these, are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the government; and, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it.

These words from the Declaration of Independence are instructive at this moment. Because not only whenever any form of government, but whenever any government official becomes destructive of the founding purposes, that official or those officials must be held accountable.

Because I believe the vice president's conduct of office has been destructive to the founding purposes of our nation. Today, I have introduced House Resolution 333, Articles of Impeachment Relating to Vice President Richard B. Cheney. I do so in defense of the rights of the American people to have a government that is honest and peaceful.

It became obvious to me that this vice president, who was a driving force for taking the United States into a war against Iraq under false pretenses, is once again rattling the sabers of war against Iran with the same intent to drive America into another war, again based on false pretenses.
Let me cite from the articles of impeachment that were introduced this afternoon, Article I, that Richard Cheney had purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and the Congress of the United States by fabricating a threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to justify the use of the United States armed forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security.

That despite all evidence to the contrary, the vice president actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and the Congress of the United States about an alleged threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.

That preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, the vice president was fully informed that no legitimate evidence existed of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The vice president pressured the intelligence community to change their findings to enable the deception of the citizens and the Congress of the United States.

That in this the vice president subverted the national security interests of the United States by setting the stage for the loss of more than 3,300 United States service members and the loss of 650,000 Iraqi citizens since the United States invasion; the loss of approximately $500 billion in war costs, which has increased our federal debt; the loss of military readiness within the United States armed services, through an overextension and lack of training and lack of equipment; and the loss of United States credibility in the world affairs and decades of likely blowback created by the invasion of Iraq.

That with respect to Article II, that Richard Cheney manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and the Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and Al Qaida in order to justify the use of United States armed forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security.
And that, despite all evidence to the contrary, the vice president actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and Al Qaida.

That preceding to the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, the vice president was fully informed that no credible evidence existed of a working relationship between Iraq and Al Qaida, a fact articulated in several official documents.
With respect to Article III, that in his conduct while vice president of the United States, Richard Cheney openly threatened aggression against the Republic of Iran, absent any real threat to the United States, and has done so with the United States's proven capability to carry out such threats, thus undermining the national security interests of the United States.

That despite no evidence that Iran has the intention or the capability of attacking the United States, and despite the turmoil created by the United States's invasion of Iraq, the vice president has openly threatened aggression against Iran.
Furthermore, I point out in the articles that Article VI of the United States Constitution states, and I quote, "This Constitution and the laws of the United States shall be made in pursuance thereof and all treaties made or which shall be made under the authority of the United States shall be the supreme law of the land. Any provision of an international treaty ratified by the United States becomes the law of the United States."

The United States is signatory to the U.N. Charter, a treaty among the nations of the world. Article II, Section 4 of the United Nations Charter states, and I quote, "All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations."

The articles conclude by pointing out that the vice president's deception upon the citizens and the Congress of the United States that enabled the failed United States invasion of Iraq forcibly altered the rules of diplomacy so that the vice president recent belligerent actions toward Iran are destabilizing and counterproductive to the national security of the United States of America.
These articles of impeachment are not brought forth lightly. I've carefully weighed the options available to members of Congress and found this path the path that is the most important to take.

The justifications used to lead our nation to war have unquestionably been disproved. Brave soldiers and innocent civilians have lost their lives in a war the United States should never have initiated. The weight of the lies used to lead us into war has grown heavier with each death. Now is the time for Congress to examine the actions that led us into this war, just as we must work to bring the troops home. This resolution is a very serious matter, and I will urge the Committee on Judiciary to investigate and carefully consider this resolution.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sheesh. It's about time. I've only written to him 4 times about impeachment. heh. At least he answers my letters -- AND he filed this.

Should be interesting.

Posted by: loretta | April 25, 2007 07:38 AM

From the "ImpeachBush" moevement:

On April 23, 2007 the Vermont State Senate voted in support of the impeachment of Bush and Cheney. One week earlier, elected officials in Vermont said the impeachment resolution didn’t stand a chance.

Then their offices were flooded with emails, faxes, and phone calls, and the tide turned.
Scores of cities around the country have witnessed impeachment resolutions carry in the City Council.

On April 28, impeachment actions will be taking place from New York City to San Francisco and every place in between.

Polls taken by Zogby have indicated that 52% of the American people support the impeachment of Bush if he lied to Congress about the reasons for going to war in Iraq.

The ImpeachBush.org movement has placed full page newspaper ads in the New York Times, San Francisco Chronicle, Boston Globe and many other newspapers. When President Bush speaks at the Coast Guard Graduation on May 23 in New London, Ct. there will be a large crowd of protesters calling for his impeachment. When Dick Cheney speaks three days later at the West Point Graduation Ceremony he will be met too by a big crowd calling for his impeachment along with that of President Bush.

Today as the rumblings for impeachment are starting to reverberate inside the House of Representatives, the only place where Articles for Impeachment can set the impeachment process into motion, Ramsey Clark issued the following statement.

Ramsey Clark's statement to the media
“We have seen that Congress can be moved. The Bush Administration is reeling from its own wrongdoing. The horror its war of aggression has wreaked on the people of Iraq and thousands of U.S. service members must trouble the sleep of every sentient American. The Surge is only adding to the death and destruction.

“All over the country supporters of impeachment are intensifying their efforts. Our focus must be on Congress, and the priorities of full troop withdrawal and the impeachment of President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other culpable officials within the Administration.
“In recent weeks, tens of thousands of people have sent letters or called their elected representatives in Congress. On the statewide and local level people have been demanding local officials take a stand. Large scale pro-Impeachment demonstrations took place on March 17 at the Pentagon and in more than 1,000 other protests marking the 4th anniversary of the start of the Iraq war.

“The crimes committed by President Bush and Vice President Cheney are numerous. The Bush Administration’s war of aggression, its assault on human dignity at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, demeaning the Geneva Conventions and Habeas Corpus, invading the privacy of any American it chooses, corrupting the rule of law in the Department of Justice and others.

“President Bush and Vice President Cheney should be held accountable as it is proscribed in the Constitution, Article II, Section 4: The President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States shall be removed from office or impeachment for and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
“The authors of the Constitution were serious about impeachment and intended that the carefully prescribed procedures and principles of impeachment written into the text be faithfully executed. We, the growing impeachment movement that is sweeping this country from one end to the other, will make the members of the House of Representatives become as serious and courageous about impeachment as the Founding Fathers were.”

Posted by: loretta | April 25, 2007 08:09 AM

I don't think it will ever happen. The Demonrat appointed CIA director said that the WMD in Iraq was a "slam dunk", remember? Bush/Cheney have a get out of jail card from the CIA.

Posted by: Captain Joe | April 25, 2007 05:56 PM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2064157,00.html

We are a Fascist State.

I've been telling you all this for months, but nobody listens to me. **sigh**

Posted by: loretta | April 26, 2007 11:08 AM

Might want to watch 60 Minutes on Sunday to see what Tenet has to say about the 'slam dunk' comment.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 27, 2007 01:31 PM

Van der sloot property being searched again. Sumpins up.

Posted by: Captain Joe | April 27, 2007 10:34 PM

I'm hoping to hear more on that, soon, Cap'n.

Posted by: vero | April 28, 2007 10:04 AM

Re; Loretta's comment above on facism.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fascist America, in 10 Easy Steps

By Naomi Wolf, Chelsea Green Publishing. Posted April 28, 2007.

There are some things common to every state that's made the transition to fascism. Author Naomi Wolf argues that all of them are present in America today.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/51150/

Posted by: Nadine | April 28, 2007 02:56 PM

When EF speaks, everyone listens. There you go.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 29, 2007 12:01 AM

Meet me on the balcony, or shame on you.

Posted by: dennycrane | April 29, 2007 12:02 AM

heads up:

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070428/NEWS04/704280331

Posted by: dennycrane | April 29, 2007 12:24 AM

What a ghoul. May he rot.

Posted by: Nadine | April 29, 2007 03:08 AM

http://www.scaredmonkeys.com/2007/04/29/van-der-sloot-residence-search-in-pictures-part-1/#comments

At the bottom of the comments, somebody on the scene in Aruba is saying that the area around the lighthuse is being searched (again). They've been upsetting Paulus van der Sloot by probing around in his yard (again). Investigators from Holland, apparently.

Joran wrote a book about it, can you imagine?

Posted by: vero | April 29, 2007 02:14 PM

Yes, I heard how terribly inconvenienced Joren's family has been. I'd say Natalee's Mother's inconvenience would trump theirs.

Joran seems to have gotten along with his life quite nicely under the circumstances. Meanwhile, Natalee's family has been destroyed.

Posted by: Nadine | April 30, 2007 01:24 PM

For all the digging and all the bags carried out of the Sloot residence I suspect that there's scarcely a soupçon of evidence of Natalee's presence left on the island. Gotta think we'll never know what happened to her.

Posted by: Captain Joe | April 30, 2007 09:37 PM

I have to agree with you, Captain Joe. I think it's too little too late. And what's up with the refridgerated truck on standby? What do they think they're going to find two years later that needs to be refridgerated?

Posted by: Nadine | April 30, 2007 11:17 PM

Shhh! I'm here. Greetings to you all.

Boston Legal is the biz!

Still have to catch up. Later....

Posted by: Mgt | May 2, 2007 07:21 AM

Greetings to all the usual suspects.

Hope you pop by soon. I'm eagerly awaiting news of this impeachment process.

Elections in Scotland look grim for the present Labour Party. I Alec Salmond get the vote, our troops will be out of Iraq and Scotland will separate from the UK. Not sure how I feel about the separation.

Posted by: Mgt | May 2, 2007 11:08 AM

Been missing you all. A quick "hi" to Cpt Joe and Nadine. I miss you.

Ciao!

Posted by: Mgt | May 2, 2007 12:12 PM

Shoot, I've missed you too, Mgt!

I hope both Bush and Cheney are impeached. They're both dangerous idiots.

Another great BL episode. Tea anyone?

Posted by: Nadine | May 2, 2007 01:14 PM

You mean you'd rather have President Pelosi?????

Posted by: Captain Joe | May 2, 2007 09:52 PM

Mgt, does Scotland really want to be separate from Britain, or just from Tony blair?

Posted by: vero | May 3, 2007 12:25 AM

Morning, all!

I'm not really sure who wants to be separated and why. My personal belief is that Alec Salmond would rather be part of Europe and keep all the profits from our North Sea Oil.

He wants our troop, home!

Reading between the lines, that is.

Oh, how I hope this lasts (being able to comment).

Posted by: Mgt | May 3, 2007 03:31 AM

Your really make me smile Ctp Joe....this thing you have with Bush.

Nadine is right. Being a dangerous idiot is worse than being the village idiot, especially when you are running the country.

A good rule to remember before going to war; know your enemy.

Posted by: Mgt | May 3, 2007 03:35 AM

Loretta, I heard the phrase "Stone Cold Guilty" used in an episode of "Shark".

Heh, I wonder how many scriptwriters have read your book?

Hi, to all the Misfits!

Posted by: Mgt | May 3, 2007 07:22 AM