NBC's 'The Firm'

Tonight is the second episode, correct? Back to the regular schedule.

 

Sorry, but in golf terms, Jeannie beats Molly 8 and 6.

 

Thoughts on the second episode?

I'm still all in. I haven't watched a lawyer/cop show in a while, so I forget how they sometimes work, but the way the writers approached the case was sort of... dark. That's not what you usually see, right? I dunno. I'm not going to watch CSI or Law & Order to figure out if I'm right.

Two things that sort of bother me, and they tie together: 1) His wife is always "helping" him on cases, giving advice; isn't she a fifth-grade teacher? 2) Why does the group conduct like half of its case work in Mitch's home?

 

And her daughter is in her fifth-grade class?

 

6 body, 1 face.

 

Disagree. It's a sequel to the movie. Mitch (or someone) even commented in the pilot that the mob shouldn't have a reason to go after him. Remember, we haven't been told that it's the mob trying to kill him, only that Mitch and/or the FBI thinks that it's the mob trying to kill him. The big reveal (no spoiler, just speculation) will be that it is the sons of one of the lawyers at the firm that Mitch took down.
And the first episode post-pilot was awful. Grisham's books usually stay realistic to law/lawyers, about half of what Mitch did in this episdoe would have gotten him disbarred. On top of that, he was WAY too out in front of the cops on every single aspect of the investigation, not realistic.

 

I liked the show and will keep watching. The whole 10-years-after premise is a good one. But it's one of those shows where you have to suspend credulity to make it work. Doesn't bear up under close examination.

 

OK, I went back and watched the full pilot episode again on demand (I missed the first 45 minutes of the original broadcast).

The opening credits state, "based on the BOOK by John Grisham."

But as you also state, in the very early scenes, Mitch discusses the overbilling-scheme storyline, which was exclusive to the movie (did not happen in the book). So my guess is they are trying to have it both ways -- they will use story points from both book and movie as they deem more convenient.

After watching the pilot again, the timeline is a little more clear as well.

The original events of "The Firm" took place in 1992-93 (as did the movie).

After that, Mitch and Abby returned to Boston and lived reasonably normal lives for 7-8 years, thinking the Moroltos had no particular motive to rub them out.

"Ten years ago" from present day (the pilot episode of the TV series), that is, winter 2001-02, came the assassination attempt and Mitch and Abby (and Ray and Tammy) go into witness protection. In early 2011, Mitch decides he wants to come out of witness protection and the whole gang moves to D.C.


You know my guess of who's masterminding the behind-the-scenes maneuvering to get Mitch?



Well, what do you think I am, the fuckin' night watchman?

 

I watched it with Mrs. Proud. She loved it. I watched the pilot and fell asleep during the second. Think Lucas was a poor choice for the lead character and the secretary was also poorly casted. She tries waaaaay too hard to play that role. If it doesn't come across naturally, she's the wrong choice. As for Lucas, he tries to play the tough guy but just comes across as soft in his mannerisms and the way he talks. I like where they are going with the storyline, but characters are key for me, and the only ones I really liked and believed, of the main characters, are the private detective and female head of the firm.

 

Tricia Helfer playing the sexy villianess (not a word, don't care) is hot stuff.

Still can't wrap my brain around the foursome just hanging out in the kitchen every night discussing cases.

 

After 4 episodes, Tricia Helfer and Callum Keith Rennie are the best characters in the show. FYI, both were Cylons in Battlestar Galactica. You don't suppose that's who is after the McDeeres, do you?

 

Ha ha. It'd be hilarious if Lukas Reiter found a way to subtly nod at BSG.

Tricia Helfer is friggin hot, too.