Change Your Image
lalaw8
Reviews
Goliath (2016)
Cheesy shlock which is insulting to women, attorneys, and the intelligence of all humans
Watched the first episode and it was so horrifyingly bad, I could not watch another one. The show treats women as objects and is just generally insulting to women. For example, after a female attorney approaches Billy Bob Thornton's attorney character to refer a case to him because it's not in her area of expertise, he repeatedly complains that she talks to much. It's just a tired male trope to complain about women speaking, perhaps under the guise that women are just supposed to look pretty and be seen and not heard; and moreover it makes no sense in this instance, when all the woman did was describe the facts of the case and why she thought Thornton would be a good attorney to handle it. Not to mention that his character is an attorney himself who is divorced from a female attorney who is a partner in a law firm, so it's not like he's a professional wrestler who does not engage in conversation with other people and isn't aware of the concept of women practicing law.
In another example, Thornton's character takes has a former paralegal whose aid he enlists to work on the new case with him (which he takes from the "chatty" attorney mentioned above) who is now an actual prostitute! I am not making this up, this really happens in the show. There is no reason for this, other than for the writers to be sleazy and insult the audience's intelligence. It's beyond unrealistic and makes no sense for this young, beautiful, intelligent, experienced paralegal who is apparently not a crack addict to work as a prostitute. She also keeps trying to get Thornton to allow her to give him a blow job instead of working for him as a paralegal - makes no sense, it overlooks the fact that he's twice her age, and looks old, worn out, and unattractive, and it comes off as just a ridiculous male fantasy.
In yet another instance of being both insulting to women and all viewers' intelligence, Thornton meets with the "client" in the new case, the sister of a man killed in an industrial accident that may not have been an accident. Their meeting is at a bar where he hangs out all day; they have a drink and then have sex in his motel room which is next to the bar. It makes no sense, as nothing is shown developing between them - the writers overlook the general rule that women need a reason to have sex, while men just need a place to do it. It overlooks the fact that Thornton is 25 years older than the client and looks old, worn out, and unattractive. And oh yeah, she's his client, so he can't have sex with her due to the major ethical rule against it, violation of which would result in the loss of his license. Apparently the writers want us to see what a badass he is, or what a loser he is, that he's sunk so low he just drifts into this sex-with-client situation without thinking, but it does not seem at all believable. The guy's practiced law for 30 or 40 years, he knows full well you can't do that, and is not stupid or that incredibly careless.... Also, the deceased man's wife does not want to pursue the case, but the sister does. The show overlooks the fact that the wife is the only person who can legally sue for wrongful death, while the sister cannot. But in the show, Billy Bob takes the case and files a complaint, which is then taken seriously by the law firm representing the defendant company (which is the firm he founded). In real life, the firm would have the case dismissed very quickly due to the sister's "lack of standing" to file a suit.
Another thing that's unrealistic is that Thornton's former firm has a live camera feed into the courtroom where one of its associates is arguing at a hearing, for some run-of-the-mill case, with the live video being viewed by partners back at the office. There's no such thing in real life. TV cameras are sometimes allowed into a courtroom for high-profile cases, which happens very rarely, and only with the judge's permission. But there's no such thing as a private firm having it's own camera with an internet hookup in a courtroom. The purpose in the show seems to be to make the law firm look all-powerful, but it just comes off as the show being over-the-top silly and like it's trying to be a futuristic, sci fi show, but not at all pulling it off.
Everything about the show smacks of classic David E. Kelley nonsense: it's all unrealistic and misogynist for the purpose of shocking the audience, but comes off like a toddler repeating swear words he does not understand because he likes the attention. One classic ploy he used in his previous legal dramas was to have a new client come into the office with a case about to start trial, and the attorney takes the case and proceeds with the trial despite being totally unprepared for it. This is falsely-manufactured drama. Doing this in real life would be malpractice; instead, the attorney would request a continuance and take time to become familiar with the case before starting trial. Kelley also does not respect women, but sees them only as objects which are the property of men, and has them act in cartoonishly ridiculous ways to suit his porn-movie outlook on life.
In sum, watching "Goliath" made me feel gross and dirty, and not at all in a good way, just a nauseating way. I can only wonder what happened in Mr. Kelley's life to cause him to feel so insecure that he needs to denigrate women in all his shows to feel better about himself, and why he looks down on the legal profession so much, despite being an attorney himself.
Flaked (2016)
Why is this a show?
So many clichés in search of a plot! Alcoholics who go to AA meetings, constantly utter all the AA sayings, keep trying to fix other people, and struggle to avoid the constant temptation of the bottle. Middle aged loser men chasing after hot loser-ish women half their age, for the purpose of meaningless sex. And not a plot or story to be found. None of the characters are very likable either.
I watched the first episode, waiting for something to actually happen, yet nothing really did. The experience made me depressed and vaguely angry - why would anyone green light this show? Why would Netflix finance it? Is Netflix mad at me about something, and passive-aggressively trying to get even with me? Or did I somehow offend Will Arnett, and this is his way of getting back at me? I don't even know the guy. Or when he and Amy Poehler got divorced, did he lose custody of the couple's talent, without even weekend visitations? So many questions, so few answers.