I can't understand why the creators decided only on 1 season? Law and order svu is on its 20th season all other law and order shows are finished, so it was set up to have this show continue, maybe they might come back to it again in future, hopefully, its every bit as good a svu and all the other shows .
Add a Review
-
bowedeclan25 February 2019
-
cosmoaj1222 March 2017The character played by Carl Weathers almost completely ruins this show. Most of the other characters aren't any better. I had such high hopes for this show, since all the other Chicago series are fantastic, sad to see that Jon Seda moved to this Show. He deserves better than what they are bringing to this show so far.
-
jdonalds-511 November 2017I'm so sorry this show only ran for one season then was not renewed. It's interesting that the "Chicago" series was created and intertwines. I know Chicago Fire is popular but after watching many episodes I couldn't get interested in it. But here comes Chicago Justice that I really like... and it gets canceled.
I like the actors, the procedural component, the direction, and the courtroom scenes.
It makes perfect sense to tie this show together with Chicago P.D. I suppose it was canceled due to low viewer-ship. Too bad for me.
There are two things that could be changed to make this show better. 1) There is no character development beyond the job. My wife and I always look for the romance behind the scenes. We don't want it to be overwhelming or even more than perhaps 5-10% of the content, but we don't want it to be zero. 2) The story lines are good but they fall apart, almost always. The cases are won in court with inadequate evidence and incomplete development. This, of course, is the crux of the show but it fails.
In spite of #2 above I would have wished for the project to continue with better writers and direction. Not cancelled.
Perhaps the Chicago collective can return with Chicago Law or something similar. -
Phylum2214 April 2017This one however, while not being bad exactly, leaves me unengaged! My mind drifts, it just has no riveting content. I find myself missing chunks, but it does not matter. There is nothing to miss.
The shame is, I really was looking forward to it, but have been left wanting.
It's not so much the cast, although Monica Barbaro looks far to young and delicate to be in the position she is.
For me it's the story lines, they are quite honestly feeble. Big wins, were really simple word play, that most of us could manage. The writing quite honestly sucks!
This really could be the only Chicago to fail! -
Chicago Justice's first episode, as opposed to its premiere episode, was Act III of a story arc that involved Chicago Fire and Chicago PD with a significant but uncredited contribution from the cast of Chicago Med. This was a great ploy for creating an audience but the storyline left the cast a bit stranded. Hence, a great deal of Law and Order, the original series, style grandstanding. Chicago Justice feels like the newest colt out of the Wolf Films stable. Given the show has excellent bloodlines, the odds are in favor of self-contained episodes meeting the (L&O) family standard as characters become more defined and story lines are developed that are based on the personal and professional lives of the Chicago Justice cast. Setting a legal drama in The Second City worked for CBS with the Good Wife; here's hoping that with a little more elbow grease and artfulness the toddling town that is home to Second City and the Steppenwolf Theater Company can show the rest of America that not all of the nation's acting and writing talent lives in NYC or LA.
-
Chicago Justice was my favorite show until it was cancelled by NBC due to low ratings.
-
amichnea2 March 2017I have very recently watched Chicago Justice (only because it was introduced as part of the Chicago Fire S05E15/Chicago PD S04E16/Chicago Justice S01E01 episodes).
There aren't that many series that I can watch front to back and not get bored. We went through all episodes for Fire and PD and are up to date. Great series, plenty of action, clever plots.
I have seen a few people giving the Chicago series ratings of 1 star... no idea why. I am here just to state that you won't be disappointed if you watch them.
I do not watch Chicago Med as I am not into the medical drama series. I believe only one or two episodes crossed over from Fire and PD which I did watch.
Justice was great for us as it linked the story and characters we already know and love from Fire/PD. The crossover episodes makes these series great. The only other legal series we watch is HTGAWM which is a completely different thing. I have not watched the other US Legal series hence why we are not bored of the genre.
We'll see what the future brings but we will watch this new addition to the Chicago family. -
SnoopyStyle23 May 2017Dick Wolf expands his Chicago universe. Mark Jefferies (Carl Weathers) is the State's Attorney. Peter Stone (Philip Winchester) and Anna Valdez (Monica Barbaro) are ASA's. Antonio Dawson (Jon Seda) and Laura Nagel (Joelle Carter) are investigators for the office.
Wolf ties this in with his other Chicago shows but it's the least compelling of them. This is basically Law & Order redux. There is even a direct connection to the original show. If he's going to do that, he should have brought back one of the old actors to do a cameo. I'm not sure returning to the old standard adds anything compelling. It's the same old formula with even more impossibly-beautiful people and none of them are good rooting interest. I'm surprised that NBC canceled it but sometimes an overgrown plant needs to be trimmed. -
sashaabrahams27 May 2017Chicago Justice is an excellent show, which highlights the way in which American drama series are represented. This is just one more addition to the Chicago franchise. I have thoroughly enjoyed this series and feel that it is a shame that it won't be renewed. I do believe there should have been more crossover episodes, but without that overshadowing the series, it was still well acted and a serious portrayal of the US justice system. Dick Wolf is an exceptional creator of excellent television.
I urge people to watch this series and make a good decision for themselves as to what they think about it.
The first cross over episode was brilliant and flowed perfectly. Many people I have spoken with, did not understand the first Chicago justice episode without watching the series. If you do watch all of them, then you would see they need that element. However one piece of advice I would suggest is that the justice episodes follow on from the PD episodes and center themselves about the court cases following the arrests made in PD. That would be a better way of running the series. -
'Chicago Justice' is Dick Wolf's fourth in a series set in the city of Chicago, but this time he is working with his long time 'Law and Order' collaborator Michael Chernuchin, so some of that gritty feel from the Big Apple will hopefully find its way into the Windy City.
Starring Carl Weathers (Rocky) as Mark Jeffries, Cook County's District Attorney, who is a no-nonsense, by-the-book prosecutor. Joining Jefferies as his ASA's are Philip Winchester (Fringe) as Peter Stone, an idealist with a soft side, and Monica Barbaro as Anna Valdez, as serious as she is overly glamorous. That was the 'order' ~ now here's the 'law'. The trio works with a pair of no-nonsense investigators...Joelle Carter, who you might remember from that great show "Justified", and Jon Seda, who crossed over from another Wolf show, 'Chicago PD'.
You'll frequently see actors from the other Chicago franchises doing guest appearances on this show, as well as the 'Justice' crew wrapping up their day at Molly's, a local pub 'owned' by the folks at 'Chicago Fire'.
The cross-over event introducing the show was entertaining, as well as a few of the stand-alone episodes that have aired since then. If this show takes anything from Wolf's show 'Law and Order', I hope it's his 'ripped from the headlines' premise which made that series very successful. -
connor-1115227 March 2017I love Chicago Fire. I like Chicago PD a lot. And Chicago Med has grown on me after a slow start. I so much wanted to like Chicago Justice, too, but it's just so bad I can't. First of all, the script writers desperately need a lawyer consultant -- all of the "legal" shows have flaws, generally in the interest of the dramatic narrative, but this one is so flawed that it's infuriating. Please people, at least TRY to get some of it right. Second, the main character -- the Winchester character -- is not likable. He's pompous, self-righteous, and wooden. Maybe a different actor could have pulled it off, but not this guy. And his female assistant is an insult to women lawyers. The only good actor on the show is Jon Seda - I hope he somehow survives this disaster and can move on to a vehicle that deserves his talent. And finally, the plots are just not all that interesting; so far, they've all felt like "been there, done that" (but a lot better elsewhere).
-
sianc-665-76477621 October 2021This did not get enough airtime, I've only just found it and love it. Why did they cancel it ? This was a brilliant was to close off so many questions.
-
veinctor11 February 2024The awkward feeling that you have missed something, when you start to watch a new show and it starts in the middle of a case. Feels like somebody forgot to invite me to a party. I get that this is probably a continuation for some other Chicago show, but I don't watch those, therefore I'm at a loss.
I dont know who is a protagonist or a cameo, or what happened, or, or.... I'm thrown in the middle of a case with a bunch of random people talking. No explanation, no recap.
Also everyone feels unlikable. I mean, who is this moustage guy that always wears a snow hat? I guess he is lying because he lost his daughter? Why is everyone supporting him? Do I care? No!
They all complain about things I should care. Everything happens too soon and it's too much and there's no context. 9 minutes in and I can't stand any of it. -
Dr_Sagan15 March 2017I really like legal dramas. What I like the most is not the "evidence-based" crimes but when they present actual dilemmas that we encounter in our lives. I mean the thin line between right and wrong. You hear the arguments of one side and you think they are right, you hear the arguments from the other side and you totally change your opinion.
Chicago justice tries to be such a legal drama, but unfortunately fails miserably. I just watched the 3rd episode that (supposedly) had some things to say about racism and cultural differences, and heroism, and taking action... Yet, it ends up to be a complete mess, blurring every message with ridiculous arguments and plot twists. The same feeling I had for the 2 previous episodes which by the way I have totally forgot what they were about.
The main actor is totally unsympathetic. His character seems also like a confused person. He acts like he knows what he is doing and saying but the situations prove him wrong every time. It's not a character that has "flaws". He is just a character poorly written.
Same goes for the rest of the cast which includes Rocky's Carl Weathers.
The script is bad. The music builds tension in places that don't justify such treatment. The plot of every episode is shallow and the resolution of each trial seems forced and pretentious with spontaneous and unjustified outbreaks from the defendants.
Another newcomer "The good fight" (a spin-off of The good wife) is surprisingly better in that department. Despite the fact that focuses in other areas and aspects of the legal world and its people, ends up to be a more solid legal drama in terms of the cases and the arguments and the "dilemmas" I previously mentioned.
Overall: Not a good legal drama. It focuses on the cases more than the lives of their characters (which is good) but it doesn't deliver. If you want a legal series with good arguments that makes you think, you have to look elsewhere. -
dmans-899-51084617 October 2022I felt this show was hurt by it's slow start and some miscasting of characters. As the show went on, I thought it got much better & was glad I stuck it out. I do think some actors weren't right for this series, such as Carl Weathers. Unfortunately the two issues I mentioned hurt it ratings wise, which I'm sure lead to its cancellation after one season. Such a shame as it had potential. I feel viewers should have kept watching so as to give it a chance of making it for many more years. I do feel strongly that P. Winchester was right for his role. I enjoyed watching him in court and thought he had the looks and mannerisms of a real lawyer. Sad there are no more seasons. Will miss.
-
eenerander-4671415 February 2024Not every show has to pop off in the first 10 min to make it great. This show wasn't given a chance to truly form. I thought it had potential, great actors, story lines and crossover characters. It's too bad, I really liked watching it as I do all of the Chicago series. We have entered this weird era in entertainment that doesn't allow for character building and plot forming. It has be instantly successful or it's over in the middle of half a season. If you go back through some of the most iconic shows in the last 40 years many of them had terrible 1st seasons and then went on the be the highest rated shows that were on for years. I wish we'd give shows a chance before shutting them down.
-
thirtyeyes7 April 2017Not getting most of these Chicago shows. I like Chicago PD but haven't been able get the FD and the med show. This new one about Justice is terrible. The characters are poorly written and the acting is sub par and really stiff. Now, the assistant to the assistant to the DA is very attractive. I think too attractive, but unfortunately she is not doing very well with the acting thing. I also hate it when she shows up on the PD show, cause I always wonder why this model is walking around acting like a lawyer. I can't say I really like any of the characters on this show not even the CPD guy. He was always among my least favorite characters on CPD, however, I can admit that the man is a good actor who is mostly wasted on this show. Anyway, the worst part of this show is the writing. The story lines and the resolutions are just horrid with no basis in reality. I am not a lawyer, but only an idiot would believe that that is the way a court room works. I have watched 4 episodes so far and each time I say one more episode because I don't want to be hasty only to find that the next is worse. It seems as if the writers are watching old courtroom shows for some sort of inspiration. I mean, the bailiff holding up 3 fingers is right out of "My Cousin Vinnie". Getting the husband to shout out his guilt seemed a copy from the Tom Cruise movie with Jack Nicholson. Oh, and the dumb music while they are trying to convince you that something incriminating is being said is just plain annoying. And once they tried to tell you that a women may be blind because she has diabetes from a lack of sunlight due to wearing an Arab robe. How dumb do they think we are? I almost laughed when they pulled the aforementioned Joe Pesci scene as a way to prove the women wasn't nearly blind. I kept waiting for someone to say "the two yutes" or "sack o suds". Good grief, I wish Sly Stallone would show up and knock Apollo Creed out and end this farce of a legal drama.
-
dhaven-1964111 March 2017I was excited Dick Wolf had created a law show again as I enjoyed Law & Order immensely. It was a show I discovered from its reruns and nothing created since can compare.
Chicago Justice, while unfair to compare to Law & Order, is a show that is a sore disappointment next to Wolf's exceptional L&O.
I watched the pilot and half of the next show. The only character I liked was the detective from Chicago PD that crossed over to the show into an investigative role with the DA's office. The other characters are unlikable; the actors/actresses are wooden, terrible. The man portraying Benjamin Stone's son (Benjamin Stone was on the original L&O as an ADA and a character I especially liked) an ADA on this show is unbelievable as an ADA as is his counterpart with awful acting skills. The female detective now the partner to the original detective from Chicago P.D. both in investigative roles at the ADA's office is a horrific actor and character, too.
What's even worse, adding insult to injury, is in the second episode the male ADA portraying the original ADA from L&O Benjamin Stone's son, bemoans and insults his father multiple times insinuating he is almost a man for whom his son cannot please. This story line is diametrically opposed to Benjamin Stone's actual character and demeanor on L&O --- it bothered me that this is the perception the show portrays although it does reinforce the lead ADA's whiny nature.
I stopped watching and deleted that second episode since it made me disgusted with all the comments denigrating Sr. Stone by his jerk son and his buddy. I did not understand the point or need to keep insulting and denigrating the character of his father from Law & Order.
None of the characters are likable, except the aforementioned detective from CPD. The acting is wooden; the story lines predictable easy to know where they're going, what's going to happen, etc.
Too much good t.v. to waste time with this show. -
bjvom28 May 2017I would like to see TPTB rework this show to make it watchable. I love the other three shows in the One Chicago series and I really wanted to love this newest addition to the franchise. Chicago Fire first got me hooked and then I started watching Chicago PD. Chicago Med probably has the best performances of all, but Chicago Justice has left me wondering who thought THIS would be a good idea. It is not cerebral. It is not emotionally stimulating. The characters are unsympathetic. The dialogue is stilted, clichéd and poorly delivered. I have seen all of the actors in other roles and, for the most part they are better than what we see in this. Jon Seda and Joelle Carter were terrific in previous series, but I can't seem to care about them in this. Carl Weathers really needs to take some acting lessons before he attempts another role. I think the writers or the director must have a problem with Monica Barbaro or why else would they give her nothing but throw-away lines in every episode. Philip Winchester is about as wooden as any actor I can remember. After the colossal failure of Player, why would anyone think he could handle the starring role of a dramatic series.
-
manik1013-180-45648419 March 2017Why does this show even exist? So I'm to believe that court investigators act as detectives hunting down suspects? I was to believe this would be a court show, not a pseudo Chicago pd series. This show wants to be a full package show, where the cast of Chicago pd does not exist to play the role of arresting suspects.
-
vriddheeg3 March 2017This show is like maybe watching a real courtroom, there is nothing other than the case, no drama no fun. The pilot opens, it feels like a middle of the case, and it takes 5 minutes for me to understand what is going on. The show lacks spark, i but Iguess that is how it was made, strictly law. It is interesting to watch and you certainly do not get bored. If the show had better screenwriters and direction, it may work for the better.The show could have been orchestrated better. Carl weathers is a vanilla lawyer, simple and good at his job. full review
-
shirlene9323024 April 2017You are going to be disappointed in the characters. The cop played by Joelle is sad and seems suicidal. The "Stone" guy, is ridiculous. Anyone who is smart and good looking acts different. You will see for yourself. He was given everything as a child, totally unrealistic. He would never be able to hide his entitlement even if he resented it. His boss is given lines that can only prompt overacting. Not the actors fault, the writers. People are full of flaws. Let's see some real ones we relate to. This show dying and needs a "clear" shot. Other shows have made it by having 90° turns on personality. Do it quick.
-
bdylee2 April 2017Loved the Law & Order series, all of them! I had great hopes for this new Dick Wolf show so I gave it a shot - but I'm done after 3 episodes! Prosecutor/actor is about a appealing as a porcupine in a dark alley! His assistant really needs to learn to not be so gleeful when discussing such sad story lines??? I could have stood the above flaws were in not for the PC liberal leaning story lines. They were the straw that broke the camels back for me! Yes Law & Order picked stories in the news to retell, made it interesting, especially if you lived in NYC. The Chicago Justice stories tip toe around serious crime issues in Chicago? Trying not to offend anyone I suppose, make your city look bad, who knows? I'm no longer interested.
-
bigjohnandsparky30 May 2017The last show was about a Trump-like real estate developer and his son and daughter who run a major real estate empire. They purposely sabotaged a huge crane to stop work on a high rise and collect the insurance for the delay. In the process the son-in-law is killed and he patriarch passes it off as the cost of doing business. The whole mess was such a desperate anti-Trump diatribe that we were deeply offended. We have largely enjoyed the other three Chicago shows, even though they have gotten too much into Liberal messaging at times, but this one was obviously written by the "Resist" idiots. Dick Wolf can do without us in the audience for any of his shows in the future.
-
MAM-214 March 2017Without even seeing the pilot, I must say that the tag-line: "Always Fight, Never Settle." sends a terrible message -- one that epitomizes a lot of what is wrong with our country. In the beginning, Americans were promised a government "... of the people, by the people and for the people." Yet what we now have in Congress is anything but... Congress is more than 70% lawyers, while lawyers represent less than 2% of the general population. When it was balanced -- and more representative of the electorate, being composed of doctors, lawyers, engineers, teachers, farmers, mechanics, etc. -- we had a representative government. But the worst part of having so many lawyers in Congress comes down to a fundamental issue that is (unfortunately) very accurately captures by your tag-line. The fact is, lawyers are not taught to settle; they are taught to win. That reality is, IMO, the #1 reason why we have political gridlock. In other words, if every negotiation starts with both sides prepared to stand their ground, you don't get compromise -- you get ruthless standoffs! Sound familiar yet? PLEASE... change this tag-line. It sends not just the wrong message -- it sends a terrible message to young people who think the object is to win at any and all costs!