I disagree with the previous viewer. I actually am enjoying this new show. The dialogue is smart, and the plots so far have been interesting. I also think it is more multi-layered than most shows of this ilk on TV presently. It's a different role for Julianna Margulies, and I love the character she is playing. It's nice to see a strong "over-29" woman, who is complex and able to think on her feet. She (the character) has been through a huge tragedy, and it gives me pause to think how that might affect her. I also enjoy Ben Shankman in his role and hope Aidan Quinn will get a bigger role in future episodes. I just feel like the series needs time for everything to gel. The cast feels a bit rough in the way they interact, but that often gets resolved within the first season. Give it some time and another view or two!
Add a Review
-
glynne4118 March 2008
-
SnoopyStyle6 December 2019Defense attorney Elizabeth Canterbury (Julianna Margulies) is willing to cross the ethics line to defend her clients. She and her husband Matt Furey (Aidan Quinn) are still struggling after she lost their son three years earlier. Her law partner Russell Krauss (Ben Shenkman) is a former prosecutor who likes the straight and narrow path. Russell's former boss, Deputy Attorney General Zach Williams (Terry Kinney), is out to get Canterbury after losing to her. Her investigator Frank Angstrom is also her former lover. Her associate Chester Fields is rebelling against his political father. Her other associate Molly McConnell is struggling to pass the bar.
There is an issue with some of the characters. Canterbury is always the one who believes in her clients' innocence and nobody else believes it. It happens far too often. It's silly that her underlings keep harping on their clients' guilt. They're defense attorneys whether the clients are innocent or guilty. There are some issues with believability. The acting is all solid. This mid-season replacement was quickly cancelled. That's probably for the best since Margulies would go on to lead a better show although the two lead characters have many similarities. In The Good Wife, she has a softer edge with more rooting interest. She's not as militant. In this one, her strident nature is problematic. It's an intriguing show but I need recalibrations with some characters. -
wendysthomas23 March 2008I have enjoyed this new show very much! Its edge, interesting, sharp and the actors are talented. I love Julianna, and I have missed her. good to see her in a star role. All the mix of characters seems to have a lot of potential. I like Julianna is strong and smart and a leader on her own but has a depth and a weak side. I enjoyed that it left me wanting to see more, and wanting to figure out more about the lives of all the characters, who's who why and how they fit together the husband boyfriend affair, what happened to her son. I like not spoon feeding. It made me set the DVR and move it up on my priority list so I wouldn't miss it next week! After just one episode I am hooked in! Keep it going! Thanks Fox I love your ideas. Thanks!
-
wroodiii1 December 2010We enjoyed this series immensely and were sorry to see it end. Arm chair lawyers can pick nits with courtroom details, but the series is refreshing because it probes the darker side of the justice system and the irony that breaking its "rules" can on occasion result in more just outcomes. Good scripts and music. Julianna Margulies is excellent and as Canterbury pushes the envelop for female leads in television. She has gone on to great success in The Good Wife, so it's probably unrealistic to think that someday, she might return to this project. Even so, it will remain in her acting portfolio as solid evidence that she's one of the very best around. Thank goodness all six episodes are available on Watch Instantly in Netflix.
-
tri_91429 March 2008Canterbury's Law is a breath of fresh air. In a time where reality TV has taken over, this is a truly creative and refreshing show with real story lines. The actors were well cast and really have added to the power of the show. Trieste Kelly Dunn may be a newcomer but she is a wonderful actress with a powerful presence. She is a force to be reckoned with. She will definitely be someone to watch. She is not only beautiful but also a very good actress. Julianna Marguiles is such a fascinating and powerful actress and is a joy to watch. This show may be new but it needs to be given a chance by FOX. Given the chance, this will develop into one of those memorable shows people will be talking about for years to come. I am hooked and won't miss one episode.
-
ikanboy21 March 2008TV has long ago decided that defense lawyer shows have to involve the same elements: 1. The lawyer has to be involved in some interesting personal life issue. 2. The trials are incidental. 3. The lawyer not only defends the case but solves it and uncovers the real culprit.
Canterbury's law is as lame as it gets. The personal issue is that the lawyer has a missing son, a son who wandered away while she was busy on her cell phone, so she gets to be guilt ridden, and show her "edges" by having an affair with a client, and defending mentally ill clients.
The trials are ludicrous! In the first show the trial of her mentally ill client is pushed through by her,in spite of the dead body being found in the back yard of her suspect, the father. Why? Her client may decompensate into psychosis if not found innocent ASAP, and it would take too long to find out if the body is that of the missing child. So in spite of everyone knowing that the identity of the body is absolutely crucial to the case, the Judge, the Prosecutor act as if it's not! Then she wins because the antagonist lawyer is presented as gullible enough to let the real culprit on the stand, and the real culprit as stupid enough to get on the stand!Oyve! In the second show we dispense with the trial and the culprit is busted in.... deposition! Margullies is an actress of limited emotional range. In this show she gets to look dazed, frazzled, excited, neurotic, and manages to pull it off without a change in expression. TURKEY! -
bilkerrob3 April 2008I think Canterbury's Law is a compelling story line with a strong lead female character. The approach taken in the story line is totally different from other law shows and a welcome change from all the superficial reality shows. The great theme song sets you up for an exciting roller coaster ride of a show!!!! Give this show a change, it's bound to gain viewers each week! Word of mouth will surely spread the news that Julianne is back and she's brought some great talent with her. I do wish Aidan Quinn had a larger role in the show each week. In my opinion, he is one of the outstanding actors of our time.
In closing, those of us who are already fans of Canterbury's Law need to introduce this wonderful show to others. -
gavinnelson-110 March 2008I was looking forward to this because I'm a fan of Julianna Margulies' previous work.
What a disappointment!! It's all I could to keep my eyes open through the pilot.
The script was clunky and clearly would have been better served by being a two-hour pilot. The characters were poorly drawn, with very little given to the actors to use. The photography was very poor, with many shots extremely grainy or out-of-focus or plain badly lit.
But most galling was the poor directing by Mike Figgis, who joins a longer and longer list of "feature directors" doing a very poor job directing a pilot. The show had no visual style to speak of, unless shaking the camera and underlighting all the scenes in Canterbury's Office is supposed to pass off as a style.
On the plus side, James McCaffrey was excellent as usual, so was Julianna, but Ben Shankman killed every scene he was in. He looked like he was fresh from amateur hour.
I might give it another try, but I doubt this will last more than a few episodes.
Yet another disappointment in a horrible season for network TV. -
arufus-118 March 2008After 2 episodes it is clear that we are stuck with a tough guy chick surrounded by squishy, wimpy male supporting characters which is disappointing. I thought she was great in the Sopranos! The courtroom scenes presented some good "lawyering" lines in her role. The airings so far have been bereft of any skillful or stimulating ending. I hardly watch prime time series as I discovered years ago that these shows were just too dumbed down or worse yet, made statements that were just too contemptuous (beyond upbeat humorous satire) of the traditional institutions that have been the backbone of this country's greatness. But this show just didn't captivate my interest or worse , it was a turn off. i hope to see Ms Margulies in better roles in the future.
-
malkink31 March 2008I'm enjoying the show, mostly. MOST shows I've grown attached to have a weak start, because they're rushing to show us the new characters - but over time, they spend less time developing the characters, because you know them by then. In the pilot, I thought I would hate the Russell character, because for one, I'd fire him outright, and for another, I don't want some wet blanket always raining on the lead character's ideas. It's weak. He's developing well now, and I think he might prove to be my favorite on the cast.
I wasn't crazy about this latest episode, because the main plot line - her eventual arrest - took the whole hour, while minor plot lines, such as her relationship with her husband - I couldn't care less about. A staff member who is studying law and another who is being encouraged by his dad to jump ship. So basically, an episode where the overall story moved very little - where "nothing happened". I'm willing to keep watching it a few weeks. -
Arenas481218 January 2015This show isn't necessarily good or bad.. But The Good Wife's a lot more intriguing. Elizebeth Canterbury stars a "controversial" lawyer who bends the law while going through personal issues(a missing son and her husband not lovng her). I gave this a shot on Netflix. It's a good watch if you have a lot of time in a day. I really can't stand the main character. She comes across really cheesy. The story line is actually quite good if the show were developed onto further seasons. I see where they're going with this. Prosecuting Attorney v. Defender of the Defenseless. The pilot would have been better if you realized that she's dealing over her missing son. Also the show doesn't make sense to me until the last episode.
-
bsqrd6614 July 2021What a dreadfully z script drama. Ham acting, ridiculously poor direction supported in the camera angles and feeble scripts.