![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatOh, I love love love this season's The Good Wife. And you can sort of come into it cold from the beginning of this season. The 100th episode was hilarious. And depicted the difficulties of litigation beautifully.
Spoilers below the cut.
Case of the week is Mathew Ashburn's will. (John Nobel is back in flashbacks as Ashburn, and I should state that Nobel is amongst the reasons I watched Fringe for as long as I did. This show has the best cast and guest stars next to Game of Thrones and Justified. You can tell the quality of a television series on it's guest stars...then again maybe not, Elizabeth Taylor and Carol Burnett guest starred on General Hospital and All My Children.) Anyhow, Ashburn has decided to leave Alicia 12 Million dollars in a new will found after his death.
Subplots: Kalinda is investigating (aka vetting) Damien (Jason O'Mara's charming Irish attorney), which involves chasing his car around side-streets, until she gets pulled over by a female cop. And after getting arrested by said cop, manages to charm the female cop into bed. (I'm guessing Damian didn't see that wrinkle.) A friend and I have decided that Damien probably doesn't have a law degree or a license. (Which is actually realistic, this happens a lot in the US. Passing the bar exam is a rigorous experience - it's a two day test, with written essay and multiple choice style questions and requires six months of in-depth study and courses. Plus you have to pay for it. And fill out a book-length application. And that's just in Kansas which has the easiest and cheapest bar in the US. Not cheap becoming a lawyer in the US.)
The other, far better, subplot is Florick/Argos Christmas Party which is ripe for comical conflicts. Alicia rapidly loses control over the guest list. She didn't want to invite her family - but due to the lack of RSVPs (they only got 30), Robin and Carey beg her to invite Peter, the Governor. So she agrees to call him. And they immediately send him an email invite, and then send an email alert to all their clients that he will be at the party, which results in 830 RSVPs. And Alicia has to invite Jackie and her mother to the party. It also throws Eli into a tizzy, when he starts to see the political and publicity ramifications of Peter associating with some of Alicia's less than stellar client list. (Lamond Bishop and Colin Sweeny. Actually he's more upset about Colin Sweeny, he didn't know Lamond Bishop was invited, nor did Alicia.) Eli thinks he's found a way out of it - by arranging a meeting with Peter and Donna Bresil (a high profile politician who could be running for President and is vetting Vice Presidents), but Peter receives a call from his mother wondering where he is, and invites Donna to his wife's party. They arrive, only to discover Lamond Bishop is there - and has made a beeline to Peter, with the hopes of discussing charity functions. This results in a conversation between Alicia and her kids, where she tells them who Bishop is (the biggest drug dealer in Chicago) and Zack responding that sometimes he forgets she's his mom and thinks of her as just a really interesting person he lives with.
Regarding the case of the week. There's two litigation bits in this that blew me away with their accuracy and the hilarity of the moment. Mainly because I've experienced both in actuality. Toss-up as to which was my favorite.
Nathan Lane's struggle to cross-examine a witness and figure out a counter-argument to an objection.
and...
Will's arrogant assumption that he knew exactly what Alicia was going to say upon cross examination and that he could humiliate and trap her on the stand. In litigation - the attorney needs to be over-prepared, and to know exactly what his or her witness will state at all times. But, people tend to be unpredictable - so you have to be prepared for curve-balls. Will's ego, arrogance, and emotions got in the way - so he didn't do his homework and talk to David Lee. Instead he assumed that Alicia had not aided David Lee with the prior will. As a result, Alicia is able to ruffle him and turn his cross against him.
She does eventually lose the case - but not because of anything Will's done. In the courtroom, Florick/Argos won it. But the discovery of four similar wills in a separate safety deposit box of Ashburn's, each leaving a sum to a separate woman, results in all four wills being declared invalid. (I actually read about a similar case in law school - I remember that.)
The emotional stuff regarding Will Gardner is rather interesting. He really has issues with women. He likes them to have power - but he wants to be in control, yet without strings or commitment. In his head - when he cross-examines Alicia, he's crossing her about their relationship and she breaks under his cross. But in reality, when he crosses her - she's prepared and makes it about the case. Alicia unlike Will is capable of compartmentalizing, she can shut off her emotions or separate them. A nice subversive flip of gender stereotypes.
We see this with Carey and Diane as well. Diane is quiet and stoic. Carey exhibits emotion throughout.
Plus, when Will and Alicia separately remember their evening with Mathhew Ashburn in his apartment - Alicia is wearing a different colored dress. Will remembers it as a red dress and Alicia as a seductress. Alicia remembers her dress as blue, and that Will is stroking her knee and thigh, distracting her. Will sees her as flirting with Ashburn, and seducing him.
Will accuses Alicia of using the fact that Ashburn was attracted to her to influence him to leave money to her in his will. Alicia counters that while she did unduly influence Ashburn and use his attraction to manipulate him into signing a will - it was not this will, but the other one, and it was at David Lee's request - Lee told her to primp the pump. Which unravels Will's case completely. She basically throws back in Will's face - how Lockhardt/Gardner had her do things - that she wouldn't normally or necessarily to do for their own ends. (Which is true, and amongst the many reasons she left to start her own firm with Carey.) It also highlights how women are often used by men as sexual objects in the business world or sex as power, and how they fight against that usage and turn the tables.
Oh lovely, lovely show.
Spoilers below the cut.
Case of the week is Mathew Ashburn's will. (John Nobel is back in flashbacks as Ashburn, and I should state that Nobel is amongst the reasons I watched Fringe for as long as I did. This show has the best cast and guest stars next to Game of Thrones and Justified. You can tell the quality of a television series on it's guest stars...then again maybe not, Elizabeth Taylor and Carol Burnett guest starred on General Hospital and All My Children.) Anyhow, Ashburn has decided to leave Alicia 12 Million dollars in a new will found after his death.
Subplots: Kalinda is investigating (aka vetting) Damien (Jason O'Mara's charming Irish attorney), which involves chasing his car around side-streets, until she gets pulled over by a female cop. And after getting arrested by said cop, manages to charm the female cop into bed. (I'm guessing Damian didn't see that wrinkle.) A friend and I have decided that Damien probably doesn't have a law degree or a license. (Which is actually realistic, this happens a lot in the US. Passing the bar exam is a rigorous experience - it's a two day test, with written essay and multiple choice style questions and requires six months of in-depth study and courses. Plus you have to pay for it. And fill out a book-length application. And that's just in Kansas which has the easiest and cheapest bar in the US. Not cheap becoming a lawyer in the US.)
The other, far better, subplot is Florick/Argos Christmas Party which is ripe for comical conflicts. Alicia rapidly loses control over the guest list. She didn't want to invite her family - but due to the lack of RSVPs (they only got 30), Robin and Carey beg her to invite Peter, the Governor. So she agrees to call him. And they immediately send him an email invite, and then send an email alert to all their clients that he will be at the party, which results in 830 RSVPs. And Alicia has to invite Jackie and her mother to the party. It also throws Eli into a tizzy, when he starts to see the political and publicity ramifications of Peter associating with some of Alicia's less than stellar client list. (Lamond Bishop and Colin Sweeny. Actually he's more upset about Colin Sweeny, he didn't know Lamond Bishop was invited, nor did Alicia.) Eli thinks he's found a way out of it - by arranging a meeting with Peter and Donna Bresil (a high profile politician who could be running for President and is vetting Vice Presidents), but Peter receives a call from his mother wondering where he is, and invites Donna to his wife's party. They arrive, only to discover Lamond Bishop is there - and has made a beeline to Peter, with the hopes of discussing charity functions. This results in a conversation between Alicia and her kids, where she tells them who Bishop is (the biggest drug dealer in Chicago) and Zack responding that sometimes he forgets she's his mom and thinks of her as just a really interesting person he lives with.
Regarding the case of the week. There's two litigation bits in this that blew me away with their accuracy and the hilarity of the moment. Mainly because I've experienced both in actuality. Toss-up as to which was my favorite.
Nathan Lane's struggle to cross-examine a witness and figure out a counter-argument to an objection.
and...
Will's arrogant assumption that he knew exactly what Alicia was going to say upon cross examination and that he could humiliate and trap her on the stand. In litigation - the attorney needs to be over-prepared, and to know exactly what his or her witness will state at all times. But, people tend to be unpredictable - so you have to be prepared for curve-balls. Will's ego, arrogance, and emotions got in the way - so he didn't do his homework and talk to David Lee. Instead he assumed that Alicia had not aided David Lee with the prior will. As a result, Alicia is able to ruffle him and turn his cross against him.
She does eventually lose the case - but not because of anything Will's done. In the courtroom, Florick/Argos won it. But the discovery of four similar wills in a separate safety deposit box of Ashburn's, each leaving a sum to a separate woman, results in all four wills being declared invalid. (I actually read about a similar case in law school - I remember that.)
The emotional stuff regarding Will Gardner is rather interesting. He really has issues with women. He likes them to have power - but he wants to be in control, yet without strings or commitment. In his head - when he cross-examines Alicia, he's crossing her about their relationship and she breaks under his cross. But in reality, when he crosses her - she's prepared and makes it about the case. Alicia unlike Will is capable of compartmentalizing, she can shut off her emotions or separate them. A nice subversive flip of gender stereotypes.
We see this with Carey and Diane as well. Diane is quiet and stoic. Carey exhibits emotion throughout.
Plus, when Will and Alicia separately remember their evening with Mathhew Ashburn in his apartment - Alicia is wearing a different colored dress. Will remembers it as a red dress and Alicia as a seductress. Alicia remembers her dress as blue, and that Will is stroking her knee and thigh, distracting her. Will sees her as flirting with Ashburn, and seducing him.
Will accuses Alicia of using the fact that Ashburn was attracted to her to influence him to leave money to her in his will. Alicia counters that while she did unduly influence Ashburn and use his attraction to manipulate him into signing a will - it was not this will, but the other one, and it was at David Lee's request - Lee told her to primp the pump. Which unravels Will's case completely. She basically throws back in Will's face - how Lockhardt/Gardner had her do things - that she wouldn't normally or necessarily to do for their own ends. (Which is true, and amongst the many reasons she left to start her own firm with Carey.) It also highlights how women are often used by men as sexual objects in the business world or sex as power, and how they fight against that usage and turn the tables.
Oh lovely, lovely show.