All the good qualities of Perry Mason have been well expressed by many others. Every episode is in fact a sharp, intelligent murder mystery. The legal plot points are intelligently done. I'll assume anyone reading this is aware of that, or can read others' reviews.
I don't disagree with most of that. But for my part, I would rather articulate some objections I have that keep me from completely joining in on the chorus of praises.
Every episode begins with its own cast of characters and a dramatic situation that are unique to that episode. And keep in mind an episode only lasts an hour. I find it quite an impressive feat that each episode is able to establish that.
So I'm describing a very good characteristic of the show, right? Well, that's just the thing. Every episode starts out great this way. But I'm always wishing they could just go on from there and continue with some drama with those characters. There could be embezzlement, power struggle, family drama, anything.
But instead, at some point someone gets killed. And then the point of the episode becomes simply to find out who did it. Every time, every episode. Granted, it's very well done as whodunits go. But it seems to me like so much potential wasted.
My other main objection is that it's just so linear. Every episode, Perry wins. The killer is found out and will meet justice. Always correctly. End of story.
Contrast that to a more modern courtroom show, Law and Order. Most of the time the DA and his team win. But sometimes he loses. Sometimes he wins but had doubts as to whether his victory is best for all concerned. Sometimes his assistant DA disagrees with him and wants no part of the case.
That's more complex, more nuanced, more like real life.
Plus, Perry never has doubts. He's always the smartest person in the room. He's always the one who sees the truth when no one can.
I understand the counterarguments one might make. It was a simpler world back then, or least fiction framed it that way in those days. You have to judge Perry Mason relative to its era.
And, in today's grim world that's nothing but shades of grey, it's nice to have a character who is totally pure and always right. A real hero.
I get all that. I love lots of quaint old-fashioned entertainment. That's why I watch Andy Griffith Show and read old comic books from the 1970's or before. I hate it how nowadays people are so quick to call works "dated".
But legal thrillers? That's a different animal. For that, I'd rather have something a little more gritty and real and complex.
I don't disagree with most of that. But for my part, I would rather articulate some objections I have that keep me from completely joining in on the chorus of praises.
Every episode begins with its own cast of characters and a dramatic situation that are unique to that episode. And keep in mind an episode only lasts an hour. I find it quite an impressive feat that each episode is able to establish that.
So I'm describing a very good characteristic of the show, right? Well, that's just the thing. Every episode starts out great this way. But I'm always wishing they could just go on from there and continue with some drama with those characters. There could be embezzlement, power struggle, family drama, anything.
But instead, at some point someone gets killed. And then the point of the episode becomes simply to find out who did it. Every time, every episode. Granted, it's very well done as whodunits go. But it seems to me like so much potential wasted.
My other main objection is that it's just so linear. Every episode, Perry wins. The killer is found out and will meet justice. Always correctly. End of story.
Contrast that to a more modern courtroom show, Law and Order. Most of the time the DA and his team win. But sometimes he loses. Sometimes he wins but had doubts as to whether his victory is best for all concerned. Sometimes his assistant DA disagrees with him and wants no part of the case.
That's more complex, more nuanced, more like real life.
Plus, Perry never has doubts. He's always the smartest person in the room. He's always the one who sees the truth when no one can.
I understand the counterarguments one might make. It was a simpler world back then, or least fiction framed it that way in those days. You have to judge Perry Mason relative to its era.
And, in today's grim world that's nothing but shades of grey, it's nice to have a character who is totally pure and always right. A real hero.
I get all that. I love lots of quaint old-fashioned entertainment. That's why I watch Andy Griffith Show and read old comic books from the 1970's or before. I hate it how nowadays people are so quick to call works "dated".
But legal thrillers? That's a different animal. For that, I'd rather have something a little more gritty and real and complex.