Thanks for your patience. It’s been a busy few weeks with the show and trying to get my life at the law school back in order.

First of all, thanks for giving the show a chance. If you stick with it, I don’t think you’ll be disappointed, and I’ll look forward to your thoughts as the season progresses.

So, several things go into answering your questions: First, is the structure of pilots and their function in the larger television world and the production cycle. There’s a ton of heavy lifting to be done in a pilot. Since most of them are only seen by some test audiences and studio execs, they are really a showcase for the engine that’ll drive a series. What that implies is that the action in many pilots is quite overblown, that there’s more exposition than there might be in a subsequent episode when the characters are better developed. Because, there is a predisposition to play your strongest card in the pilot, it won’t surprise you to know that the general “innocent client screwed by an unresponsive bankrupt system” plays better than “”guilty client screwed by an unresponsive bankrupt system.” even though there is, at least arguably, more nuance in the latter position. Similarly, in terms of your concerns about the sex etc, in order to explore relationships, you need to establish them. Thus there is a ton of stuff packed into the pilot which serves the function of just winding the springs that will uncoil over the season. It’s perfectly reasonable to find the winding less enthralling than the unspooling.

Finally, in terms of the dialogue: Just blame me. It was the first script I ever wrote, and Steven, though he spent ages trying to improve my writing and teach me the form, had the courage to let me keep flailing away at it. I’m no David Kelley. But I invite you to join me in climbing up the learning curve.

In terms of the last thought: There is no way to convince you, so I’ll just say: Look at my life, my book etc. I’m a pretty candid guy. Watch the series. By the end, if you don’t think I have good cause to be proud of what we’ve accomplished, I’ll ask for no more courtesy and will surrender my feeling that at least right now, I deserve the benefit of the doubt.

And last but not least. If you think I’m commenting at length or responding in any real way to anyone outside the PD community, I’m not. I write here because I have always believed in the work, and I’ve done this show to do the best I can to portray a broken system, a heroic public defender and to show clients as they actually are–in all their very human glory. I believe we’ve succeeded at that. I hope, in time you’ll agree.

Best,

David Feige.

For the record, I grew up in the 70s, so I don’t see why everybody’s so upset about Jerry’s hair.

Thank you for your kind words about my blog.

Personnally, I think you have to develop your main characters to the point that your followers can relate to them somehow…. first. Then it becomes an easier question to approach and answer. Right now, all that you see on the RTB message boards are common folks repulsed by Jerry’s hair and all of the sex scenes (I can see the hairstyle being David’s idea, but not all the sleazy sex).

I’m thinkin that maybe when Jerry has a major jury trial, he’ll wash up pretty nice, like we all do, people will suddenly see him in a different light and they will focus more on those things that are actually relevant. That’s when I’d get into the issue if I were writing the script.

But what do I know, I’m just a PD, not a writer. I’m looking forward to the next installment to see how things start to roll out…..

Hopefully, David will stop by and address your question from his perspective.

You have a GREAT blog by the way!!

I can also see how a guilty client might make the first episode a little too much to handle. (Although now that I think about it, didn’t they imply that he was actually guilty of some misdemeanor weapon charge?)

In the last few years of reading blawgs, I’ve learned a bit about the passion that defense lawyers bring to their craft, and what I wanted from this show was the answer the perennial question, “How can you defend those people?”

I didn’t want it answered with speeches by the characters, but with stories about “those people” and the lawyers who defend them. Certainly an innocent client is one reason for defending those people, but it’s not the only reason.

So for me, I was glad that so many people got the exposure to that type of problem and could see why there is something wrong with holding on to preconceived notions of guilt. To me, that was actually some real stuff that I was hoping to see on the show.

I think the point would have been a bit sharper if they had showed a part of the jury deliberations. What tends to happen is the jury gets into the deliberation room, looks at those crazy jury instructions (full of legal mumbo jumbo) that make absolutely NO sense to anyone in the room and they go with their gut reaction. “Guilty of something”

So…this PD liked that aspect of the pilot.