***SPOILERS*** I must agree with kfo9494 when it comes to ugly. I've got both kinds in my life. You know - the kind that make a mud fence look like Elizabeth Taylor, and the kind that are beautiful to look at; kinda like a Diamondback Rattlesnake. Rod Serling did a great job of pointing out the perception of beauty in his "Eye of the Beholder" episode of Twilight Zone.
Now, if poor little rich girl truly wants to experience a good reason for poverty, maybe she could work at a street mission, or soup kitchen; maybe for her spirit she could join a nunnery? Huh? Okay, back to reality. One of the other reviewers mentioned Bill Boyette. He's one of those actors who got cast fairly early in his career as a cop. One of the first performances was in "Highway Patrol", and it fit so well, it stuck to him. Kinda like Spock to Nimoy.
As far as the other actors, one standout property of a Perry client is basic dumbness. In this case, the only character stupider than the defendant is the charcoal artist, who, of course, falls in love with her. The "happily ever after" factor in this piece is drenched in drivel. I did think that it was cool of Perry to point out that he'd have plenty of time to think over his mistakes while he was cooling his heels in the hoosegow.
One of the truly standout points in this episode is the camera's P.O.V. during Max Showalter's breakdown. There are a few of these (too few) in some of the presentations, and it must have taken a little envelope pushing to work it by the normally, staid, and cheap stick-in-the-mud line of thought that normally governed the courtroom direction.... Kudos, no doubt.
The acting was pretty good in this presentation, also. Thanks to S.A.G. and the casting department for their choices. As you can tell, my problem is with the story, not the acting. SPOILER -- don't read past this notice if you haven't already seen this episode. I thought one of the best parts of the show, was when Perry had the battery toy just banging away in constant repetition; driving Max closer, and closer to his breaking point. He nailed the door shut on him, even if he DIDN'T really admit his guilt. I gotta give it an 8.
Now, if poor little rich girl truly wants to experience a good reason for poverty, maybe she could work at a street mission, or soup kitchen; maybe for her spirit she could join a nunnery? Huh? Okay, back to reality. One of the other reviewers mentioned Bill Boyette. He's one of those actors who got cast fairly early in his career as a cop. One of the first performances was in "Highway Patrol", and it fit so well, it stuck to him. Kinda like Spock to Nimoy.
As far as the other actors, one standout property of a Perry client is basic dumbness. In this case, the only character stupider than the defendant is the charcoal artist, who, of course, falls in love with her. The "happily ever after" factor in this piece is drenched in drivel. I did think that it was cool of Perry to point out that he'd have plenty of time to think over his mistakes while he was cooling his heels in the hoosegow.
One of the truly standout points in this episode is the camera's P.O.V. during Max Showalter's breakdown. There are a few of these (too few) in some of the presentations, and it must have taken a little envelope pushing to work it by the normally, staid, and cheap stick-in-the-mud line of thought that normally governed the courtroom direction.... Kudos, no doubt.
The acting was pretty good in this presentation, also. Thanks to S.A.G. and the casting department for their choices. As you can tell, my problem is with the story, not the acting. SPOILER -- don't read past this notice if you haven't already seen this episode. I thought one of the best parts of the show, was when Perry had the battery toy just banging away in constant repetition; driving Max closer, and closer to his breaking point. He nailed the door shut on him, even if he DIDN'T really admit his guilt. I gotta give it an 8.