|Index||4 reviews in total|
I really enjoyed this 5-part drama.
Not only is it an engrossing and well made drama, it also makes you think about the rights and wrongs of the British jury system.
The story is quite simple: it is about the retrial of a previously-convicted multiple murder, and focuses mainly on the people who have been selected to be the jury, offering up things about some of the jurors that seriously make you think about whether or not random selection from the general public is the best way to go about selecting a jury for such an important case.
The backdrop for the entire series is an ongoing political debate as to whether trial by jury is a good system or should be replaces.
Interesting stuff, and entertaining too.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I saw the advert for this series and thought it looked interesting, but I found out as well that it was a second series of the original 2002 version, but with the first series (with Hugh Jackman) unavailable I gave this a chance, and I stuck with it. Basically, the story is unconnected to the first series, Alan Lane (Sliding Doors' John Lynch) is going on retrial, convicted for the murder of three women five years ago, all of whom he met on an internet dating site. John Mallory Q.C. (Roger Allam) is acting as the prosecutor, and Emma Watts Q.C. (Julie Walters) is defending him, but the twelve people in the jury are the people who will ultimately decide whether he is still guilty or whether evidence can prove he is in fact innocent. The jurors include single man Paul Brierley (Steven Mackintosh) who looks after his mother June (EastEnders' Anne Reid), teacher Katherine Bulmore (Jodhi May) who had an affair with a seventeen year old pupil, Sudanese immigrant Tahir Takana (Ivanno Jeremiah) who is waiting to get a visa so he can go to America and join his brother, Lucy Cartwright (Natalie Press) who is the assistant to businesswoman Theresa Vestey (Sarah Alexander) taking her place, quiet young man Rashid Jarwar (Aqib Khan) who lives with his parents and with Aspergers Syndrome, lonely woman Kristina Bamford (Branka Katic), devout Christian woman Ann Skailes (Jo Hartley), likable pensioner Jeffrey Livingstone (Ronald Pickup) and tanning salon enjoying Derek Hatch (Rory McGann, Paul's brother). As each of them are summoned for jury duty and go through the process of going to court, hearing the evidence and accusations, and questioning the witnesses and involved people, they also have big changes in their personal lives. Also starring The Kumar at No. 42's Meera Syal as Head Teacher and Lisa Dillon as Tasha Williams. The cast all do their parts, especially Walters as the determined defence counsel and Lynch as the man pleading his innocence, obviously the trial unfolding with evidence and opinions does sort of grip, the story part with Jeremiah's character being friends with Pickup trying to get somewhere is okay, the other subplots aren't all the most interesting elements, and the ending is relatively alright, all in all the series is a not bad viewing drama serial. Good!
This moves at the speed of a constipated glacier, especially the first
episode. ITV decided to split it over five nights, but only had enough
material for two or three, so it had to be spun out. I can't believe I
watched it to the end. Memo to self: get a life.
It's difficult to write about the crazily unlikely plot, and its holes, without giving away spoilers, but I think I am safe in asking why no forensic or DNA evidence was ever mentioned in the courtroom. Surely this would have established whether the defendant had contact with the murdered women or not? Of course, any firm scientific evidence would have done away with most of the agonised discussions among the jury members and also ruined the contrived plot twist at the end.
Steven Mackintosh was good, as was Jodhi May. Roger Allam and Julie Walters as the barristers were very watchable but not really stretched. The series came to life a bit in their courtroom scenes.
The previous series (of ten years ago) was recently repeated as a curtain-raiser for this one. That's the one to see, if you can.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Skirting the rickety scenery with surprising agility,Mrs Overall brings the cast of "Acorn Antiques some of her delicious macaroons...ooops,sorry,just a bit of stream of consciousness there,brought on by Julie Walters' playing of "liberal" defence QC Emma Watts in her best "I'm just a Brummie,folks" manner. "The Jury",which could have been done and dusted as a two - parter was dragged out over five nights no doubt because it could sell more dog food and hairspray that way.Just in time for the Christmas adverts for stuff most of us can't afford anyway.Or maybe I'm being cynical. Whatever,at the root of the programme lies the "drama"of the personal lives of the jurors,many of whom would not have passed the Jury Selection process,(Selection Process,what Selection Process?)thus making the whole concept invalid. But,regardless of such niceties,at least some of "The Jury" might have been forgivable if it hadn't reminded us of just about every Movie or TV show about juries there has ever been,and that's a heck of a lot. Indeed,"Coronation Street" the other week featured a pair of counsels who were far more convincing - and that's a soap made for about 200 quid per episode with no delusions of grandeur. Frankly after the first episode I didn't care about whether the defendant had done it or not or what the jurors did in the privacy of their own homes as long as it wasn't in front of the servants. And if I have to see Ms Walters in a "serious" role again I will try my very best to forget Mrs Overall....honest.
|Ratings||External reviews||Main details|
|Your user reviews||Your vote history|