|
Schwimmer is really good in his role. I hope he keeps it up through the series. Although Cuba isn't very...OJ, Schwimmer is a great Kardashian. I love the scenes with the kids because it really does tie into the big theme of the show ; FAME. Plus, the kid's commentary on O.J doing it, Kris Jenner being mad about him being still tight with OJ, etc, all works for Kardashian as he struggles to swim with big time lawyers and pressure of "I know he did it but...my bestie!". It's his main theme for his character. His scenes are some of my favorite. But now that we got us some Nathan Lane on a regular basis!!! shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit son, it's another level show now!
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 11:54 |
|
|
I was about 7 when this whole thing went down, so I don't remember too much (except my aunt talking a lot about it and buying a novelty book that was purportedly OJ's sketchbook or something similar.) But on the subject of Clark's and the prosecution's incompetence, did they not charge OJ at all for the Bronco chase? I know AC was charged with aiding a fugitive and then let off for lack of evidence (which seems insane given video footage on every TV in the nation, but I guess you could argue OJ forced him to do it.) Also, the Kardashian bits are like the bees in Coven: unnecessarily goofy for the sake of it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 00:32
|
|
|
commy gun posted:David Schwimmer's performance is such a pleasant surprise. Another guy I could see pulling this off is Fred Armisen, but I might be stupid.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 01:25
|
|
|
My only problem with David Schwimmer is that while he does a good job looking like Kardashian, he isn't a terribly great actor. In anything he's in, he's just David Schwimmer Competently Reading Lines As David Schwimmer. I've just never been truly impressed by any acting he's done. He puts on the costume, but I don't think he puts on the role.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2016 05:20
|
|
|
fart blood posted:My only problem with David Schwimmer is that while he does a good job looking like Kardashian, he isn't a terribly great actor. In anything he's in, he's just David Schwimmer Competently Reading Lines As David Schwimmer. I've just never been truly impressed by any acting he's done. He puts on the costume, but I don't think he puts on the role. I'm not disagreeing with you, but curious what you thought of his role in "Band of Brothers"?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2016 17:11
|
|
|
Ross Plays Army
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
I don't think the Kardashian kids stuff is out of place at all, since one of the central points of the series is the birth of modern celebrity culture. You can't really blame the show for a lack of subtlety when it comes to that plotline since the show clearly isn't interested in subtlety period.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 00:01
|
|
|
I dunno in Curb he was David Schwimmer reading lines as rear end in a top hat David Schwimmer and that was pretty great.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
Toilet Mouth posted:I don't think the Kardashian kids stuff is out of place at all, since one of the central points of the series is the birth of modern celebrity culture. You can't really blame the show for a lack of subtlety when it comes to that plotline since the show clearly isn't interested in subtlety period. Besides how can you not love the Kardashian Kids being told that honor and virtue are more important than being shameless fame whores and their faces going blank like robots that just got Kirk'd.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
because those ruddy kardashians that don't even bloody deserve the fame mate!!!!!
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 05:56
|
|
|
Re: bunch of stuff, I'm only a paralegal so my knowledge isn't definitive, but there's a lot of things that happened in this trial that even I know shouldn't have went down. Also all 854,000 pages of the trial case law can be searched by anyone on several different sites. This is the biggest case in US history in case law size by over 300,000 pages, so it's not light reading or anything. About Clark not using the two witnesses for fear of the defense discrediting them, that's a common trial fallacy that I can go into detail about. Basically you never, ever want to exclude testimony unless it discredits another part of your case. The two people (knife salesman and Bronco witness) would not have discredited anything else, at worst case the jury would have just chosen not to believe them (there's no doubt in the knife salesman though, he had receipts and OJ admitted he bought the knife). The Bronco witness however never said she saw the driver, only that she saw the Bronco driving dangerously. All Clark would've had to prep them with in under cross examination would've been to admit they sold their story, to what news company, for what amount. That's it. At worst case the jury could've chosen not to believe even 1% of their story (unlikely) or best case 100% (unlikely for Bronco witness). In a criminal trial you always want to stack the evidence. Stack it, stack it, stack it. Maybe the jurors wouldn't find the Bronco woman 100% credible but they could still find her story somewhat credible, you never know. Marcia Clark however was operating in some wacko fantasy all or nothing land where if it wasn't 100% it was useless to her. This came back to bite her on the rear end big time but weirdly doesn't even end up being in the top 5 worst decisions she made in the trial. I was going to wait until the trial selection until I posted her worst decision but someone a few pages ago spoiled it so I'll say it now, her worst decision was that she purposely shaped the jury box to be women heavy, because she thought the women would "relate to her" in a case with spousal abuse at the heart of it. Only in the end after the verdict most of the female jurors said they actually hated Clark and found her attitude and speech during the trial obnoxious.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 07:51
|
|
|
The jury selection seems to make sense. The fact that Clark was the precursor to the lawyer from Serial is a different matter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 07:58
|
|
|
A heavy women's jury was not something Darden supported or some of the commentators of the trial did. At the risk of opening a big can of worms ITT heavy women juries have the stigma of making very...strange decisions. I'm not going to argue whether they do or not but there is that belief that exists. It's also worth noting that the defense played right into it. When you find yourself playing into the defense's hand it's probably a good time to stop and re-evaluate your case. As for women juries, it's important to understand that it wasn't until the mid 1970's that women were even allowed to serve on federal juries in all states.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 08:12
|
|
|
It could have been that Clark was so sure, so very sure that this case was a slam dunk 100% win for the prosecution due to what she saw as a great deal of (perhaps circumstantial) evidence and OJ's violent history, that she was willing to exclude the less-than-perfect stuff in favour of... god knows what got sent to the court room ultimately.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 08:55
|
|
|
That's exactly it. She thought she could do without this stuff but it actually turned out to have been stuff that would've/could've saved the case for her because none of it was police generated. The defense was able to make almost all evidence the police collected be tainted, but these things couldn't be tied to that tree. The kicker? She knew from before jury selection that the defense was going to do it. Since I'm already on the jury selection and spoiled the surprise (plus I don't know what way the show will even come down on it) I'll go ahead and point out worst decision #2: Clark's jury woes. First she had a very antagonistic relationship with the jury. She'd repeatedly accuse them of lying on their questionnaires so that they would get in on the jury and at one point tried to have Ito throw out the entire jury, but Ito refused. Secondly she decided to make the entire case rest predominately on DNA evidence, which was still reasonably new at the time. The problem with this? The highest level of education 10 of the 12 jurors completed was high school, one juror never went past 8th grade. She was so concerned with making sure it was as women heavy as possible she let people on the jury who were later deposed for the civil trial to say they couldn't make sense out of most of the DNA testimony. Botnit fucked around with this message at 11:14 on Feb 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 09:36
|
|
|
Botnit posted:Secondly she decided to make the entire case rest predominately on DNA evidence, which was still reasonably new at the time. The problem with this? The highest level of education 10 of the 12 jurors completed was high school, one juror never went past 8th grade. She was so concerned with making sure it was as women heavy as possible she let people on the jury who were later deposed for the civil trial to say they couldn't make sense out of most of the DNA testimony. And the defense poked enough holes in the prosecution's DNA arguments that the jurors found it almost useless to the case. The LAPD didn't actually show a lot of competence in the handling of the blood evidence in the first place which laid the foundation for that, too. The show had a very brief but important aspect of this in an earlier episode, where the vial of Simpson's blood was hand delivered to Det. Vannatter at the crime scene.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 17:22
|
|
|
Yeah, but Patty Hearst paid 
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 04:19
|
|
|
Courtney B. Vance is killing it
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 04:28
|
|
|
Botnit posted:That's exactly it. She thought she could do without this stuff but it actually turned out to have been stuff that would've/could've saved the case for her because none of it was police generated. The defense was able to make almost all evidence the police collected be tainted, but these things couldn't be tied to that tree. The kicker? She knew from before jury selection that the defense was going to do it. That was my memory of it as well, that she felt the DNA evidence was a slam dunk. Then Barry Scheck started tearing that apart and building doubt in the jury's minds. Forgot that this was on tonight, going to have to grab the on-demand episode.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 04:36
|
|
|
Travolta's F-bomb caught me off guard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 05:30
|
|
|
Lmao OJ confused at intersectionality
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 06:22
|
|
|
Yeah Cuba may not physically be a good match for OJ (who recently said that Cuba's head was too small to play him), but if OJ was really that out of it the whole time then he's killing it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 06:28
|
|
|
Botnit posted:This is all from the old Ask/Tell about the case. The reason he was/is so desperate for money is that he owes the estate of their families a poo poo ton of money for losing the civil case. There was an ask/tell about the case? It would have to be years after it concluded. I think one of the biggest mistakes, and this is in the Toobin book (which I read years ago), is Clark blowing up at a young couple who were witnesses and saw the Bronco parked right after the prosecution timeline said it should have left. It would have required only a small timeline adjustment to fit them in, but Clark blew up at them and called them drunk liars. Corek fucked around with this message at 17:16 on Feb 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 08:17
|
|
|
Cacator posted:Yeah Cuba may not physically be a good match for OJ (who recently said that Cuba's head was too small to play him), but if OJ was really that out of it the whole time then he's killing it. I think that's my only issue with the show is that they didn't really do anything at all to make Cuba look like OJ. It's like they spent all their makeup budget on making Travolta into Shapiro. Oh, what was the deal with Ito's wife Margaret looking over that form? She seemed to pause when she saw Fuhrman's name
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 17:08
|
|
|
IMB posted:Travolta's F-bomb caught me off guard. FACK! Another great episode. Curious to learn how many of the beats depicted in this episode regarding the power struggle happening with Simpson's defense team actually happened and can be backed up with proof or eyewitness accounts. On a similar note, does anybody know if Johnnie made up that story about OJ inspiring him to live a better life? Sounds like the kind of thing he could fabricate (or at least highly embellish) in order to get OJ into the right mindset and ultimately name him lead counsel.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 18:08
|
|
|
neckbeard posted:I think that's my only issue with the show is that they didn't really do anything at all to make Cuba look like OJ. It's like they spent all their makeup budget on making Travolta into Shapiro. I believe that was some sort of conflict of interest list that named all of the LAPD officers involved in the case. Ideally Ito's wife would be required to disclose any past dealings or run-ins with any of the officers named on the sheet, and she clearly has some sort of past with Mark Fuhrman (my guess is something sleazy or harassment related since that's how Mark's being painted so far) but she decided to ignore whatever it was so as not to jeopardize her husband's eligibility to preside over the case since he was clearly so excited for the opportunity.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
neckbeard posted:I think that's my only issue with the show is that they didn't really do anything at all to make Cuba look like OJ. It's like they spent all their makeup budget on making Travolta into Shapiro. Yeah, it was a bit jarring in this episode when Schwimmer went to see him alone in jail and they were standing face to face and Cuba was looking up at Schwimmer towering over him. Schwimmer is 3" taller than Cuba. OJ is 6" taller than Kardashian. Cuba really doesn't have the physical build for the role.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 18:46
|
|
|
It annoys me that ShaVolta is wearing what appears to be a Rolex Daytona with a ceramic bezel. It's a watch that didn't come out until just a couple of years ago. With all the other attention to period detail in the show, it really stands out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 19:32
|
|
|
Botnit posted:This is all from the old Ask/Tell about the case. The reason he was/is so desperate for money is that he owes the estate of their families a poo poo ton of money for losing the civil case. Anyone got a link to this thread?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
evobatman posted:It annoys me that ShaVolta is wearing what appears to be a Rolex Daytona with a ceramic bezel. It's a watch that didn't come out until just a couple of years ago. With all the other attention to period detail in the show, it really stands out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 20:51
|
|
|
neckbeard posted:I think that's my only issue with the show is that they didn't really do anything at all to make Cuba look like OJ. It's like they spent all their makeup budget on making Travolta into Shapiro. Every time they showed the defense table in this episode, I thought Tony Gray from The Wire was OJ at first. He's a small guy but he has the real OJ's big forehead and looks more like him than Cuba. Edit: wait, that wasn't Tony Gray? It's not listed on his IMDb. Who's that smaller black lawyer on OJ's team? I think this was his first episode. Kevyn fucked around with this message at 21:42 on Feb 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
Although it really wasn't any different than any other emotionally charged scene involving a parent of a murder victim, Clark meeting with Goldman's father and sister was a pretty strong moment. If for no other reason than it shined a light on the fact that it really IS easy to forget that Nicole wasn't the only victim, and that people knew or cared very little about who Ron was, despite the brutality of his murder.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 23:19
|
|
|
neckbeard posted:I think that's my only issue with the show is that they didn't really do anything at all to make Cuba look like OJ. It's like they spent all their makeup budget on making Travolta into Shapiro. What exactly could they do outside of ridiculous looking facial prosthetics, to make him look anything like OJ? Have him stand on a box?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 23:19
|
|
|
zVxTeflon posted:Have him stand on a box? This has been the basis of Tom Cruise's entire career.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 01:47
|
|
|
OmegaBR posted:Although it really wasn't any different than any other emotionally charged scene involving a parent of a murder victim, Clark meeting with Goldman's father and sister was a pretty strong moment. If for no other reason than it shined a light on the fact that it really IS easy to forget that Nicole wasn't the only victim, and that people knew or cared very little about who Ron was, despite the brutality of his murder. I felt the exact same way. Rons death does often get overlooked. That was an amazing scene and whoever they cast as Rons Dad nailed the look spot on. The costuming and makeup in this series is incredible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
I'm looking forward to the discussion of the dog's plaintive wail. Jury selection is something that bothers me in the US court system. You should just get whatever you're dealt.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
Cuba's doing a good job so I dont really give a poo poo about his height or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
Kevyn posted:Every time they showed the defense table in this episode, I thought Tony Gray from The Wire was OJ at first. He's a small guy but he has the real OJ's big forehead and looks more like him than Cuba. Dale Godboldo, who plays Carl Douglas, Cochran's second-in-command (and the only one of the defense team still a practicing lawyer, I believe.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 02:19
|
|
|
Kevyn posted:Every time they showed the defense table in this episode, I thought Tony Gray from The Wire was OJ at first. He's a small guy but he has the real OJ's big forehead and looks more like him than Cuba. actor is Dale Godboldo - sweet last name http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0004964/?ref_=tt_cl_t13 Speaking of The Wire - Wood Harris (Avon Barksdale) would've made an awesome OJ.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 02:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 11:54 |
|
|
Well don't I look stupid, they covered Clark's idiocy as well as they should have. neckbeard posted:Oh, what was the deal with Ito's wife Margaret looking over that form? She seemed to pause when she saw Fuhrman's name Fuhrman was recorded talking poo poo about Ito's wife (who was his superior at one point) to a movie producer previously, saying she hosed her way to the top(ish) of the LAPD and that she was an ugly troll. Mark this as example #182 of Fuhrman not realizing someone is recording him while he verbally digs his own grave. Corek posted:There was an ask/tell about the case? It would have to be years after it concluded. It was only 3-4 years ago, someone with search will have to find it but it was a good read, non-US goon wanted all the skinny on America's worst greatest trial.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 03:44
|
|