I think there were way to many p.c. things that didn't make a lot of sense given it was set in 1932 but once I suspended disbelief of that stuff, I enjoyed it. I thought it was fun the way they pulled in all the classic Perry Mason characters (Della Street, Paul Drake, Hamilton Burger) into similar but different personna.

of shows that are well-made, but boring. Westworld wins first place on that list.

That show's better for sleep than any CPAP machine on the market!

S2 of True Detective wasn't boring. It was just ultimately too poorly written. It collapsed under its own weight, and it did not develop its stories or characters well enough. It started off okay, included a great setting & subject matter, but it could not finish on the promise. The season failed overall, but it held legitimate promise.

but both were pretty boring. However, the second season did have that one awesome shootout.

Also, anything from Terrence Winter.

one of the greatest single episodes of the greatest television series of all times.

They weren’t show runners on that show. Most people aren’t gonna walk around and credit Michelle McClaren Or Rian Johnson for Breaking Bad instead of Vince Gilligan just because they directed and wrote some of the best episodes of the show. They are going to credit Gilligan.

I have no idea what happened in the second season after the third episode when I gave up.

Someone got high and watched too many David Lynch movies before that season. It wasn’t even fun to hate watch.

I don’t give Winters the credit for that since he wasn’t even part of the first season. The two shows he was show runner on definitely fit the bill. Vinyl was hot expensive garbage.

Very well produced and some great acting. But I thought the storyline was a bit undercooked and the dialogue too eye-rolling in its explanation of certain characters' motivations.

Also, if you're going to have a show named after a legendary character that grants the writers some pre-established affection and expectations, then let him exhibit those legendary characteristics. In my mind, Mason didn't exactly pull off amazing cross-examinations or a stirring closing argument at the trial. It just sort of ended with some of the awful characters continuing to be awful.

I guess cynical nihilism is the main requirement for prestige television nowadays. As for me, I wouldn't mind watching some hope and redemption in my entertainment to be honest.

I agree with your observations.

Have any of you read the Perry Mason books? I was just curious if they are worth reading, or if they are a disappointment.

to the books?

I haven't read the books but from what I understand they're much like the 60's TV show. Gardner even had input into casting Raymond Burr as Mason.

film noir, gum shoe type movies. I also really like Matthew Rhys as an actor.

I think the scene showing that he didn't need to bribe a juror is providing future context that he has real legal skills and should trust them. But, with this being his first case, and with everything stacked against him from the judge to Ennis, etc., he felt the need to take that action to ensure he got the right outcome.

It also took me a second to figure out where Mason got the money to bribe the juror. At first, I thought it was all Shea Wigham's doing until I realize he used the money from the lady buying his parent's farm.