TV and Movies

[Mz iMac]

@ROMARY

---

@ROMARY wrote:

It (Bull) was interesting, although I must have missed something because I didn't understand the ending.  But, I don't want this to be a spoiler for others, so I'll ask around or re-watch it later.  ............ Also, I didn't realize it was based on Dr. Phil's previous profession or whatever. (?)   Another interesting bit of info.

---

Spoiler

The spoiled rich boy's drugie smart ass girlfriend mother was the murderer.  She had the murder girl's missing necklace which was given to her by the spoiled rich kid.
She wanted her daughter to be the "real" girl friend of the spoiled rich boy, not her gay husband.

Oh, the mother's husband was the one who the rich spoiled brat boy spent the night with.

got all that?

[ROMARY]

Thank You, MzImac!  Now it all makes sense.  I guess I dozed off somewhere along the line, lol. 

[Mz iMac]

@ROMARYYou're welcome. 

You must have blinked during the courtroom scene when the rich kid was

Spoiler

exchanging loving looks w/the "fake" girlfriend father. 

Bull saw the whole thing & that's when he put 2 & 2 together.

[Caaareful Shopper]

I loved Michael Weatherly on NCIS.  I really wanted to like Bull, despite the Dr. Phil premise.  I most certainly did NOT.  All that hyper-ego prattling on about the psychological process and breaking people down to mere data points -- I was so tired of it all.  Predictable and boring.  The supporting characters are all stereotypes; every one of them played right off a Hollywood checklist.

In addition, I think some actors are best in a strong supporting role.  I think Weatherly is over his head as lead actor, at least in this show.  I don't see this one lasting a 2nd season if things don't change.

[Lovemyboots]

My husband & I really like Michael Weatherly but we only made it the first 20 minutes or so. That was it. Sorry but just thought it was really really boring! 

[MamaWick]

I was turned off by all the "DR" Jason Bull introductions...even by the character himself.  Okay, so you have a PhD.  Do you make your mother call you "DR?" 

[Noel7]

---

@ChynnaBlue wrote:

---

@Zita wrote:

Have to agree with these assessments. Besides the turnoff of Dr. Phil, I just don't believe in the premise. Found the few moments I wasted on this to be boring. (TV shows, like books, have to grab me on the first page or I move on.)

---

Which part of the premise? Because jury consultants like that are real and do work like that. One of the privileges of being wealthy is being able to afford services like that, which is one of the reasons prisons are full of poor people. A consultant was hired to help choose the OJ Simpson jury.

Mirror Jurys are also used by consultants, just as depicted on the show. You can Google a variety of jury consultants to read more about them and how they work.

---

*******************************

Backing up @ChynnaBlue

Jury consultants and mock trials with like-minded jury members are very real.

The psychology of choosing jurors based on what they can find out about them is very real.

[Noel7]

I thought it was fascinating.  However...

I can't stand Dr. Phil and that ruined it for me.  And seeing Michael Weatherly dressed as a schlump was just wrong.

[Noel7]

---

@silkyk wrote:

Kinda creepy thinking that if you get picked for jury duty on a big case that a bunch of snoops will be looking into every tiny part of your life including work, home life, computer use etc.. And then what happens to all that info? Way too invasive for my liking. Investigate the criminals and defendents NOT the jury. No wonder so many people do NOT want to serve on jury duty. Who the heck want to have their whole life investigated just because they got picked for a jury? Not me! 

---

***********************

@silkyk

But they do investigate the jury.  That's why certain questions are asked when they address possible jurors.

I got excused from a high-profile case in gun dealing once because they asked the entire lot of us potentials who believed in gun control and I was one who raised my hand.  All who did raise their hands were excused.

[ChynnaBlue]

---

@Noel7 wrote:

---

@silkyk wrote:

Kinda creepy thinking that if you get picked for jury duty on a big case that a bunch of snoops will be looking into every tiny part of your life including work, home life, computer use etc.. And then what happens to all that info? Way too invasive for my liking. Investigate the criminals and defendents NOT the jury. No wonder so many people do NOT want to serve on jury duty. Who the heck want to have their whole life investigated just because they got picked for a jury? Not me! 

---

***********************

@silkyk

But they do investigate the jury.  That's why certain questions are asked when they address possible jurors.

I got excused from a high-profile case in gun dealing once because they asked the entire lot of us potentials who believed in gun control and I was one who raised my hand.  All who did raise their hands were excused.

---

Voir Dire questioning isn't really what I'd call investigating. They ask well-crafted questions designed to get at the information or traits they want, but they aren't really examining too deeply. It's very superficial, even taking into account any questionnaire they may have you complete before you show up or when you show up.

On the show, they exposed a deeper level of investigation for the people selected for the jury, both because that's when it really matters (why investigate a pool of 50 people when you can investigate 12 and two alternates once the jury is selected?) and because it's TV. They exaggerated some things for the sake of TV drama.

I've been through Voir Dire a few times and it's always interesting. The last time was weird. The prosecuting attorney asked a few questions, called a few individuals and asked them more questions, then passed to the defense attorney. The defense attorney told us a story, watched our reactions, then asked if anyone had any questions. I was the only person who raised my hand and asked a question. I asked him to clarify something - I don't recall what I wanted clarified or even the story he told. That was it. Five minutes later, they announced the numbers of the people who would be on the jury. They picked a few people who had been questioned individually and a few who had not. They picked mostly people with numbers lower than mine and a few with numbers higher than mine and sent me home. I figure the defense attorney thought I'd be a pain in the rear end and ask more questions.

Fine by me. I went to work and read up on the case in question later that night and it sounded like a mess - armed robbery, kidnapping (they drove the person down the street) and a shooting. I've already been on a jury for the rape of a minor and was definitely fine missing out on that mess.