HBO Series "The Night Of" (1 Viewer)

[Zow]

The cinematography of this show was very well done.  It was well thought out, planned, and executed which certainly added to the value of the show.  If those who prefer Blue Bloods can appreciate anything about this show, it probably should be the cinematography. 

I liked the last episode quite a bit, I thought it was well written and executed and the courtroom scenes were the best of all episodes.  I think the one of the only thing about this whole presentation that really bothered me was the Kapour kiss and cooter smuggle which is far-fetched at best.  Do you know lawyers?  Do you know high-priced lawyers?  Well if you do you know they are quite possibly the biggest pussssssies in the entire world (present company excluded...).  I work with them all the time, they take chances on tie color and whether to get heated seats in their Jaguars.  An Indian American female attorney working at a big firm on a huge case doing what she did, is about as likely as a Trump follower thinking a joke about the world being 6000 years old is funny.  It wouldn't happen, it's just not possible.  Also just tripping across cell phone records at the last minute for a cop that was locked in, seemed odd.

Otherwise the show was worth the time invested and whether or not you think he actually did it, left a lot open to interpretation.  Seems to me that people who didn't like the show at all like a tidy ending, like they have in CSI Miami (and also some one liner zingers to boot!!!!!!).  Not an Emmy winner or anything but all considered the acting was good, the story was good enough, and the cinematography was excellent. 

  #### you.  I mean you're absolutely right, but #### you…

 

[Zow]

That's right. The Chandra kissing/smuggling was a cheap plot device and so was the eczema, which again was designed as it turns out purely for the dramatic closing argument. There was Stone, looking like Aqualung, yeah Nas was surely sunk, right? Pfft I gave this show too much credit early. Again, great acting across the board, great atmospherics, great premise & direction, lousy screenwriting IMO.

What I never get with these shows is why they don't pay some like third year public defender a view grand to review the script and point out the few unrealistic/ridiculous things in it regarding law and procedure.  It wouldn't impact any of the plot and would, in my opinion, enhance the realistic quality of the show.  But, instead, we're left with "badgering" objections and blatant ethical violations. Which really aren't the biggest deal in the world, I guess.  But it warps the minds of future defendants and their families who actually really anticipate that these things happen in trials.  

 

[Zow]

I dunno, I'm starting to change my mind on this. I mean, instruct the jury all you want, every "Serial" or "The Staircase" or whatever I've seen that talked to real jurors, they always say they take it into consideration and it makes them feel the suspect is guilty even more. 

Well, that and the fact that the decision whether to testify is one of two strategical decisions left solely up to the defendant (the other being whether to accept a plea bargain).  Obviously, he should listen to his attorney's advice, but that decision is solely up to the defendant. 

 

[Zow]

I'm pretty nonplussed by the ending though.

Something that ticks me off in any book, movie, play or tv show is when the makers involve the viewer for whatever X hours and then in the last phase they just throw in some new information. That's not very cool. It's manipulative and lazy from a writing standpoint. 

So we spend 7-1/2 shows learning about the thug on the street and the stepfather and the hearse driver and Andrea's drug dealer and even Nas' own mixed history... and then at the very very end oh look it's the financial advisor. Never mind.

Writers do this when they get in a bind and some actually think it's just great, but they're hacks. This is the kind of thing a Box of cable tv melodramas would do.

I think the point was that in reality there's a lot of unknown in cases.  While not well-executed here, that's a valid point.  Many cases/trials end with everybody walking away having zero clue what actually happened/didn't happen. 

 

[El Floppo]

The cinematography of this show was very well done.  It was well thought out, planned, and executed which certainly added to the value of the show.  If those who prefer Blue Bloods can appreciate anything about this show, it probably should be the cinematography. 

I liked the last episode quite a bit, I thought it was well written and executed and the courtroom scenes were the best of all episodes.  I think the one of the only thing about this whole presentation that really bothered me was the Kapour kiss and cooter smuggle which is far-fetched at best.  Do you know lawyers?  Do you know high-priced lawyers?  Well if you do you know they are quite possibly the biggest pussssssies in the entire world (present company excluded...).  I work with them all the time, they take chances on tie color and whether to get heated seats in their Jaguars.  An Indian American female attorney working at a big firm on a huge case doing what she did, is about as likely as a Trump follower thinking a joke about the world being 6000 years old is funny.  It wouldn't happen, it's just not possible.  Also just tripping across cell phone records at the last minute for a cop that was locked in, seemed odd.

Otherwise the show was worth the time invested and whether or not you think he actually did it, left a lot open to interpretation.  Seems to me that people who didn't like the show at all like a tidy ending, like they have in CSI Miami (and also some one liner zingers to boot!!!!!!).  Not an Emmy winner or anything but all considered the acting was good, the story was good enough, and the cinematography was excellent. 

don't remember if I chimed in yet when I caught up... but it's all been said already, sim to DD's comments above. 

beautifully filmed, paced and acted. I liked the writing for the dialogue, but less so the overall plot arcs. thought there were too many ridiculous things (Naz's complete OG/drug-addict shift... lawyer idiocy... last second investigations/chase scenes by the attorney... etc, etc.) to take this into high quality tv... which is a little unfortunate, because the rest is good.

I was so-so on the ending. the cooch/kiss was ridiculous- agree about top-tier attorneys never doing something like this, especially given this girl's extrapolated background. I kept saying, given the themes and style of the show that they weren't going to definitively show/say who done it, and were going to leave it to the jury... as would happen in real life. I liked that- not so much the last second "oh, this other guy looks guilty"/ so prosecutor is ok about not re-trying and too easy set-up for second season.

 

[Zow]

Is a defense team allowed to basically accuse other people of a crime on the stand as part of their defense strategy?

Possibly, but unlikely.  Totally in bounds to question the officers re: who they didn't speak to, what leads they didn't explore, etc.  Going beyond that, to the extent of actually calling the people, probably not admissible unless there's some firm evidence. Aside from that though I just think it's bad strategy. I'd much rather reference the man behind the curtain in a reasonable doubt/police didn't do their jobs argument than actually give the jury a chance to meet him and have him deny and logically explain. It's also just generally bad strategy to call hostile witnesses because you don't know what they'll say.   

 

[Zow]

Naturally I defer to you, however I just took it as a cheap screenwriting trick.

Right.  I don't disagree with you that it was overdone with the "here are three random, plausible alternate killers… oh wait it's actually the seemingly with it, white collar guy!".  Having a randomly unmentioned witness who likes to hurt people with knives, a conniving stepfather with financial motivation, and a random dark/mysterious dude literally referred to as the "undertaker" was a bit much. 

 

[Sinn Fein]

Right.  I don't disagree with you that it was overdone with the "here are three random, plausible alternate killers… oh wait it's actually the seemingly with it, white collar guy!".  Having a randomly unmentioned witness who likes to hurt people with knives, a conniving stepfather with financial motivation, and a random dark/mysterious dude literally referred to as the "undertaker" was a bit much. 

He was an undertaker, wasn't he?

 

[jamny]

If people tell you that penis tastes great do you run out to taste one?  Just curious. 

That would be like a network drama. I don't care how good people say it is, I'm not watching it.

 

[Zow]

Yes he's literally an undertaker, but that makes it more over the top to me. 

 

[Good Posting Judge]

Would've been better if it was The Undertaker imo.

 

[Sebowski]

I'm sure I'll get yelled at for answering, but: 

1.  Personally, if I'm approaching a trial with a "it could have been somebody else" defense, I better actually have something.  I think it's bad strategy to say it could have been these three random other people -- I'd prefer to have one, consistent theory of defense (self-defense, this particular Joe did it, no physical/medical evidence, etc.).  Heck, there's a decent chance that a judge probably would have precluded the defense from exploring these alternate theories with the lack of evidence that they had (more on this shortly). I'm not saying this is an incredibly bad strategy or implausible, but with the overwhelming evidence pointing towards Naz I'd have focused on a more defined theory of defense rather than the employ the throw a bunch of #### out there and see what sticks type defense. 

It looks like a lot of people are missing this. I don't think the defense's angle was that those other people did it, it is that the cops made up their minds to quickly and didn't go through proper investigations. As was processed and convicted in their minds before any investigation at all. He didn't get a fair shake. They didn't put those other suspects on trial. THEY PUT THE SYSTEM ON TRIAL!!!! Sorry, that just needs to be all caps when typed. Pretty sure that's a law. 

C+ season for me, fwiw. 

 

[RUSF18]

I think Stone legitimately believed the stepfather might have done it. 

The ridiculous kiss/drug mule thing still bothers me. They could have come up with 20 better reasons for her to sit aside and get Turturro up there for the closing argument. She could have had a panic attack due to inexperience/knowing she already ####ed up by putting Nas on the stand and not wanting to make it worse. It would have been cheesy but much more believable. One of Freddy's guys on the outside could have intimidated her to giving up the first chair because of how much more confident he was in Stone than her. Even though they would have had to find another way to get us a wet spot on a bench.

 

[James Daulton]

I think Stone legitimately believed the stepfather might have done it. 

The ridiculous kiss/drug mule thing still bothers me. They could have come up with 20 better reasons for her to sit aside and get Turturro up there for the closing argument. She could have had a panic attack due to inexperience/knowing she already ####ed up by putting Nas on the stand and not wanting to make it worse. It would have been cheesy but much more believable. One of Freddy's guys on the outside could have intimidated her to giving up the first chair because of how much more confident he was in Stone than her. Even though they would have had to find another way to get us a wet spot on a bench.

No no, much more reasonable that she was so into Naz that she was perfectly willing to shove crack up her snatch. 

 

[Thorn]

I think Stone legitimately believed the stepfather might have done it. 

The ridiculous kiss/drug mule thing still bothers me. They could have come up with 20 better reasons for her to sit aside and get Turturro up there for the closing argument. She could have had a panic attack due to inexperience/knowing she already ####ed up by putting Nas on the stand and not wanting to make it worse. It would have been cheesy but much more believable. One of Freddy's guys on the outside could have intimidated her to giving up the first chair because of how much more confident he was in Stone than her. Even though they would have had to find another way to get us a wet spot on a bench.

She could have just said to Stone, I've never done a closing on a criminal case, he's been your client since day one, you can talk about seeing him moments after being arrested, I think you need to do the closing.  No idea why they had that weird contrivance. 

 

[Skoo]

She could have just said to Stone, I've never done a closing on a criminal case, he's been your client since day one, you can talk about seeing him moments after being arrested, I think you need to do the closing.  No idea why they had that weird contrivance. 

Let's not forget, this is also the reason we watched about 3 hours of eczema/cat footage.

 

[El Floppo]

the last scene... homage to The Departed, IMO.

 

[GregR]

Haven't read the thread yet as I'm just starting Episode 5.

I find I'm cheering for Stone's feet most of all.