MagneticMediaFed’s Daytime Television Exposé! Part 1: Court is now in session
Since starting this site last spring I’ve watched a lot of television. I’d like to think I’m watching television so that you don’t have to, but honestly I’m just watching television because I really, really like the medium and need something to do while wolfing down Cool-Ranch Doritos. Still, there’s a lot I don’t watch. Does that mean its bad? Probably, but how will I know if I don’t sit down and watch it. One of the biggest mysteries to me is “daytime” television. These are shows that are targeted toward housewives or former dock-workers home on disability. They are shows that are designed to sell soap (sure, all shows are designed to sell soap, but these really like to lather it up thick). I want to know what America’s stay-at-home populace watches during the day, and so I’m officially christening the beginning of MagneticMediaFed’s Daytime Television Exposé!. Over the next few weeks I’m hoping to tackle all the major subjects: talk-shows featuring former sitcom stars yacking on couches, Hollywood gossip rags, Springer, Oprah, the noon news and everything in between. When all is said and done I hope to either have a firm grasp on viewing patterns of millions of Americans or hope to be institutionalized for running through the streets of New York screaming about my unrequited love of Greg Bernhardt.
But before we get there, lets start by taking a look at the myriad “Judge” shows splattered across most of the pre-primetime television spectrum. I’ve got the skinny right after the jump…
“You sir! I stand here in judgement, of you!” — Harvey Birdman
In the New York metropolitan area there are NINE (9!) courtroom shows broadcast on the major networks between 9am and 5pm, taking up a crazy eleven-and-a-half hours of airtime. Most of the shows are 30 minutes long, though there are a couple that run a full hour, and of the 30 minute shows almost all are broadcast in multiple episode blocks. Basically, if you’re the type of person who is absolutely fascinated by small-claims court, you should really start working the night shift as to not miss a single frame of the non-stop fury that is daytime court-TV.
All of the shows are basically the same. There’s a judge sitting behind the bench. This judge is frequently tough and no-nonsense (male) or sassy and mildly threatening (female). This judge is also “ethnic,” even if you can’t tell. The judge will have a bailiff. If the judge is white, the bailiff will be black. If the judge is a man, the bailiff will likely be female. The bailiff will be huge (male) or carry a gun (female). Regardless, the bailiff has the judge’s back. Each case will have a plaintiff who seems mostly petty, and a defendant who clearly did it and really doesn’t want to be here. The case, no matter the difficulty, will be judged in either 15 minutes (9 minutes actual TV time) or 30 minutes (22 minutes actual TV time). There will be a logo on the screen the whole time. It will tell you what show you are watching in case you forget. The show will end with a gavel slamming on the bench, and you, the viewer, won’t really understand why the plaintiff was awarded $317 but you accept this decision because you are not sassy or ethnic or have a bailiff and the credits are rolling and what’s the point of rewinding.
Every episode of every show is like this, with a few changes here and there. Let’s take a closer look at these differences:
Hearing that her last name is Lopez may lead you to believe that Judge Maria is a sassy latin woman, but you would be wrong. Maybe. It’s hard to tell exactly what ethnicity Judge Lopez is per se. My best guess is “Marlboro” as her voice suggests she been sucking down a carton and a half every week for the last 24 years. She kind of looks like Katie Couric by way of Miami beach (only with a thick Long Island accent).
In the show’s opening Judge Maria Lopez says, “You want the American dream? I am the American dream!” I believe her.
The show is 30-minutes with two cases. The cases are silly. In the end Judge Maria Lopez gives everyone a little lesson.
None of this matters. All you need to know about Judge Lopez is summed up in the bio page on her website. Just skim over all that nonsense about graduating from Smith College and working in a law office and such and instead focus on the difference between the publicity photo of her and the picture of her from the actual show.
Case dismissed.
MMF Rating: 2 out of 5 gavels
Cristina’s Court
Cristina’s last name is Perez. Perez also suggests Latin-America, but Cristina couldn’t be more white-bread if she were on Saltines payroll. Judge Cristina is kind of an creepier Laura Dern. Cristina’s show is better than Maria’s. I know its better because her bailiff is bigger. Cristina, like any good TV-Judge is a no-nonsense kind of gal. Her rational on the cases is strong for TV-Court standards, in that I felt like I understood why the person who won walked away happy, which is kind funny since no one seemed happy in the two cases I watched. Basically everyone would present their side of the story, Cristina would make her decision, and then both parties would walk away confused. In Cristina’s court no one is a winner.
Thirty-minutes. Two cases.
MMF Rating: 2.5 out of 5 gavels
Judge Alex (whose last name is the very ethnic “Ferrer”) was originally a cop before he became a trial lawyer and eventually a judge. But the question remains, does he play by the rules? I guess. Alex has a likable enough personality. He’s funny and not very abrasive, though one could argue that abrasiveness is exactly what these shows need.
While watching Judge Alex I noticed a trend in the plaintiff/defendant pairing. One seemed to be kind of straight-laced and one seemed like a freak. The freak lost most of the time (just like in life).
One great thing about Judge Alex is that a little timer popped up over the logo-bug to let us know that the decision was only two minutes away. Sweet! Just enough time for me to make a sandwich and rally the family around the set.
The show is 30 minutes with two cases.
MMF Rating: 3.5 out of 5 gavels
Judge Mathis
Judge Mathis has the perfect show opening. “He was a troubled kid who got a second chance! He went to law school. He became a lawyer and then a judge. Take that hard knocks!”
Greg Mathis is a no-nonsense black man. He has a white bailiff. Watching his show is kind of like watching a court show judged by Bill Cosby. Judge Mathis likes to interrupt the testimony. This is good. We don’t care what these people have to say, we care about justice and only the judge has the gavel, so the plaintiff can go ahead and shut the hell up as far as I’m concerned.
Judge Mathis has a good set. It has a lot of royal blue. It makes me feel like I’m in good hands. It makes me want to be judged or sit in judgement of someone else.
Judge Mathis likes to slouch. He also like to rap with the bailiff, who apparently is Robert Patrick (but acts like Kevin Eubanks). At one point Mathis calls the defendant a crack-head and then she walks out of the court room. That’s hardcore.
These shows seem to go after the strangest cases with the most elaborate and peculiar setups. Really, its all about the story. The whole show is three people talking and recreating a story, so the more odd the story the better I suppose.
The best thing about the judgments, Mathis included, is how quickly they’re decided and with such force the gavel is slammed down before we go to commercial. It’s like slight of hand. You don’t have time to think about how illogical any of it actually is.
These shows seem to showcase the seedy underbelly of the American middle-class.
Judge Mathis is an hour long (though a fast hour) and has 4 cases.
MMF Rating: 4.5 out of 5 gavels
Judge Joe Brown wishes he were Judge Greg Mathis. Or maybe its the other way around. I don’t really know, but I do know that he’s no Mathis. Joe Brown is an Mmm-Hmmm kinda judge. As in, he says, “Mmmmm-Hmmmm” after just about every single fact that is presented to the court. It’s kind of maddening/comforting.
Judge Joe Brown also kicks up the production a bit by having a Swoosh sound accompany all lower-third graphics. This is equally as maddening/comforting as the Mmmm-Hmmms. What’s nice is we get to actually see the evidence in this show as opposed to just hearing about the evidence in others. Joe Brown also has the most realistic looking courtroom.
Also interesting: Female bailiff. She looks kind of like Laura Kightlinger.
Judge Joe Brown has a mustache that either looks sick and alive or healthy but dead or just fake. It’s hard to say. What I can tell you is that when you go to commercial a voice says, “It’s Joe Time… after this,” which I found enjoyable.
Clearly Judge Joe Brown is living in the 21st-century as the audience in the courtroom gets to vote on a keypad about whether they agree with the verdict or not. Imagine if they had had this at the OJ trial.
Curious: Judge Joe Brown frequently talks with his eyes shut, and often faces the wrong direction when talking to someone. Cute and endearing or troublesome?
Thirty minutes. Two cases.
MMF Rating: 3 out of 5 gavels
Judge Hatchett
She’s a sassy black woman. This I know. Here’s also what I know: this is the worst of the bunch. First of all, the show seems to have a “baby-daddy” theme to it. I don’t know if this is always the case, but it is what the episode I watched had to deal with as well as the promos for future episodes. The problem is that we have two parties who are arguing if the guy is actually the babies father or not. The judge has a DNA test. But for some reason she still has them present their case. Why? You HAVE the DNA test!? It doesn’t matter who does a better job presenting their side of the story. Science says the kid either IS or ISN’T his. And then they have the balls to make us wait through three different teases before opening the god damn letter? The show should literally be two people walking into the courtroom, the judge saying who the dad is, and then two people walking out of the courtroom.
The one good part was that the bailiff, who looked like a fatter Michael Chiklis, DID NOT want the two parties to address each other directly. “No talking! No talking!” Very funny.
Thirty minute show, ONE(?!) case.
MMF Rating: 1 out of 5 gavels
Now you’re talking! This is what its all about. I know that this is what its all about because the opening sequence plays Beathoven’s 5th and ends with a show of “Blind Justice” lifting up her mask and winking at us. So perfect.
Judge Judy Sheindlin knows how to put on a show. She starts out real soft spoken and direct, but as people start to interrupt, the fury is unleashed. Also, she seems like the only of the TV-judges who take any time explaining the finer points of law (or at least as much as you need to follow along). Not only that but the show has good drama. Its only one case for the half-hour, but that case is presented in acts. After the second act we’re totally on one guys side, but then… Oh what’s that? You have a felony? BAM! A whole new ballgame. Judge Judy is really the only show worth watching.
MMF Rating: 5 out of 5 gavels
The People’s Court
The People’s Court is an American original. It succeeds because its classic. It has the music that plays when the plaintiff/defendant walk into court with all that awesome high-hat and the baseline that sounds like N.E.R.D.’s “Rockstar.” It also has Man-on-the-Street interviews done by some random lawyer in Times Square. He also checks in as the cases go on to fill us in on the legalese.
The biggest problem is that Judge Marilyn Milian doesn’t really do a lot for me. Sure, she’s a redheaded spitfire, but sometimes you need just a little more. Also, I can’t trust a judge who doesn’t appear in press photos in focus. Seriously, what’s that all about?
What is cool is that the show is an hour long and does three cases, which gives you a little more time for each without overdoing it.
MMF Rating: 3.5 out of 5 gavels
Divorce Court is presided over by Judge Lynn Toler Esq (yes, Esq.!), who looks kind of like Toni Braxton from 1991, but she’s really the least interesting part of this show. Divorce Court has the best cases because its all arguing couples. It’s about as straight-forward as the genre can get. The judge doesn’t need to be the personality, but instead just needs to steer the madness of dying love.
The highlight happens at the end of the show as the credits start to role (one case for each 30-minute episode) when the couple leaves the court together and then goes and squabbles in the hall.
MMF Rating: 4 out of 5 gavels
And that, my friends, is the list. There might be some more court shows airing on cable networks (like, oh, I don’t know, CourtTV) or the like (is Texas Justice still produced?), but sometimes you just have to draw a line in the sand.
The real question remains: who is watching all of this? Let’s say that EVERYONE is watching this, which they very well might be doing, I’m still curious why you need nine different versions of the same thing. Five versions? Sure. Six? Maybe. Not nine. Nine is unnecessary. Nine makes you question what exactly a television scheduling executive has to know before getting the job. How to look at other networks and plan the exact same lineup but with different faces? I guess, yes.
There is something interesting about a show where one person tries to get two other people to tell a cohesive story. There’s something perhaps more interesting about how hard it is to truly pull off.
Next time… Talk, Talk, Talk
Tags: Daytime Television
October 30th, 2006 at 1:16 pm
when i was living in chicago a couple of years ago i took a job on the judge mathis show as a court audience member. security was absurdly tight. they’d only let five people go to the bathroom at a time between tapings. it was a hot summer so the set was stifling, and it reeked of hotdogs.
the filthy underbelly of television court justice — exposed!!
October 30th, 2006 at 3:51 pm
In this bunch of t.v. judges: six women, and almost as many “persons of color”. If only federal judicial chambers housed such diversity. Do these programs showcase the possibilities of a more perfect U.S. legal system? Divorce Court as aspirational television? How’s that for a spin.
November 3rd, 2006 at 4:38 am
I think the fact that I work 3:30 p.m. to midnight Sun-Thurs and don’t watch daytime television AT ALL might say something. My demographic is not catered to in the least. I don’t care about court shows or soap operas or talk shows or mindless game shows. So I’m basically out. But then again, are they seeking my age group? No, not at all. How many 24 year-old males are available to watch daytime TV. Pretty slim.
So anyway, yeah… you can see why I’m bitter that I miss all the awesome primetime shows I read about here and even have a Fantasy TV team based around them (that is currently in 4th, might I add). Can a man get some Lost without owning a DVR? Oh well…
November 14th, 2006 at 1:40 pm
[...] It should also be noted that I’ve been trying to get through these programs since recording them on November 1st, 2nd and 3rd. Watching all of the “Judge” shows was at times trying, but it was never as emotionally draining as these damn talk shows. On the whole, the programs are so vapid you actually feel your brain is melting like Velveeta in the sun. This, obviously, isn’t the case for every program, but it certainly argues that no one should be watching this much daytime television in one sitting. Unfortunately for me, I discovered this last night at two in the morning. I’ve got the low-down on the first seven shows right after the jump… [...]