{"id":8776,"date":"2008-01-08T19:16:25","date_gmt":"2008-01-09T00:16:25","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/2008\/01\/08\/the-long-and-short-of-lawyer-films"},"modified":"2011-08-05T14:53:34","modified_gmt":"2011-08-05T18:53:34","slug":"the-long-and-short-of-lawyer-films","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/2008\/01\/08\/the-long-and-short-of-lawyer-films\/","title":{"rendered":"the long and short of lawyer films"},"content":{"rendered":"

O<\/em><\/strong>n a sunny day when Spamalot<\/em> comes to Schenectady<\/a> (see Gazette<\/em> photo<\/a>), along with record-high<\/a> temperatures, the f\/k\/a<\/em> Gang seems especially frantic to get me to step foot outside and avoid this weblog. You’d think that would be easy, now that we’ve sworn off writing about legal ethics (and successfully overcame<\/a> the temptation to join in the current blawgisphere discussion of billable hours<\/a> and the status of lawyers<\/a> in our society). But, alas, nothing ever seems easy or uncomplicated around here.<\/p>\n

\n

the morning after –
\nshe says hindsight
\nis 20\/40<\/p>\n

……………………………….. dagosan<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n

For example, an email came yesterday from Lisa Solomon, of the humor-vending Billable Hour Company<\/a>, asking whether writing about a lawyer-ethics video clip [to wit, “Ethical Dropout<\/a><\/em>” at BHC’s new The Video Venue<\/a>] constitutes prohibited punditry these days at f\/k\/a<\/em>. That got me thinking way too hard about politesse, parsing, punchlines, and similar p-words. It also reminded me how much I actually enjoyed, prior to getting broadband access a few months ago, being able to tell friends, “I only have a dial-up modem, so I can’t go to YouTube to marvel at your new fave video.”<\/p>\n

Since we watched the whole thing, here is our painfully-honest, mini-review of the 5-minute TVV video “Ethical Dropout<\/a>“: Didn’t laugh, lust, or learn any legal ethics.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Eventually, I decided that “pointing ain’t punditry<\/em>” and I remembered — especially after reading about the up-coming truncated<\/a> version of the Golden Globes<\/a> — that I’ve been meaning to tell our readers about some interesting sources and resources on “lawyer films.”<\/p>\n

\n

Fictional lawyer “Michael Clayton<\/a><\/em>” confronts many ethical issues and personal crises in the critically-acclaimed eponymous film, which is likely to be a big winner at awards shows this year (see Wikipedia<\/a> for awards, and nominations; and find critic reviews<\/a>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n

So, without undue explanation, explication, nor exegesis, here are some links for lovers and critics of lawyers on film:<\/p>\n

\n

highway patrolman –
\nhis leather jacket squeaks
\ntaking the stand
\n………………………………………………. by barry george<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n

LPOP<\/em><\/strong> — The Lawyer and Popular Culture Collection<\/a><\/strong>, housed at the U. Texas Tarlton Law Library, brings together information and materials on how the profession is portrayed in the our modern culture. As part of its collection, LPOP owns over 700 featured films and tv series<\/a> about lawyers — from Abe Lincoln in Illinois<\/em><\/a> (1940) to Zoot Suit<\/em><\/a> (1981). Click for its alphabetical list<\/a>. The website also republishes scholarly work such as “Reading\/Teaching Lawyer Films<\/a>,” by Prof. Prof. James R. Elkins<\/a> (see our prior post<\/a> on his Legal Studies Forum<\/em>), Vermont Law Review, Volume 28, Number 4 (2004).<\/p>\n

\n
\n

summer day
\na seat in the movies
\naway from others<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

…………………….. by John Stevenson<\/font><\/font><\/strong><\/font><\/a><\/font><\/font><\/font><\/strong><\/font> – Upstate Dim Sum<\/font><\/em><\/a> (2004\/II<\/font><\/a>)<\/span><\/span><\/font><\/font><\/font><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n

I<\/em><\/strong>f you’re serious about the genre of lawyer films, and the discipline\/past-time of legal film criticism, you will want to read the Winter 2007 edition of the Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review<\/em><\/a>, which presents the “Symposium: Access to Justice: Law and Popular Culture<\/a>“( Vol. 40, No. 2, 2007). You’ll find a summary of the symposium submissions in an Introduction<\/a> by Prof. John T. Nockleby (at 539). The table of contents<\/a> contains links to articles such as:<\/p>\n