Does *Anyone* Like Scott Wallace?
Hpnepa
I find Scott Wallace more of an enigma than just about any character who's
ever been on; Judge Hiller said it best when she said she had absolutely no
idea if he was guilty or not.
The risks Bobby is taking in regard to his reputation will be devastating if
some new piece of evidence surfaces that makes it evident (if only to the
viewer) that Wallace is guilty.
Just because Wallace is "white bread" doesn't mean he can't be fascinating.
I'd really like to hear if anyone else finds him that way.
tmhollywood
history!!! what is with this guy? and why does david kelly insist on
continuing with this losers drama? i sincerely hope that they let him go
and bobby decides not to represent him due to the possible conflicts. i was
so happy when the other partners voted against him last week, but then they
show bobby, feeling guilty, acting like this isnt the end after all. give
it up! the guy is guilty, story over! find a new character, one that's
interesting!
Rob
"Hpnepa" <hpn...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20001225155202...@ng-ff1.aol.com...
Hpnepa
>'cause he's a wimp :-)
Serious question: Why? I don't understand. Is it something about Bruce
Davison's face? I'm asking because the character obviously is inspiring very
negative reactions that I don't understand.
I don't think he's a wimp at all but some Job-like character, and I personally
hope he's on for the rest of the season, (Serious!)
Kelly at klkbeadworks
>
> Serious question: Why? I don't understand. Is it something about Bruce
> Davison's face? I'm asking because the character obviously is inspiring very
> negative reactions that I don't understand.
>
What fascinates me is the way his eyes are always rheumy and bloodshot, as if he's
been up drinking for most of the night.
Kelly
so_t...@my-deja.com
hpn...@aol.com (Hpnepa) wrote:
> I can't figure out why people on this newsgroup dislike this character
so much.
> I find Scott Wallace more of an enigma than just about any character
who's
> ever been on; Judge Hiller said it best when she said she had
absolutely no
> idea if he was guilty or not.
The character is fine and Bruce Davison plays him well. (For a movie in
which Davison got a lot of critical acclaim, see "Longtime Companion".)
The problem is that I -- and it sounds like most viewers -- am tired of
the story line. And now with Bobby abandoning all logic in his desire to
defend Scott for a murder that two of his associates witnessed, the
story line is no longer enjoyable or compelling.
While I usually appreciate that on the Practice (like real life) we
don't know for sure whether someone really committed the crime, in this
case I feel it weakened the story line. If we 100% knew that Wallace
wass innocent, the storyline could have been a moving exploration of the
devastation to a person's life of being wrongly accused of your spouse's
murder while coping with their suicide. But since there was always some
doubt, when we watch Wallace we are always trying to determine how
credible he is.
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
Hunter
Well, that tends to happen to you if your was murdered was in jail for
her murder you didn't commit and you lose all of your friends, your
career, the respect and support of your community, the contemptuous
looks you get from strangers. If he didn't have an adverse reaction to
all that *that* would be somewhat suspicious.
--
----Hunter
"The most outrageous lies that can be invented will find believers if a
person only tells them with all his might." Mark Twain
Kelly at klkbeadworks
> >
> > What fascinates me is the way his eyes are always rheumy and
> bloodshot, as if he's
> > been up drinking for most of the night.
> >
>
> her murder you didn't commit and you lose all of your friends, your
> career, the respect and support of your community, the contemptuous
> looks you get from strangers. If he didn't have an adverse reaction to
> all that *that* would be somewhat suspicious.
> --
True, but that misses the point -- it's one thing to be a good actor (as
Tracy said, "don't let them catch you at it"), but to get one's eyes to
follow suit physically is a damn good trick!
Hpnepa
>> What fascinates me is the way his >>eyes are always rheumy and bloodshot, >>
as if he's been up drinking for most of >> the night.
>>
>> Kelly
>Well, that tends to happen to you if your > was murdered was in jail for her
murder > you didn't commit and you lose all of > > your friends, your career,
the respect > and support of your community, the > > contemptuous looks you get
from > strangers. If he didn't have an adverse > > reaction to all that *that*
would be > somewhat suspicious.
>--
>
>----Hunter
Exactly! I personally think Bruce Davison is playing this role *expertly*.
The fact that he seems to play bad/rich/upper class white guys is what makes me
wonder if *that* is why he's being called "wimpy," because I personally don't
see his portrayal as weak or particularly passive. He imploded until last
week--so he was "wimpy?" But then he exploded--is he still a wimp?
Hunter
Yeah, just like real life. We want a hard answer either way. We want to
either say "Good! the bastard is getting what he deserves even though
the jury let him off!" ala O.J. or "Oh my God, what torture this poor
man is going through! Can people see he is obviously innocent?". Real
life aquittals are not black or white most of the time and that
disturbs us. Especially those who are convinced that Scott is guilty.
It is-or it should be-a unconfortable feeling that you may be
condemnming a person and making his life miserable unjustly. To
relieve that discomfort, some want the Scott story line to go away. Too
messy. Just like real life.
--
----Hunter
"The most outrageous lies that can be invented will find believers if a
person only tells them with all his might." Mark Twain
Rob
"Hpnepa" <hpn...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20001227123657...@ng-mj1.aol.com...
Nita Dee
Scott Wallace has been such a drag this entire season. I wish they would get
the cases wrapped up in one or two weeks.
Nita Dee
alber...@my-deja.com
> character so much.
I'll take a stab at this. I'd wager it's because DEK has never given us
a compelling reason why we should care about what happens to this
character.
Recall the very first time we saw Scott Wallace. It was the first scene
of the season premiere. Bobby's in Scott's cell, going on about this
supposedly damaging videotape, and in response, Scott pulls out a map
of Fiji. I'm sure I was not the only one left utterly mistified by this
reaction on the part of his client.
(Actually, for a second, I thought he pulled out a Fuji label. You
know, like the videotape manufacturer? I could see the light bulbs go
off in Bobby's head: "That's it! We'll say the videotape was defective
and can't be allowed in as evidence! Scott, you're brilliant!)
Anyway, the net effect of this little exchange was that I was convinced
Scott Wallace had already gone off the deep end. I know, and I imagine
a lot of other viewers do too, that it's just a matter of time before
he gets committed to a mental institution.
Yet, DEK just keeps him around, despite the fact that he's just a whiny
nutcase who needs some serious therapy. I mean, even George Vogelman
got annoying when he went into "whiny nutcase" mode ("I had theater
tickets, Ellenor!!") but, luckily, George was only a whiny nutcase for
about two or three minutes before he got blown away.
Another problem is that the Scott Wallace case was hashed out not once,
but TWICE with the retrial, introducing an entirely new concept to
network TV: all-new repeats.
> I find Scott Wallace more of an enigma than just about any character
> who's ever been on; Judge Hiller said it best when she said she had
> absolutely no idea if he was guilty or not.
I suspect this is largely because she really didn't care if he was
guilty or not. It has no relevance to her duties in the courtroom and,
also, it's not a very intriguing question to ask in the first place.
> Just because Wallace is "white bread" doesn't mean he can't be
> fascinating.
Scott hasn't been all white bread the entire time. Any guy who thinks
his wife would commit suicide just to screw him over is anything but.
He needs more good moments like those. (I can almost hear DEK slaving
over his legal pads: "Dammit, Bruce, I'm going to get you an Emmy
nomination even if it KILLS me!!")
Kelly at klkbeadworks
> Scott hasn't been all white bread the entire time. Any guy who thinks
> his wife would commit suicide just to screw him over is anything but.
Wellllll..... it depends on what the wife's mental state was. Adolescents
sometimes think "if I kill myself they'll be sorry" and
without giving full thought to the fact that if carried thru they wouldn't
be around to enjoy it. Do we know if his wife had a full bag of marbles??
Kelly
Jimk0403
this losers drama?>>
From the first episode, I thought that Wallice would be a continuing character
and that he would be a McGuffin for another storyline. And I think the firm's
refusal to go along with Bobby's wishes and its repurcussions will be that
storyline.
And FWIW, I think Wallice did kill his wife.
Jim K.
Elizabeth
> I find Scott Wallace more of an enigma than just about any character who's
>ever been on; Judge Hiller said it best when she said she had absolutely no
>idea if he was guilty or not.
That was hilarious -- she's the coolest judge, IMO. (What was up with the
videotaping thing in that episode, anyway? Like, who was the guy behind the
camera, and why were they interviewing everybody? If this was explained in
the episode, I missed it.)
>The risks Bobby is taking in regard to his reputation will be devastating if
>some new piece of evidence surfaces that makes it evident (if only to the
>viewer) that Wallace is guilty.
>
>Just because Wallace is "white bread" doesn't mean he can't be fascinating.
>I'd really like to hear if anyone else finds him that way.
His emotional problems interest me -- a depressed man who is also homicidal
is not what I'd call "white-bread." Even though he's not as exciting as the
possible serial killer Hinks, he's a much more sympathetic character. I hope
we'll find out more about what's going on with him.
-elizabeth
Nibby63
this losers drama?>
I'm so tired of this story. I don't care. Also, I think he killed his wife.
I thought Bobby was going to represent him and he would be going after Jimmy.
Why couldn't DEK do the Vogelman or Hinks like this? Both of them are way more
interesting than Wallace.
Nibby63
be-a unconfortable feeling that you may be condemnming a person and making his
life miserable unjustly. To relieve that discomfort, some want the Scott story
line to go away. Too messy. Just like real life.>
I just find the story boring. I've always found it boring. Hinks is way more
interesting. I like The Practice because of its pace. It didn't feature a
case that lasted half the season.
But than again, I'm getting tired of Bobby shouting at everyone whenever he
doesn't get his way.
so_t...@my-deja.com
nib...@aol.com (Nibby63) wrote:
> But than again, I'm getting tired of Bobby shouting at everyone
whenever he
> doesn't get his way.
I agree. Totally unprofessional.
Hpnepa
>His emotional problems interest me -- a depressed man who is also homicidal
is not what I'd call "white-bread." Even though he's not as exciting as the
possible serial killer Hinks, he's a much more sympathetic character. I hope
we'll find out more about what's going on with him.
>
>-elizabeth
Thanks to this thread, I think I understand now why Scott Wallace is an
unpopular as he is. I also find him sympathetic but not "exciting" in the way
I suppose others do. Complexity is often not exciting.
The reason others seem to find him so boring is because he's accused of a
mundane crime. Last year, when everyone went wild over Henry Winkler's
season-long storyline, his crime, like Vogelman's and the new psycho was far
from mundane. Henry Winkler and Bruce Davison essentially are playing the same
role on the show, but I find Davison ten times more intricate and fascinating.
Goldmarx
>Serious question: Why? I don't understand. Is it something about Bruce
>Davison's face? I'm asking because the character obviously is inspiring very
>negative reactions that I don't understand.
As a matter of fact, Davison's face is the expression of a man who is
constantly in pain, with his eyes always wincing in agony.
Enough already. So much torture, for such a narrow storyline. This kind of
disproportionality is what viewers like me find annoying about this plot.
When Davison was Willard commanding rats like Ben, then he rocked!!
Phil Goldmarx