Cannes Film Festival 2013

Review: Jimmy Smits in NBC's 'Outlaw'

An improbable drama about a Supreme Court justice-turned-defense lawyer

<p>Jimmy Smits in "Outlaw."</p>

Jimmy Smits in "Outlaw."

Credit: NBC

Outlaw,” the first new series to debut on any of the big broadcast networks this fall, is far from the worst rookie of the season (NBC's “Outsourced,” CBS' “(Bleep) My Dad Says” and ABC's “My Generation” are all duking it out for that honor), but it may be the silliest.

The legal drama, which sneak previews tomorrow night at 10 on NBC before moving to Fridays at 10 next week, stars Jimmy Smits as Cyrus Garza, a Bush appointee to the Supreme Court widely considered to be the Court’s most conservative justice. Then Garza’s father, a famously liberal defense attorney, dies in a car crash that Cyrus himself survives, and everything changes. His political beliefs appear to do a 180, and he decides to resign from the Court and travel the country pursuing injustice like his father would have wanted him to.

"Ever since the accident, it's felt like I'm hurting the people I should be protecting," he explains.

It was around that point that I began to realize that the only way “Outlaw” makes any kind of sense in terms of plot logic or characterization is if it’s not really a legal drama, but a body swap comedy in legal drag, about an eccentric defense lawyer whose ghost possesses the body of his conservative ingrate son.

Want More...

Fall TV Preview?
  • Tca-whatsthelogo_thumbnail
    Check out everything there is including photos, reviews, videos.
Viewed that way, I buy that Garza would leave the most powerful legal job in our land to go into private practice - and, for that matter, that his upwardly-mobile law clerks (including Jesse Bradford and Ellen Woglom) would eagerly follow him, even though at least one of them has an offer to go work for another justice. If we’re meant to take this seriously, we can’t. If we’re meant to view this as “Freaky Friday’s Law,” then anything goes.

Smits is charming as ever, but even he can’t hide the fact that he’s not playing a character, but a collection of cliches about dramatic irony dressed in a nice suit and expensive haircut.

In the pilot episode, Garza wholeheartedly embraces his father’s liberal ideals, but when we get to the second episode, involving a white Arizona cop accused of racial-profiling in a shooting tied to the immigration law, he stuns his new team (with David Ramsey and Carly Pope signing on after he leaves the bench) by choosing the cop’s side because “I’ve spent my whole career defending states’ rights.” From episode to episode, scene to scene, Garza contradicts himself and confounds others’ expectations of him, not because he has any kind of consistent motivation, but because it’s the most surprising thing the writers can make him do in that scene.

There’s a fair amount of “House” in the formula, too. (Just like James Woods’ short-lived “Shark,” which had the opposite premise, of a renowned defense lawyer who has a come-to-Jesus moment and becomes a prosecutor.) Garza admits he hired Woglom’s character to clerk for him because she’s pretty, which is the same excuse House gave for hiring Cameron back in that show’s pilot. Instead of a distracting Vicodin addiction, Garza suffers from a gambling problem. (The first two episodes both feature Garza living it up against a CGI backdrop of Las Vegas.)

However you view it - mediocre “House” rip-off, improbable law show or “Like Father, Like Son 2: Judicial Boogaloo” - you have to like Jimmy Smits an awful lot to make “Outlaw” a Friday appointment. I’m as devoted an “NYPD Blue” fan as they come, and even I’m not willing to make that leap.

Alan Sepinwall may be reached at sepinwall@hitfix.com

Alan-sepinwall-sm
Alan Sepinwall
Sr. Editor, What's Alan Watching
Alan Sepinwall has been reviewing television since the mid-'90s, first for Tony Soprano's hometown paper, The Star-Ledger, and now for HitFix. His new book, "The Revolution Was Televised," about the last 15 years of TV drama, is for sale at Amazon. He can be reached at sepinwall@hitfix.com

Comments

  • Option 1

    Comment instantly as a guest Guest
  • Option 2

    Connect
  • Option 3

    Login or create a HitFix account Login Signup
  • Default-avatar

    Ed

    Two clerks follow a conservative judge turned liberal advocate? An article just came out last week that "the more conservative justices are much more likely than were their predecessors to hire clerks who worked for judges appointed by Republicans. And the more liberal justices are more likely than in the past to hire from judges appointed by Democrats." (http://tech.mit.edu/V130/N34/scotusclerks.html)

    It's one thing to have a judge/doctor/lawyer/etc. "see the light," but to have employees think to themselves, "wow, I've been in the wrong camp my entire life" seems implausible at best.

    I'm guessing "Mr. Smits leaves Washington" will miss the mark.

    September 14, 2010 at 1:17PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    GuyITC

    As soon as I read the plot outline of this show, I stopped, looked up from my laptop, stared straight for a few seconds, looked back down to see if I read it right, read it again, laughed, then said "I'm out" out loud even though I was by myself.

    September 14, 2010 at 1:19PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Batfink_talkback_profile

      chuchundra When I first read the premise I figured there had to be something they were leaving out, some twist that would explain why Smits' character would leave a spot on the highest court in the land to take up private practice. Maybe a drinking problem or some other scandal forces him to resign. Maybe he gets bopped on the head or eats some bad sushi which drives him bonkers. Maybe space aliens take over his mind.

      Nope...none of that.

      I can't believe that crap like this gets greenlit and nobody is interested in my idea to turn The Last Starfighter into a TV Show.

      September 14, 2010 at 5:39PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    gregmw

    If you're a conservative justice and you do a sudden ideological 180, why wouldn't you stay on the most powerful court in the land to make the largest possible difference? It's a lifetime appointment, after all. The stupidity astounds.

    September 14, 2010 at 1:42PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Mike F what he said!

      September 14, 2010 at 5:53PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    SaveFarris

    Congratulations Mr. Smits on winning the Seperation of Powers trifecta:

    President (West Wing)
    Supreme Court Justice (Outlaw)
    Senator (Star Wars)

    Congratulations on joining James Cromwell on the list of actors who have served in all three brances of government.

    September 14, 2010 at 1:44PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Desktop1_talkback_profile

      The Noble Robot Remember, he was also a member of the House in West Wing, but I forgot about his turn as a Senator in Star Wars (since he didn't really do anything "Senatorial" in those movies).

      September 14, 2010 at 4:29PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Mike Honorable mention to John Goodman for playing both a president (West Wing) and a King (King Ralph).

      September 14, 2010 at 7:49PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      pgillan Don't forget Morgan Freeman's blatant disregard for the separation of church and state by playing both God and the President.

      September 15, 2010 at 5:18AM EST


  • I want to watch the show just because I miss his character on Dexter.
    And the gambling addiction thing is weird because Smits himself looks like he would have a gambling problem...probably because he reminds me of my half-brother, who has a gambling problem. Okay, I just figured that out.

    September 14, 2010 at 2:50PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Matthew

    Is this really an expensive haircut? i can never tell

    September 14, 2010 at 3:18PM EST Reply to Comment


  • Network TV doesn't have enough shows about lawyers.

    September 14, 2010 at 3:20PM EST Reply to Comment


  • Wasn't Jimmy Smits in a body swap comedy movie in the 80s co starring Ellen Barkin?

    September 14, 2010 at 8:06PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Midnight_run_mca255950_talkback_profile

      sepinwall Heh. Fienberg brought up "Switch" as well in today's podcast segment on the show:

      http://www.hitfix.com/blogs/whats-alan-watching/posts/firewall-iceberg-podcast-episode-35-boardwalk-empire-true-blood-outlaw-and-more

      September 14, 2010 at 8:47PM EST
  • The_boondocks_a_pimp_name_slickback_talkback_profile

    tigger500

    Carly Pope? From Popular? Enough to get me to watch the pilot episode.

    Plus - I do love some Jesse Bradford.

    September 14, 2010 at 9:17PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    BigTed

    I can still remember the "Mad" magazine satire of "L.A. Law," in which Smits (whose character in that show was also a liberal lawyer) is in court, yelling "I'm out of order? Judge, you're out of order!" I figure this show will have a lot of that sort of thing, and I think I can miss it.

    September 15, 2010 at 3:07AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Andrew

    The trailer they put out for this show a few months ago was hysterically bad. So I was hoping it would be bad enough for comedic value.

    September 15, 2010 at 12:06PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    GuiltyFeat

    There are some great comments in this thread. Well done everyone. I also had a negative reaction to this show. It was just weak. Read it here: http://guiltyfeat.com/2010/09/15/down-and-outlaw/ Cheers.

    September 15, 2010 at 5:17PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Dex

    Jimmy Smits is dead to me.

    Sincerely,
    Dexter Morgan

    September 17, 2010 at 1:06PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Yunnie

    Saw the first episode. It's just baaaaad!!

    September 24, 2010 at 5:56PM EST Reply to Comment

Get Instant Alerts on What's Alan Watching

Latest Posts
More Posts
Recent Activity on Facebook
Most Popular on Facebook
Top Stories From Around the Web