We all new that The People v. O.J. Simpson wouldn’t be able to maintain the breakneck momentum of its last three stellar episodes. No show could (maybe Fargo or Hannibal). “A Jury in Jail” pumped the brakes on the narrative, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but it was too scattered for its own good. A jury-centric character piece is a great idea on paper, especially given the jury’s living situation, but too many plotlines felt shoehorned-in.
The jury, almost quite literally, is in jail. We meet them on day 124 of the trial, in month eight of what was supposed to be a two-month sequester. Denied access to the pool, TV, and any outside contact or entertainment, they’re understandably going stir crazy (I expected one of them to bust out “No TV and no beer make Homer something something”). To make things worse, the episode quickly devolves into And Then There Were None, as Marcia and Cochran turning the trial into a pissing contest.
Judge Ito dismisses one juror for having met O.J.; another for sharing a doctor with him; another for lying about a felony; another for lying about being a domestic abuse victim; and so on. Even he gets tired of it, and there’s a cathartic sense of enjoyment to be found in him telling Marcia and Cochran to shut up and leave his chambers. (Have I mentioned how much I love Kenneth Choi?)
To fulfill The People‘s quota of lawyers saying and doing terrible things, F. Lee Bailey says of the abuse survivor, “It wasn’t legally rape in ’88.” It’s an odious thing to say, even for a lawyer, and Nathan Lane should be commended for downplaying his natural Nathan Lane-ness to make lines like that land. Marcia, to her credit, realizes what we do, and admonishes him: “You just said that. Out loud,” in a dryly funny moment.
This would all be fine were it not for the time-jumps. It doesn’t serve to make the episode confusing, but maybe a little unfocused. I understand why they were included, from a narrative standpoint, but that doesn’t make it easier to swallow. Especially when they start exhibiting cartoonish behavior, like when an argument about Martin vs. Seinfeld almost becomes physical (and we unfortunately get the obligatory “What do you mean ‘you people,'” a line that should be retired from any serious artistic endeavor from now until eternity).
By far the best part of the episode was David Schwimmer, who in many ways is this show’s secret weapon. Robert Kardashian is seriously starting to doubt O.J.’s innocence, owing to the preponderance of forensic evidence that implicates him. Schwimmer shows off some great facial acting, and even breaks down in tears with Kris Jenner near the end, by far the most amount of time a Kardashian has ever spent thinking about someone else. “He was my friend for twenty years,” he cries, “and I can barely look at him anymore.”
It’s not hard to see why. O.J. demands to be put on the trial, which Cochran and Bailey are in favor of. Shapiro is against it, showing increasingly good judgment (the masterstroke of O.J. trying on the gloves has put him and Cochran back on good terms). O.J. doesn’t take his mock cross-examination seriously at all, expecting his charisma to carry him through to acquittal. But guilty or not, laughing at domestic abuse doesn’t make anyone look good.
A Few Thoughts
- In a cool bit of stunt-casting, one of the jurors was played by Susan Beaubian, who played O.J.’s wife in the Naked Gun movies
- I feel like Robert Morse is being wasted as Dominick Dunne. He could be so much more than a quip delivery machine
- “Another One Bites the Dust” was a little on the nose, no?
- “Toughen up, Cochran. This is the smoker’s lounge.” Sarah Paulson’s ballsy, brassy performance is far and away the best part of The People v. O.J. Simpson
About Author
