Cebalord Very best movie i ever watch

Glucedee It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

Ariella Broughton It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

Guillelmina The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

John Smith I have watched the series for the third or fourth time, however this last time including the episodes withdrawn by the BBC. I therefore write this review having finally seen the show in its entirety. I enjoy courtroom based films (Rumpole, 12 Angry Men (2 versions), The Verdict, The Wrong Man, Judgement at Nuremburg, To Kill a Mockingbird).Each episode (except the last series) is 1.5 hours long (quite long). Each episode has three main plot threads - Deeds cases, Deeds personal life and Deed's relationship with the powers that be. The basic ideas running through the episodes is that Deed tries to get to the truth in the cases before him, he is a (mostly) radical judge, he is incorruptible, has appalling judgement in his personal life and has an excellent knowledge of the law and the operation of the courts and frequently uses it to his advantage.Authenticity is one of the strengths of the series (up to five legal advisers are listed in the credits), although the legal system portrayed is fictionalised and the legal argument is often simplified. Initially his brother judges, the Lord Chancellor's Department (LCD), the Attorney General and the Home Secretary plot to remove Deed but are constantly out manoeuvred. Eventually his brother judges are supportive of Deed.The series attracts criticism with Deed having his on again-off again girlfriend and daughter appearing before him, using influence to get his daughter off charges, his womanising and the over the top portrayal (for example Deed has 3 assassination attempts made against him over the course of the series).However, in my view the series is well acted, high quality and is extremely funny in places. For example Deed locks up his ex-wife for contempt on two occasions. While sometimes over the top, the series is at its best portraying an honest judge, battling against corruption and government interference. Other highlights are Deed having a habit of taking over the questioning of the witnesses from the prosecution and defence, using various methods to get certain cases in his court, refusing to give up cases once he has started them and fighting a continuing battle with the LCD, who are constantly dreaming up ways of removing Deed.The 2 episodes banned by the BBC relate to the Measles, Mumps and Rubella (MMR) vaccine and one other episode also attracted controversy (TETRA phone towers causing motor neurone disease). This arose because the series targets populist/minority issues. The MMR vaccine episodes were based on controversy about use of the vaccine in the British Health system. Unfortunately the episodes were based on data that had been faked. It is a pity, as one of the banned episodes was titled One Angry Man and was based on the movie(s) 12 Angry Men.

TheLittleSongbird I saw Judge John Deed as I like legal dramas and I love Martin Shaw. Judge John Deed is not bad, but it is not perfect. And I admit I prefer Rumpole of the Bailey and Kavanagh QC. Judge John Deed is wonderfully photographed and the locations and scenery are stunning, and the music is great. In the first four seasons or so, the writing has in general been excellent and the stories are engrossing, with exception of the baby episode which is easily one of the weaker episodes for me. And the acting is fine, Martin Shaw is brilliant in the title role, and he has a good chemistry with the lovely Jenny Seagrove who plays Jo, while the direction is pretty solid and the courtroom scenes on the whole compelling. However, I do have to agree that some parts of Judge John Deed is unrealistic such as the sinister government schemes, making Deed a womaniser and such. Also the pacing can be a little slow at times, and in seasons 5 and 6 the writing and story lines sadly aren't as strong, with the writing lacking the intelligence of the earlier seasons and the stories becoming a tad unoriginal and repetitive. And there were some characters that came across as cardboard, on occasions Judge John Deed and Jo are the only well-developed characters. To conclude, it is good thanks to Shaw, but it has lost its quality. 6/10 Bethany Cox

david_kravitz I have definite rules for all television series. Do they hold my attention? Are they well written? Are they well acted? In the case of this series, the answers are yes, yes and yes.Starting with the writer, nobody seems to mention him. The stories are well crafted, the different strands of each episode are seamless. I assume that Newman either has some knowledge of the law or access to those that do as the words of John Deed make sense to the viewer.The cast is attractive with a large number of regulars who have stuck with it for some years, always a good sign of their belief in the project. Martin Shaw is always good value for money. The beautiful Jenny Seagrove, (what did she see in Michael Winner), Sir Donald Sinden doing his Donald Sinden act, Christopher Cazenove et als, all turn in quality performances.Some have seen fit to compare this unfavourably with Rumpole of the Bailey, I cannot see the comparison. This is not played for laughs though there is humour a-plenty. This does not have the "clever" endings. This is a good attempt to portray English justice. At 90 minutes an episode, true things have to be tidied a little. A sub-plot is added and we see the human side of the characters' private lives. Each episode I have watched has held my attention, wholly and completely, to the credit titles at the end.A better comparison than Rumpole is probably the late, great John Thaw in Kavanagh QC. This, I know, was based on a real character, latterly elevated to the bench before his untimely death, the real Kavanagh was a friend of mine. I do not know if Deed is based on a real judge, or judges, but I would guess at "probably".I have seen some of the episodes more than once and they do not suffer from repetition. Yes I am a fan, long may Judge John Deed sit on the bench. And at only a handful of episodes a year, this viewer always yearns for his return.

Big Movie Fan I did actually work in the judicial sector many moons ago in an administrative role and I saw the day to day workings of the British judicial system. Judge John Deed is an extremely realistic show.Martin Shaw can play any part and is the perfect choice to play the conservative judge. Each show has focused on Deed's courtroom antics and his private life along with the politics that go hand in hand with the judicial system.Having worked for the judicial sector, I can tell you that this show is realistic on so many fronts. One thing that Deed has to put up with in this show is bureaucracy and politics from the powers that be and I know that is how the judiciary works. Deed is his own man and interested only in seeing justice served. He isn't interested in politics and advancing his career and will not compromise his principles to get ahead. In each show, he usually has to contend with Sir Ian Rochester, a squirmy little bureaucrat from the Lord Chancellors Department.The courtroom scenes are fantastic and Deed does everything he can to get to the truth. He does seem to take on the roles of the barristers from time to time but he believes in the truth only.Deed is a very conservative judge whereas a lot of real life judges in the UK are more liberal than conservative. Deed has no hesitation in punishing those who are guilty but if there are extenuating circumstances, then he will consider the options. Deed realises that the law is not black and white and that there are very grey areas in between.All in all, a realistic portrayal of life as a senior judge. Check it out.