The Escape Artist
Tags: revenge, murder

Plot synopsis:
The drama revolves around Will Burton (David Tennant), a talented junior barrister of peerless intellect and winning charm who specialises in spiriting people out of tight legal corners. He is in high demand as he has never lost a case. But when his talents acquit the notorious prime suspect in an horrific murder trial, that brilliance comes back to bite him with unexpected and chilling results, not to mention a shocking twist in the talevhavnal, 2013= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =(NOTE : The original BBC version was shown in three parts ~ an hour each. The version shown in the United States on PBS was edited to two parts ~ 90 minutes each. This is the American version.)A man runs through a rainy downtown London and hails a taxi. The driver eyes him suspiciously as the man talks about cocaine in a hold-all and a double-barreled shotgun. The man apologizes to the driver, saying hes a lawyer.The man sits in front of a group of students on career day. When the teacher asks who knows what a barrister is, the mans own son, Jamie, answers that the barrister stops people from going to prison, even if the evidence may be circumspect, and that may sometimes keep him from coming on holiday as promised. Mr. Burton clarifies that he basically talks to a judge in a court. He gives an example about how he would help if a student is accused by a classmate of stealing a pen his job would be to convince the jury that the witness was mistaken. When another student asks what would happen if the accused actually DID take the pen but denies it, Burton answers that the student would be guilty but that it would bring reasonable doubt to the case. Jamie points out that the student would be getting away with it. The questioner replies, only if Jamies dad was on his side.A female barrister looks through a file as she is being driven to the Central Criminal Courthouse. Burton arrives at the CCC and is told that Maggie Gardner will be prosecuting. Burton asks, again?In the courtroom, Gardner, the female barrister for the prosecution, argues to the judge that the accuseds wielding a hunting knife was NOT an act of defense, the clue being the word hunting. Burton counters that sometimes a pre-emptive strike is allowed by law, especially, as in this case, when the victim (the accused here) had a shotgun pointed to his head. After the case, the accused, now free, offers to shake Burtons hand, which Burton takes, after a long pause.As a news report plays on about an unsolved brutal ritualistic murder (the body was found by two dog walkers), and how the police was still asking for witnesses to come forward, a man walks between several aviaries inside his house (there is an award ribbon on one of the aviaries), sprinkling seed through the chicken wire. He sits down to eat when theres a banging at the door it is the police, with a warrant. The man, annoyed, screams for them to come back after breakfast. The police storm in.Burton runs into Gardner in the courthouse and she congratulates him. She is skeptical when he claims he doesnt know what shes talking about. He walks away, grinning, gnawing on an apple.At the office, Mayfield, a senior, hands Burton a glossy magazine where Burton has been deemed the number one barrister under 40 Margaret Maggie Gardner is second. A clerk ribs Burton about applying for Silk. Gardner, back in the car, leafs through the article with a glum expression.The clerk hands Burton, who is on his way out, a large stack of documents. Burton demurs, saying his is on his way to his cottage for the weekend. A senior barrister walks by and asks Burton to take a look at it, adding that the solicitor, Brown, asked for Burton himself. Burton wonders aloud why Brown would ask him over a Silk. The senior says if someone was to be chained inside a safe in a shark tank, they would want the assistance of someone like Houdini.Burton walks quickly along a soccer field, as a mother yells at the boys playing a match. He kisses her and she is surprised to see him. As they watch, Jamies shot on goal goes wide and bounces off the post. After the game, Burton says he found an apple in his pocket; his wife says she is trying to get him to eat something that is not made of cheese.At home, Burton struggles with the dishwasher. His wife comes by and works the controls easily. Burton finishes packing his overnight bag, almost forgetting the stack of documents he was given. They reach the cottage and unpack. The wife puts Jamie to sleep. Burton makes tea and grabs the documents, but his wife entices him to join her in the bath. He sets the tea and the documents down. Later, in bed, she tells him Jamie said he was a hit at school and that the students think Burton can get them out of any crime they would commit. She adds that what the students do not know, is that his brain is full of holes and that his hard drive is full. As she cuddles him, Burton reaches for the documents on the nightstand. His eyes grow big as he reads it.Back at the office, Burton asks Brown why he didnt want a Silk to take the case. Brown says a Silk would just try to ram it through the court and that the client needs someone who would spend days, elbows deep in the evidence. And because Burton wins.The clerk comes by as Burton looks at the photographs in the file. He tells the clerk that he had never seen photographs like that, and that the victim was alive for most of what happened. The clerk walks out without saying a word.In the visiting room, Burton narrates how the accused should say the body was found that he was walking a while with his dog through undergrowth, not noticing that he was collecting blood on his shoes. He first thought he had stepped on the remains of an animal. The accused, Mr. Foyle (the man with the aviaries), posits it might have been a squirrel and then muses about how gray squirrels are killing red squirrels in their habitat, and that the gray squirrels are then being killed by recently unseen black squirrels. Foyle concludes that you cant be too careful.Brown tries to move the questioning forward and asks when Foyle usually does his laundry, and then why, after consistently doing so on Tuesdays, he, on the week in question, went on a Monday. Burton prompts Foyle to say that it was because he ran out of clothes, and not because he had blood on his shoes.Burton mentions the large number of visits Foyle had to websites featuring extreme sadomasochism, torture and necrophilia, which are consistent with what happened to the victim. Foyle denies visiting these sites but Burton points to the credit card charges to these sites. Foyle says the credit cards are lying. Burton worries aloud that Foyles presentation style will not go over well with the jury. Foyle says, what you see is what you get. Brown smirks that, that is the problem. Foyle turns and glares at Brown and asks Burton if Brown has to be there; Burton says yes.Foyle thinks a while and asks Burton if hes picked up on the fact that he, Foyle, does not like people and is not a nice person, and then wonders if Burton is behaving the way he is because he thinks he is guilty. Foyle demands that Brown leaves. Brown leaves. Foyle did not like being stared at. As they drink tea, Foyle tells Burton that as they spend more time together, the more Burton reminds him of himself.Later, Burton runs out of the courthouse, bypassing Brown, for some air. He stops at a shop for some cigarettes and sees a tabloid headline proclaiming, Arrest Made in Ritual Slaying, with a picture of the victim below.At a fancy reception, Gardners senior offers light-hearted condolences for coming in second in the magazine ranking, but she shrugs it off saying that it reminds her of coming in second to Burton on a school final. Burton, with his wife, looks as if he doesnt know what she is talking about; Gardner admits it was a long time ago. Gardner notes that Burton will be up against her colleague Julian on the Foyle trial and they express surprise that she is not the prosecutor. She shrugs again and says she is thinking more of working the defense side. She thinks the case is a lost cause and wonders why Burton would seek to defend Foyle. She thinks he will get a lot of exposure but for the wrong reason. Burton says he doesnt do it for the exposure, but because everyone deserves a defense.Back home at Jamies birthday party, Burton goes out to the balcony to take a call. Jamie brings him a piece of cake and asks who the call was from. Burton tells him it was a computer expert and Jamie jokingly asks if the expert will help back-up Burtons hard drive. Later, as Burton reads over the case, the wife brings him a book on easy-learning English conversation. He is only slightly amused. She then presents him with a card from the mail, an invitation to his college reunion. He is only slightly amused.Foyle does calisthenics in his cell before he is taken to the courthouse. Reporters swarm around the police van, ignoring Burton who is walking past outside.In the communal dressing room, Julian notes that Gardner will be in the gallery. Julian points out that being number one results in everyone wanting to knock you down. He asks if Burton had petitioned the judge for an adjournment, and Burton confesses, saying that he needed more time.In court, Julian characterizes the case as being beyond description and defying community and humanity. A coroner, a park employee, and a banker testify to the heinous injuries sustained by the victim Sandra Mullins, the observation that a man was seen rising from a lying position in the bushes, and that the credit card transactions were made by Liam Foyle to companies that distribute depraved pornography, respectively. From the dock, Foyle yells, liar; to which the judge reprimands him as his only warning. Someone in the gallery yells, murderer, and Burton writes, lynch mob, on his pad and shows it to his assistant, who nods.Burton reminds the judge that he had submitted an application for an adjournment, noting that in light of the testimony of the experts for the prosecution that he will need more time for his computer forensic specialist to prepare his counter arguments. The judge refuses, saying that a fast trial is in the interest of the public and threatens Burton with contempt if he pursues it further.The wife wakes in the middle of the night and finds Burton sitting at the end of Jamies bed. She urges him to go back to bed, but hes thinking about installing locks on their windows. He says the world is broken. She thinks he shouldnt watch the news so close to bedtime.In his holding cell, Foyle tells Burton that he is not inspiring much confidence in the courtroom. Will says he knows what he is doing and that he is working at Foyles will. Foyle apologizes. Foyle confirms he only has the one computer.In court, Burton argues while SOMEbody had to pay for the murder of Sandra Mullins, and Foyle is admittedly unlikeable, that the testimony presented by the prosecution does not prove Foyle was involved in the murder. Burton calls the prosecutions computer expert to the stand and asks him why Foyle would pay for the s-m websites but not actually visit them. He asks the expert if it is possible that upon visiting other porn websites, that his identity was stolen and used by someone else to access the s-m websites. Julian objects, saying that the case is not about identity theft or porn websites, to which Burton counters that in light of his inability to bring his own computer forensic specialist because of the lack of time, he has to follow this line of questioning, especially since the expert on the stand is the prosecutions own witness.in camera , Burton argues that his client has been falsely branded as a torturer, pervert, necrophiliac and that there is no way he can receive a fair trial now. The judge admits that he messed up. Back in court, he dismisses the jury and releases Foyle. Outside, Foyle offers a handshake; Burton walks away.At home, Burton is still fussing with the dishwasher. The wife, studying Italian in bed, looks out the window and sees Jamie on the balcony waving at someone on the street below. By the time she gets out, the man is gone.As she is peeing, the wife tries to reassure Burton, who is fidgeting nervously at his reunion. The wife had been taking a pregnancy test. When Jamie comes by, she tells him she has good news. Burton forgets his cell phone in the bathroom. After she reads Jamie a bedtime story, the wife gets in the bath. A man is staring at her from the window.Back at the reunion, Burton finally realizes hes missing his phone and by the time he returns to the bathroom, the wife has been calling repeatedly. He tells her to make sure everything is locked and to call the police. Burton finds the police searching the grounds. They find a party balloon with the words, Sorry Youre Leaving, on it.At the office, Burton is with Mayfield and a police detective, who is eager but not very helpful. As Burton has never lost a case, or ever refused to take on a client (cherry-picking is frowned upon), the police have nothing to go on.Back home, Burton installs motion sensor lights.Back home, Foyle feeds his birds, including an owl, while chanting, Everybodys hungry.At the office, Burton asks the clerk if there has been a reply from the QC selection committee. The clerk suggests Burton wait on that. The partners tell Burton he has been named in complaints from Foyle about unprofessional conduct and dishonest behavior that Burton had expressed doubts in their conversations. Burton is incredulous as they WON the case. The partners recommend Burton delay his application for Silk. The partners call the clerk, Danny, to hold up the other lawyers before they leave for the day so they can strategize their next move.Burton calls his wife to tell her he will be late. She urges him to hurry as she has something to show him. She and Jamie will meet him at the cottage. He loses her cell signal. Burton calls his wife but it goes to voicemail. It is dark when they unpack their car. Jamie goes in first and the wife, Kate, lags behind. When she goes in the cottage, she calls for Jamie but he does not answer.Burton makes it to the cottage. The car is left at the gate as Kate had it when she was unpacking; the dog is walking around loose. The house is dark and nothing happens when Burton flips the light switch. He picks up a poker and a flashlight and yells for Kate and Jamie. He finds her in a back room, lying in a pool of blood. He looks up and sees Foyle standing outside the window. Burton finds Jamie curled up in a fetal position, trembling, in the toy box. He finally gets a cell signal and calls for an ambulance.The coroner takes Kates body away. Burton is huddled underneath blankets by the side of the gate.Foyle is locked up in a jail cell.After the funeral, a senior barrister assures Burton that he is family and that things will be taken care of.At home, Burton sleeps with Jamie in his arms.At a bar, Burton and Danny make small talk until Danny tells him that Gardner is the defense counsel.Burton goes to see Gardner outside her office. She is contrite but reminds him that, quoting Burton himself, everyone deserves a defense. Burton pulls an apple from his pocket and slams it into a finial in the fence.Burton rushes to comfort Jamie who has had a bad dream.Mayfield walks through the office calling for Trevor Harris. He tells him the case has been moved up. Harris asks if Mayfield knows for sure that Jamie did not see anything. Mayfield barks that the only things they have to work with are blood, ID, and alibi.At home, Burton is trying to convince a credit card representative that his wife does not wear aftershave nor is interested in Peter Rabbit collectibles. When the rep asks to talk to Kate, Burton freaks and tosses his phone. Jamie has been watching this from the staircase. Burton apologizes and assures Jamie that he can talk to him about that night at any time.In the visiting room, Foyle prattles on about what happens to the animals in the forest when there is a heavy rain. Brown tries to get him back on track but then Foyle stares as Gardner pours tea leaves into a container of hot water. Brown says there is only one witness (Burton) because Jamie has not made a statement, yet. Brown says their effort will be focused on affirming Foyles alibi, that he was with a Ms. Morris. Foyle knows Burton cannot be part of the prosecution as he will be testifying as a witness, and knows this because he had a law class at Cambridge. Foyle wonders if he may have crossed paths with Gardner and then expresses relief that Burton will not be working the case as he always beats Gardner. He says, off the cuff, that it was dark, and then returns to talking about the animals in the rain.At her office, Gardners senior comes by and thinks she is working late because she has qualms. She says Burton lost his wife; the senior counters that if the tables were turned, Burton would not hesitate. He says she is not Burton, at least not yet.Burton is sitting outside the office in his car. Danny runs out and tells him that Mayfield is lead, and Harris is assisting. Burton does not look pleased. Also, forensics found a size 12 footprint outside the cottage; Foyle is a size 9. His alibi is that he was having dinner with a neighbor, Eileen Morris.In a bar, a private investigator shows Burton a printout from an internet news site when Morris presented Foyle with a Parish Council award for his birds. Burton thinks he has seen her name somewhere else.Burton follows Morris from the Parish Council as she takes a box to a self-storage building. Burton meets with Danny and tells him that Foyles alibi may not be solid. Burton asks where the Sandra Mullins case file is. He wonders if the box could wind up near his office.As his officemates stare at him, Burton goes to his office and goes through the case file. He finds what he is looking for and scurries out when an office mate approaches.Danny stops Harris outside the office but Harris stops him when he tries to tell him something.Foyle is again doing calisthenics when the guards come by to take him to court. Burton drops Jamie off at school.Foyle pleads not guilty. Gardner asks that bail be granted due to lack of evidence and the judge agrees. Outside the court, Foyle reaches into Gardners car to shake her hand. She does, hesitantly, and drives off. At a stop, she sprays sanitizer on her hand.At home, Foyle pleasantly admonishes Morris, who had been waiting for him on the sidewalk, for bailing him out. She had been caring for his birds in his absence.Burton strolls through the office as they are discussing the case. Mayfield intercepts him and they walk outside. Mayfield is surprised no one had told Burton about the plea, or that Foyle posted bail. Burton runs off.Jamie and a classmate walk out of a snack shop. Foyle, who had been waiting, follows them. Burton finds out from the school that Jamie had already left with his friend. He drives by the school but another classmate doesnt know where Jamie is. Foyle follows the two boys onto the bus and sits behind them. Burton makes it home but his mom has not heard from Jamie. The classmate gets off at his stop. Foyle moves to the seat across the aisle. Jamie looks over at Foyle. Jamie comes home and Burton makes him swear that he will not talk to anyone he doesnt know and that he will be picking Jamie up from school from now on.Danny meets with Harris at a mall restaurant as Harris looks around nervously. Danny talks about football and how their team is missing their star striker. Harris reminds him that their star cannot play and cant even watch the match. Burton shows up and Harris freaks, and then apologizes that another barrister wasnt chosen for the case; its just that he was available. Harris calms down when Burton says he is the hardest working barrister at the firm.Burton says that Foyle had mentioned he had a storage unit but gave it up six months before the murder. Someone else took it on after that Eileen Morris.Burton leaves. Danny gets up to leave, handing Harris a brief. He says that Spencer ___ will be on holiday shortly, but he, Danny, hasnt decided where yet.At home, Jamie is blaring a video of Burton and Kates wedding. Burton puts it on mute and asks Jamie if he saw the man. Jamie says it was dark. He puts the sound back up.Gardner is at home looking through the file when someone throws stones at her window. No one is there. She gets a call from Brown who says Foyle wants to meet with them immediately. Foyle doesnt show up at their office. Gardner suggests they go to Foyles house but Brown says they cant do that. She storms out.Burton in bed with Jamie is listening to Kates outgoing message over and over. He tosses the phone.On her way home, Gardner sees a man running toward her and pulls out a can of mace. Its Burton. He is convinced Foyle murdered Kate and urges Gardner not to be alone. Outside her home, a neighbor asks if her friend, who was ringing her doorbell, found her. She enters her home and walks in, scared out of her mind.

Review: But I found the show clearly worth viewing - because the dialog was great, the premise was a good one, the acting and directing were outstanding, I cared about the characters, and the ending was satisfying.The writing of a screenplay has a number of important components, and not every good writer is a master of all.
David Wolstencroft was the author, and his dialog is very good, his character development excellent, the basic scenario good, his plot creativity good, his resolution of the story rather brilliant.
In order to advance his story, he resorts to plot twists that defy logic, and characters who act stupidly and have emotions that don't fit - and he does it over and over.
I've often thought that every screenplay that wants to be considered as serious art should go through a logic evaluation process before screening.Still, it was a riveting series, and I couldn't wait to see how it would turn out.
David Tennant is a talented barrister whose big win comes back to haunt him in "The Escape Artist," from 2013.
Lots of negative comments here on IMDb.Will has to defend Liam Foyle in a horrific murder case.
Motivations throughout are simply not clear, and I guess we're supposed to assume that because this guy is a sociopath, he does things for the hell of it.And for the hell of it, he's out to get his defense barrister.
This time, though, another barrister takes his case, and Will feels what it's like on the other side.There were criticisms on this board about the way British court procedure was portrayed.
I watch a lot of true crime and have seen innocent people sitting on death row for 16 years, an abusive husband given joint custody of his children with his wife (he winds up nearly killing her) - etc.British courts aside, this is an unbelievable story that is nevertheless engrossing and has a neat, if preposterous, twist at the end.
This BBC mini-series was short on credibility but pretty long on tension and suspense, helped by convincing acting and pacey direction.
David Tennent, who appears to be everywhere on TV at the moment, is a hot-shot young city barrister who gets a sadistic murderer off on a technicality, but who by snubbing him after the trial wreaks a terrible fate for his family.
Although an eye-witness to the horrific crime perpetrated on his wife in their holiday cottage, Tennent finds himself the biter-bit as the perpetrator turns to his chief rival in the "Young Lawyer of The Year" stakes, Sophie Okinedo, who also appears to be everywhere on TV at the moment, as his defence solicitor, her character's detachment and ambition now ironically reflecting Tennent's own character earlier.Like I said, the plot was unbelievable but once you cottoned onto this and surrendered to it as a sort of UK-based John Grisham entertainment, it was an engaging enough production.
The acting helped to paper over the plot holes, Tennent as the high-flier brought to earth with a crash, Toby Kebbell as the clinical but devious psychopath Liam Foyle and Okinedo as Tennent's young legal rival, her ambition clouding her judgement in taking on the case of such a brutal killer.Spread over three nights you could see the padding and as I indicated earlier the sensationalist story-line probably belonged more in a Stateside rather than London-based setting, over the top final confrontation and all.
I personally prefer my thriller dramas when they're a bit more grounded in reality but as escapist nonsense I suppose it just about justified three hours of my time..
This series is well acted and directed in the sense that the scenes work.However, the story is completely implausible and relies on ludicrous contrivances to try to force out the main theme - the conflict between justice and moral right.The British legal system has many faults and judges and lawyers can be manipulative,self seeking and make errors, but not to this degree.It seems that the Director and writer think the use of some excellent actors and plenty of gratuitous violence can cover up these flaws.Doubtless it will be successful as audiences can be easily taken in, eg by David Tennant's equally well acted but ridiculously plotted Broadchurch..
On the other hand, as so many similar works are created monthly, it is evident that not all can be up to par or they just do not bespeak you as much.The Escape Artist is such a series where the share of court events and dramatics sometimes tend to overshadow the thrill and the urge to find out what was really the case.
David Tennant as Will Burton, Sophie Okonedo as Maggie Gardner, Toby Kebbell as Liam Foyle are more than good, but often the aridity of scenes with-around them does not bring the suspense along as it could be.
Bearing in mind Burton´s profession, the final outcome is logical as well.Thus, the performances excel the script decidedly, but 3 episodes only let you dig yourself not in too big redundancy or have blah!
Watch it, ponder a bit and then find other works where the stars of this series perform :).
Will Burton a junior barrister defends a man who charged with a brutal murder.
Not only is David Tennant superb, each actor in this 6 part series delivers a great performance.
Given that the "artist" is a murderer who gets away with murder, it would have been nice to see more of his macabre character explored.
I was watching it on the TV channel that brings us wonderful British shows, Part 1, knowing that Part 2 would be aired the next week.
In the case of "The Escape Artist", I was rather surprised at the intensity of many of the reviews.
Many complained that the show wasn't very believable, though some admitted that the acting and mood were good.I cannot say how credible the story is here.
The complaints mostly had to do with court procedures and last time I checked, I wasn't a British barrister (for us non-Brits, it's a lawyer who tries cases in court).
I think the other reviewers were probably correct--but I simply don't know for sure.
So, while the story does seem far-fetched at times, I just cannot say whether such a case could or could not occur.David Tennant stars as Will Burton--a very successful defense barrister.
The film begins with him defending Liam Foyle in a grisly murder case.
It seems pretty obvious that Foyle is a sociopath who did brutally murder someone...but Burton is able to work the system and get him acquitted.
This makes no sense and soon it's obvious that Foyle is out to get Burton.
Well, Foyle's next move is to attack Burton's wife and he butchers her--just like the earlier victim.
In this case, Burton himself sees Foyle out the window-- gloating over his handywork.
Now Burton gets to feel what it's like to be on the other side of the law and see another clever lawyer work hard to keep Foyle from serving time for his infamous crimes.What follows are a lot of court proceedings and more instances where seemingly good evidence is tossed out because Foyle's new barrister is clever...just like Burton had been.
So, unless you are a barrister or judge, it's really not possible to determine if any of this is plausible--and I'd LOVE to hear from one if you have seen the show and could explain to all of us if the plot was believable.
What I do assume was quite ridiculous is the scene where Foyle is screaming and behaving like a wildman at his second barrister's office.
I don't think it's far-fetched to assume if this really happened that the lawyers would have him arrested and would petition to be removed from the case.
A few other scenes also seemed tough to believe--such as the ridiculous and poorly written confrontation scene between Foyle and Burton in the third and final installment.So what I am left with is to discuss the other merits of "The Escape Artist" apart from the bizarre plot twists and court procedures.
I watched this show last night, and woke up feeling so annoyed about the utter contempt for the intelligence of viewers that I'm moved to write this review.
As other reviews have noted, the acting and tension elements are good, which makes it all the more noticeable that the writing is so woefully deficient.Some genres don't depend on credible authenticity, but the legal thriller is not one of them.
That a murder charge in a case rife with "serial killer" implications would be completely set aside by procedural error, rather than result in a mistrial and new proceedings.2.
That a high profile case would be assigned for prosecution to the same chambers where the victim's husband works??
I'm a former defense attorney in the U.S., and granted we have a different system, but surely the Crown Prosecution Service pays more attention to such things than this would indicate?Even if we accept this highly unlikely allocation of the prosecution, we are then asked to believe that the firm is assigning their most incompetent junior to the case because "the others are too busy." Oh, right.
That the young son, known to be present during the murder, would not be handled by someone experienced in child psychology, therapy etc, rather than just have his father barking at him, "Sure you didn't see anything?" Again, any legal system has errors and sloppiness, but we're asked to believe time and time again that it's happening in the most high profile kind of case?
She's representing a guy with SOCIOPATH SERIAL KILLER written all over him in mile high letters, she knows he may well have killed the wife of his last attorney, and now it looks like he's broken into her house and she's basically so okay with this, she only makes a brief phone call to a colleague?
I guess it is the only way for many of them to make things work anymore, such is the state of creative writing.The ending, and I mean the actual last 30 seconds of the teleplay, to my mind, are the only truly clever and revealing moments in this work, leaving the observant viewer to question his eyeballs and hit the replay button on the DVR.
Others in this review thread have covered a lot of the problems with this screenplay but here are the ones that bugged me the most:+++++SERIOUS SPOILERS BELOW +++++First we have the script outline (the "high concept"):1.) Legal Beagle gets an obvious murderer off on a technicality.
2.) Murderer kills wife of legal beagle.
3.) Murderer is tried and gets away scott-free, again through a technicality.
5.) Legal beagle is arrested and tried for that murder.
6.) Legal beagle also gets off on a technicality.
7.) A character finally lays out how the legal beagle MAY have committed his "perfect crime".This "high concept" has it's own problems but a skilled writer should be able to make these 7 points work right?
Wrong.The set-up: The protagonist "legal beagle" (played by Tennant) gets an obvious murderer off on a technicality.
I don't know enough about the English legal system to understand why this doesn't just result in a mistrial but I'm generous so I'll buy it.Now the problems with the screenplay come fast and furious.
Unfortunately the writer (David Wolstencroft) doesn't have an idea about how to make it believable so he takes the lazy way out.Issue 1.
Why does the psychopathic murderer kill the legal beagle's wife?
This point is not part of the high concept so rather than come up with a plausible motive (and I can think of several that he could have used), Wolstencroft employs the ham-fisted "not shaking hands with the man who got him off" as the motive and leaves it at that.
So the viewer is left to assume that he would commit this second murder for no real reason whatsoever.
The psychopath also has to assume that his only way of getting away with this second murder is to HOPE that another grievous error will be made by the system.Sure enough, Wolstencroft provides us with this grievous error (a storage unit is searched for a key bit of evidence without a warrant) and this error gets the murderer off on a technicality once again.Point 2.
Moving to the end, Wolstencroft's climactic expository scene where the competing defense attorney (Sophie Okonedo) confronts the legal beagle with her speculation of how he committed his perfect murder of the psychopath is completely implausible.
Not what she lays out, but that she knows any of it in the first place.Let's be honest here; Okonedo's character would have ZERO way of knowing anything about the murder of the psychopath except - wait for it - for a chance encounter she had earlier in the story where she shows up at the tail end of a meeting between the legal beagle and a local underworld "operator".
This underworld operator evidently can provide background medical information on the psychopath - information that the legal beagle ostensibly uses to kill him later in the story.Here's the problem...
The legal beagle meets with this underworld operator at night on a deserted street nowhere close to where Okenedo's character would ever go at that time of night.
For the viewer's benefit, she makes a point of mentioning that she recognizes this underworld dude so we have to assume that this bit of dialog is there for an important reason (otherwise, why shoe-horn this implausible situation into the story?)Wolstencroft needs to have someone (in this case, Okonedo's competing attorney character) speak key expository dialog later but realizes that this dialog can't be spoken without a catalyzing scene earlier in the story.
Someone had to have asked Wolstencroft after they read the script, "wait a second, how does the competing attorney come to suspect the legal beagle in the first place in order for her to layout the exact method he used to kill his wife's murderer?" Wolstencroft's answer: "You're right, that makes no sense wait, I've got it!
What if she just happens to walk in on a key meeting between the legal beagle and his conspirator planning the murder?
That would explain it right?"So of course, the climax of the story hinges on this chance meeting that would never have happened had the writer had any wits about him.
The screenplay is about how the guilty can get away with murder through technicalities.
So why not make the psychopath's motive for his murders that he knows enough about the legal system to escape prosecution by gaming it?
Wolstencroft completely misses this story element - to the viewer's frustration.I still recommend The Escape Artist for David Tennant fans as he is great as always..
The holes in the plot have made the whole thing a bit laughable, which helps to break the tension, which they have done a fantastic job of creating.
Enjoyed the 'slapstick of unfortunate events.' But the irony of injustices to the main character, a charming lawyer, is a numerous litany of misfortune because he's observed to be a good man but slips and slides in an outfield to be sucker punched by the killer 'for not performing a common courtesy.' I hope to see the other two episodes on TV during the showing weekly but believably real is this story because the entertainment value is more than enough to be engrossed and watch it with my girlfriends.
If you need to see both sides of human nature both kind and nefarious weaved well watch this series as the Lawyer has an intimate close knit family but the killer is subtly diabolical in how deviously he murders victims.
SPOILER ALERT: this may give away some elements of the plot.Tremendously good acting wasted on a preposterous plot and limited character development.
David Tennant was good, as was Sophie Okonedo, but the only thing that was believable was the pain felt by the victims of the gruesome crimes committed.
I really expect better from these British series.
I can understand that the writers felt they had a good premise--a top-notch barrister gets his obviously guilty and extremely creepy client off on a technicality, because that's his job, only to find himself then victimized by the same person.
Disappointing, disturbing, Excellent cast & production let down by implausible plot.
I have to agree with many of the reviewers on IMDb here : the writing lets this production down.
The storyline is just not credible and after watching the first episode and the synopsis for the second and third episodes, I am not watching further.If you look down the list of reviews, almost every single one has a "spoiler alert" - that should tell you something; namely that the plot line is so ridiculous everyone feels the need to mention it in their review.
I find it completely implausible that Burton would have been able to get Foyle off such a high profile "heinous" crime with a technicality as ridiculous as credit card charges for pornography.
Totally not believable.Then, the wife would have known about the case.
Add to that the fact that Foyle has now complained to the Legal authorities about Burton's "Misconduct' after he actually got him off the charge....
I don't think that a top Legal Barrister is stupid.
Nonsense!!!!!Then apparently, in episode 2 which I will not be watching, even though Burton sees Foyle standing outside after he finds his blood covered wife and says so, the other Barrister gets Foyle bail?
When the person testifying he saw him standing outside is a top legal Barrister?
Simply would not happen.I watched this because I really appreciate David Tennant and from the synopsis I thought I was going to be watching a really good legal drama.
To the reviewer who had not seen Tennant in anything else but Dr. Who and thus realized "oh he can really act".
watch him in "Broadchurch" which unlike this, is a brilliant murder series set in the UK (Dorset) starring Tennant and - like this - a fabulous supporting cast.