Enter the Law & Order franchise. Hands down, the shows that make up the canon of Law & Order are by far the best written, performed, directed and overall executed television dramas on television today. Think that's an exaggeration? Think again. With relatively mild fanfare (to start with), these shows have survived and perpetuated since 1990, garnering critical acclaim and the praise of intelligent viewers consistently over that time. Can you name another spot of light on the dark television landscape that can lay claim to that? The Simpsons? Monday Night Football? Whatever.
The fact of the matter is that these shows are anomolies: strange, bizarre exceptions to the rules of common sense and pop culture. Swimming through bad sitcoms, prime-time game shows, reality TV and trendy, twist-based dramas, this franchise has managed to not only stay afloat, but swim against the current for years. Why has this been the case? The reasons are both obvious and subtle at the same time:
1)Fantastic Acting/Casting - Rather than rely on hiring "major name" stars to make up for poor screenwriting like many other shows, Dick Wolf and company have always decided to cast their shows with stars that are only "recognizable" at best. The leads have always been great actors--but never A-list box office material (honestly, how often do the two ever cross paths?) Michale Moriarty, Sam Waterston, S. Epatha Merkerson, Chris Noth, the late Jerry Orbach, Chris Meloni, Mariska Hargatay, Vincent Donofrio, etc. Even in the smaller/transient roles are handled so well that the can take any level of actor and make them shine in subtle ways (B.D. Wong, Angie Harmon, etc). And what's more, even actors that may be in the public eye for a moment or two (eg: Benjamin Bratt, Ice-T), never overpower their characters on screen. It's as if they suddenly become the person they are portraying, which, as any actor can tell you, is the true test of dramatic ability. (The only exception to this rule so far is Dennis Farina: while he has a good dramatic presence, his inclusion in the cast may be the worst decision the producers have made--only time will tell.)
2) Timely, Varied Writing That's Never Heavy-Handed - While most of the stories told on the Law and Order shows are based on crimes that could occur at any time or in any place, they are unbelievably varied in their execution and delivery, so that they are fresh every time they are told. In the hands of other writers, a rape story is a rape story, but no two stories in the last 14 years of Law and Order are alike. Even the scripts "taken from the headlines" (Organ trafficking, pop stars molesting children, etc), rarely seem gratuitous, silly or ham-fisted. In fact, when the shows have the opportunity to go "over the top" and really rely on hot button public issues (instead of genuine writing), they never do. Restraint is sometimes the hardest quality for a television drama to maintain.
3) No Need for a "Hook" - This ties into number 2. Part of the greatness of the Law and Order franchise is that it has no need to rely on some trendy, hip "hook" to get viewers to tune in. Let's be honest: as long as there are people on the planet, there will be crime and criminals--there will never be a shortage of material. The fact that the writers of each show take the procedural events surrounding such frequent societal events and make each one different and engaging frees them from being forced to rely on a "cool" hook or "different" premise to get people to tune in. Unlike "Lost," "Desperate Housewives" or "24," Law and Order doesn't require a trendy "twist" to generate dramatic tension. That's not to say those shows are not well done: quite the contrary, they are very good dramas. The problem is that their respective "hooks" are what will lead to their inevitable short shelf-lives: Chances are that there will be no 12th season of "Lost" or 15th season of "24." Not because they aren't well-crafted--but because shows that rely on hooks/styles undoubtedly lost their sheen more quickly than any others on the dial, no matter how popular they may have once been.
4) No Forced Personal Dramas - The reason why NYPD Blue was so annoying (though popular) was that it consistently tried to force "personal relationships/demons" down the public's throat. Sometimes it worked, but in most cases, it was painful to watch. Part of the draw of the Law and Order franchise is that it never, ever places the characters' personal lives squarely AHEAD of the police procedural drama in each episode. There have been, of course, many occasions on which character's personal lives are given screen time (Det. Stabler's childhood, Det. Goren's mother, Det. Benson's mother's rape), but there rarely is an instance when an entire show is "about" their lives. And on those rare occasions when a show DOES seem to focus on one character's personal demons, the fact that it's done SO RARELY gives those episodes amazing amounts of dramatic weight. In general, the Law and Order shows are about crime and the people who commit crime. But meanwhile, the writers skillfully give insight to each lead character via subtle references, isolated personal moments and rare emotional interchanges: each of which is handled in such a seamless way that a viewer may not even know it's happening. Rather than spending 10 episodes in which Det. Benson cries about being the product of a rape to a shrink, we see tiny yet massive clues through the actor's performance and through the writer's references over a period of a whole season. A good writer knows there's no reason to shove something down your audience's throat--and while the majority of viewers would rather have drama fed to them like infants, the writers of Law and Order bank not only on their viewers' intelligence, but their appreciation for not being talked down to.
Some may think this reviewer may be going too far overboard in this article. Maybe they think my lack of exposure to other television drama may have affected my judgement. They may claim that other shows on TV are better, more engaging, etc., and that's their right. But the facts remain: no other series of shows has maintained a consistent level of excellence in writing and execution for as long as this canon of shows. The nay-sayers out there would be best served to sit down and watch several episodes of one of the three shows (the original or SVU would be best) and then pass judgement. I have a feeling that the majority of people who THEN claim the show is either unwatchable, "not good," or "heavy handed" will fall into one of the following categories: 1) They have that opinion to be "contrary" for fear that their precious faux-intelligence might be challenged after watching something that *gasp* other people watch, or 2) Their level of patience, intelligence and overall astuteness will be well below the levels necessary to digest and appreciate the series on a regular basis.
Before anyone starts feeling the pangs of a bruised ego: Yes, I realize that there may indeed be healthy, intelligent people who just "don't like the show(s)": but I have never met one who has watched SEVERAL episodes in a distraction-free environment that doesn't AT LEAST see it's value. I know this because I was one of the many who thought of the series as being "just another drama" on NBC in the early 90's--until I sat down and watched the shows--REALLY watched them. Years later, as a former screenwriting student and lover of films, I'm still amazed that television dramas can't come close to matching it's gravity.
At it's current pace, it seems as though the only thing that will effectively remove Law and Order from the television landscape will be the producers themselves--by choice. I for one hope they never make that choice.
