bpatrick-8 I spent a short time in law school about a year before the CBS version of "The Paper Chase" started. I'm not sure law school is as intimidating today as it was in the '70s, but it was pretty accurate at the time. Still, I would not care to see this show revived in a softer classroom environment, and for one reason: John Houseman. He actually did teach acting at UCLA drama school, and a student once told him he wasn't acting in "The Paper Chase," that that was really his classroom manner. And as for his character, Professor Kingsfield, yes, he can strike fear in his students, but at the same time, when he allows himself a small smile after a particularly good class, you know he's rooting for his students to make it into the legal world. Personally, I think that if there were more Kingsfields at real-world colleges (and even high schools), we wouldn't be talking about a crisis in education in this country.I also want to single out James Stephens, who I thought was a more credible Hart, the Midwestern kid who idolizes Kingsfield, than Timothy Bottoms in the movie; Bottoms seemed to be the last of the hippies. I also liked the fact that the series rarely, if ever, got into the relationship between Hart and Kingsfield's daughter, the subplot of the movie. There are some shows ("Law & Order" was another) where viewers don't care about the characters' personal lives.It's been noted that "The Paper Chase" was slotted against the two hottest shows of the era: "Happy Days" and "Laverne & Shirley." CBS may have been hoping for an alternative audience, much as "The Waltons" achieved against Flip Wilson a few years earlier. Thus, some of the episodes were flashier than "The Paper Chase" should be; the nadir was the one where Hart escorts a visiting Russian gymnast; Houseman refused to appear in that episode.Finally, like the similar "White Shadow," which was on CBS around the same time, these students do graduate! And as Houseman himself might say, they've won Kingsfield's respect the old-fashioned way: they've earned it.

kpagan79 I remember this series for a bit of a quirky reason. I was a law student (SMU in Dallas) and entered in the Fall of 1983, the same year Showtime picked this up and ran it. Because of that timing, "Hart" and gang were progressing through law school at the same time as me and my classmates, so we would get together after episodes and critique! I liked the show and it was fairly reflective of law school reality and life. (Not to pick nits, but one area was pretty far off - the law review "office." I wasn't on law review, but certainly friends were and the show portrayed it as like a major metropolitan daily newspaper! It was the opposite end of that spectrum, in reality! The law reviews come out about 3 times a year and students spend their time in the library "cite checking" not running into the law review offices to "beat the presses"! But I digress . . .) I do think the movie was certainly more powerful, and I pull that out about once every 3 or 4 years, but the images bring back some not too pleasant memories! Anyway, I would like to get a copy of the complete series somewhere, but can only find the first two seasons online. Any suggestions??

commerce-29 As I'm writing this, I have seen only about 8 episodes of the first season. It seems a bit quaint to me. Some of the episodes have predictable plots in a law school setting. Hart seems to find a new girlfriend every episode - I don't want to see his energy with the ladies, I want to see it with Kingsfield. One episode, in which a female student takes a Supreme Court justice (Alan Napier, better known as Alfred on "Batman") to task for never hiring a female law clerk, seems really bizarre in that there are actually people spending more than a nanosecond defending his discriminatory practice - is this really controversial? The man is a Neanderthal! There's also this recurring theme of Hart as the Good Guy who rides his white horse to bail everybody out. One time it's a married student whose wife (Kim Cantrall, later of Sex And The City) doesn't understand the demands of law school, another time a neurotic study group member who feels picked on because his photo on Kingsfield's seating chart is unflattering.I think what troubled me is that I was looking for more continuing plot themes from episode to episode. Characters and themes pop up and are disposed of in an hour. Law school is vastly more complex than that, and The Paper Chase should be also. When you have 10 or 20 hours available, you should be able to build more intensity, conflict, and drama than they could in the original 2-hour movie. But I "feel" Hart as more a happy-go-lucky nice guy than the scared yet driven 1L Timothy Bottoms played.I do recall though, from when I saw many of the episodes when they were on Showtime in the 80's, that it gets better later on. If and when I get to see more recent episodes, I'll update this review or write a new one.

classicalsteve I know there are a few die-hard fans making posts here. But after reviewing the show for the first time in 30 years on DVD, I do see why it was canceled. Not even Houseman can save this over-acted and badly-written show that is much weaker than the original film where the dialog is predictable, and the incidences are rather contrived. And of course, the whole feel of the show is so stylistically entrenched in the era of the 1970's, from music that sounds like imitation Simon and Garfunkle right down to the old freeze-frame at the end, that it gives the impression that it was too targeted for a 1970's TV audience that liked idealizing college days. In other words, it relies so heavily on the perceived 1970's sensibility that it can't break out of its own era while the film easily stretches decades beyond without it seeming like it was from the 1970's. This may be why broadcast television shows have a higher likelihood of being dated than films.The original film of 1973 has a more convincing look and feel to it that is entirely its own. It is modern but is not cemented to its era, similar to films like "Ordinary People" or "A Few Good Men" which seem somehow timeless. Probably the only differences between Harvard Law of 1973 versus Hardvard Law of the 2000's is that in the latter scenario the students have laptops, course assignments can be received via email, and case books can be acquired via CD-ROM--superficial upgrades. Students still attend large lecture halls and study in the law library containing tomes dating back centuries. The substance is still largely the same, and a prospective law student would still absorb much of the atmosphere of Ivy League law if he/she saw the 1973 film. Unfortunately the TV-show doesn't quite measure up.Comparing the casts of the TV show with its counterpart in the movie is kind of like comparing college football to the NFL. All the actors in the film took their acting down just a notch into the acting realm where it seems more genuine, more true-to-life, and more compelling. For my money, James Stephens was not nearly as convincing in the lead as James Hart as Timothy Bottoms from the 1973 offering. Bottoms finds that fine line where he has an understated intensity that emerges in a few crucial scenes, particularly in the moment where he confronts Kingsfield on his own terms. Stephens plays Hart as too much of a softy, the total nice college guy from the 1970's, replete with plaid shirt and an "ah shucks" kind of easy-going persona. Stephens lacks the intensity you would find among law students, the intensity that is captured very well by the film. In fact most of the cast of the TV show seem way too nice to be law students. Harvard law students are not only competing for grades but aspire to become leaders among the world elite and possibly enter politics. Not members of the Glee Club about to embark on a public relations tour.The actor who played Willis Bell in the original film, Craig Richard Nelson, does a fine job of making his character snooty and haughty although it never feels like it's so over the top that he's acting the part. Every college class has someone like Bell whose been given everything since before birth and acts like everyone else is dirt under his feet. By contrast, the actor who played Bell in the TV show, James Keane, misses the mark and his performance skyrockets into over-the-top-dom. Especially in the second episode when Bell's lobbying for a job, he came off like a science major who decided to try an acting class. It just doesn't work. The same could be said of the two Fords. The Ford of the film came off like a true law student, not particularly sociable but not unfriendly--the true studious intellectual engrossed in the case book. By contrast the Ford of the show comes off like this hot-head people-pleaser who wants everyone to vote for him in the second episode. And unfortunately, the hot-headed-ness starts to climb Mt Everest.It is not only the actors' fault. The writing of some of these episodes are just not on par with the original film, although some scenes and/or lines from the movie were used in the pilot. Some of the lines of the show are so ridiculously contrived I was almost rolling over the floor, especially when Stephens was in Kingsfield's office during the pilot episode, saying "But but Professor Kingsfield..." in a last-ditch effort to gain some sort of footing in the class. Sort of akin to the line "Why why you you...!" I have never heard anyone actually say these kinds of lines except in movies and TV shows.Ultimately a let-down as I vaguely remember the show when it first aired (I was in Elementary School at the time), but I never watched it religiously. I acquired the original film "The Paper Chase" not long ago and decided it would be fun to see the TV series. Unfortunately it falls flat. I rest my case.