One of the reasons I'm a big fan of the Practice is that they do sometimes do things are a little more challenging to watchers than the usual network fare -- as a viewer I am led to think about issues and wrestle with questions, rather than just be amused.

The ending to this last episode, however, really depressed me. What I take from it is how vital it is to have a really good lawyer.

Mac-

Minor point, but while the crime Sacco & Vanzetti were wrongly accused of took place in Braintree, they were tried and convicted in Dedham, where this three-episode arc was filmed. There's an excellent article by local historian Robert Hanson here.

Dedham is a cute little town just south of Boston, and I think David E. Kelley gave it a bit of a bad rap with this storyline. Class warfare in the Eastern Mass. suburbs is not nearly so vicious as it was portrayed here.

While I do agree that what used to be an ensemble drama has turned into a showcase for Spader, I can't argue with the results.

Yes, Alan Shore took a case that should have been easy to lose for both legal and extralegal reasons and triumphed. But. . . his client was guilty all along. Irony. A miscarriage of justice occurred in the opposite way of what happened with Sacco and Vanzetti.

I loved the co-stars. Betty White and Ed Asner were perfect in their roles. Way to go, David Kelley!

Thanks for the info, Scott. I thought Kelley was just using Dedham as a stand-in for Braintree. Now, I understand there were three small towns in the area involved.

While I did like the history connection, I really HATE when "The Practice" has multi-episode stories. I watch it each week for exciting courtroom and related legal drama, not to watch one story-line dragged out so long that you have wait *a month* before you get see the good trial action.

IMHO, "The Practice" is better served when they have story-lines contained in ONE episode, MAYBE two (like when the original cast went to LA).

I agree that is becoming the James Spader show, which is why they need to go back one episode story-lines and give us some "Eugene" legal drama, as that guy is powerful in the stage set courtroom.

Good suggestions, Pappy. I was put off by the interruption to. The first episode of the two-parter did a great job of building suspense. Then one had to wait, wait and wait to see what happened next.

Let me admit that I fell for the defendant's manipulation. He had me convinced he was not guilty, partly because Alan believed him.

LOL... I wrote about James Spader on my blog yesterday.

As much as some detest Spader's character and the emphasis put on Shore
over the course of the new season; it's no coincidence that the show has rebounded in ratings and enjoying renewed critical popularity. As someone who didn't care for the original cast, I can only imagine how the fans of the original cast must feel seeing
this new fellow wrangle all the screen time.

In my opinion, this is a breakthrough character that conventional
television is often too wary to rely on. (at least not since JR Ewing) He's an anti-hero and not someone you're supposed to like. He's mean, cold and calculating. Like a car crash, you simply have to look. He's one of those guys out of the Miles Trentel (30-Something) school of amoral charisma.

Everyone within the ensamble will get their due as the program enters it's swan song. The introduction of William Shatner as a top labor attorney feels like a genius stroke in casting. Something the Practice has always had a knack for..., The show had actually gained new viewers and sustaining old ones with the Alan Shore Show. I eagerly await the spin-off that brings Shore back into the Corporate arena.