I have watched all but one episode (first day, episode 2 did not air here due to 9/11 commemoration ceremonies), so here is my full review of this show as a long-time People's Court viewer, if anyone is interested.
The intro reminds me of the "Rhoda" opening credits ( "My name is Rhoda Morgenstern. I was born in the Bronx, New York in December, 1941. I've always felt responsible for World War II. The first thing I remember liking that liked me back was food. I had a bad puberty; it lasted 17 years. I'm a high school graduate. I went to art school. My entrance exam was on a book of matches. I decided to move out of the house when I was 24; my mother still refers to this as the time I ran away from home. Eventually I ran to Minneapolis, where it's cold, and I figured I'd keep better. Now I'm back in Manhattan. New York, this is your last chance!") without the humor. Here, MM skips over her main claim to fame, being judge on "The People's Court" for 22 seasons. If you are not including that information, then why bother with a biographical opening? On an everyday basis, the spoken word intro about MM's life, trying to validate JM's credentials as a lawyer and judge, doesn't work and is annoying. Cringeworthy is her little dance sequence.
First, some differences between the two shows: I very much miss Douglas, the bailiff. He was nice and likeable, this bailiff adds nothing with no interaction with JM. This guy seems like a knockoff. I wonder why TPC announcer is included and Douglas isn't? The same announcer is a bad idea, as it invokes comparison to TPC and this show loses the comparison. I do not like, when we return from break, the case just resumes; I like TPC's recap before testimony begins. Also missing is Doug's hallterview, instead we have a 'Judge Judy' like commentary by each litigant without anyone challenging their viewpoint. I am very much fine without Harvey's post-case commentary and especially like not having Harvey's street peanut gallery. The segments with Judge John are sporadic, and so far seem to be opinions on legal questions and not the terrible personal questions TPC judges' segment devolved into.
Second, the cases lean toward being slightly odd/cute rather than the straightforward loans, contractors, security deposit, dog bite cases of TPC. The first week overloaded on precoscious kids. Odd/cute leads to a feeling of are these cases even real or just cutesy ideas? This leads to the overall feeling that that this show is fake.
Third, the fakeness. The show comes off fake. Fake equals lame. The disclaimer at the end says that some of it is reenactmants but it all seems fake. The cases all start out with the litigants giving each other dirty looks. Just comes off as acting and ridiculous. The "litigants" speak too well and what they say seems planned. The litigants try too hard to be "interesting." Almost every case has the litigants having back and forths. MM tolerates this until she doesn't. The judge also tolerates speaking out of turn but at some point, in almost every case, she lays the hammer down that she is talking in order to come off as tough, IMO. She allows it until she doesn't and then slaps the litigants down to exert her power. Happens too often; it seems intentional.
Fourth, cases dragged out for a half hour. None of these cases are worth 30 minutes; dragging them out makes them even more tedious and boring. This edit was inspired by the case of the plaintiff who grinded with defendant's boyfriend while dancing at a party, who, when threatened by the defendant, ran to the bathroom and then jumped out the window, injuring her ankle. No, was not 30 minutes worthy and the added length made a stupid, ridiculous case with fake, annoying litigants even more boring.
Fifth, I have found some of JM's decisions questionable. I wish there were more (any?) posts actually discussing individual cases but, alas, nobody seems to care enough to post about the cases.
My overarching complaint is that the cases seem designed to be cute/unusual/"interesting" rather than real and, coupled with the litigants probably being (bad) actors, the show comes off totally fake, cheap (the courtroom set is cheap looking even by TV court show standards), boring and uninteresting. Also, bring back Douglas (especially) and Doug. Middling and missable but so far I keep watching but not actually enjoying. Watching kind of feels like a duty or chore and that is not good.
Edited September 29, 2023 by BazingancG1vNJzZmien6fCrr%2BNqamipZWptq6x0WeaqKVfqbyxtcJoaG1pYGaGbrbUrKuim5Vis7C%2BjK2fnmWgmryxuMRmrqKsmGK3trDGnmSmoZyerq95xp6lnqqRoXqltdKcrKyrmaS7cLzAoJxoal8%3D