Der Anwalt des Teufels

The Escape Artist is a so-so piece of entertainment. A three-part Series. Here's the premise.

David Tennent plays a Defense Attorney so good at what he does that his peers refer to him as an Escape Artist; he gets his clients out of seemingly impossible circumstances. In the first half hour he gets two murder clients Not Guilty verdicts. But the second of the two results in freeing a man who promptly goes out and murders again. And the Escape Artist knows it. And is faced with the questions: (1) What to do, and (2) Is it OK for a defense attorney to help the prosecution, and (3) Does every defendant deserve a good defense?

These questions hang over the three part series. And, to some degree, they are all answered. But the failing of the film lies in the way the story is told. For quite some time the viewer is baffled by what our hero is doing; the what and the why? He is brilliant, that we know. And so we are willing to have faith in his actions. But finally, and sadly, we shake our heads. And we say, 'How'd he do that? How'd he Know that? What'd I miss?'.

We do in fact get told the 'what's, the why's, the how's. But by then I was already too angry at the story to appreciate the attorney's genius.

I completely agreed with the review of another IMDB user.

For me the clever ending just about rescued this from a lower rating. The main problem was the plot's lack of credibility I found the characters all rather unexciting. They were uniformly unpleasant, perhaps with the exception of the villain who was really nasty. But it was not all bad. The story moved on at a reasonable pace, and the viewer is pulled in to see how it all ends up.

I am not a huge fan of David Tennant. He always seems too smug, so perhaps this was the perfect role for him.

I was relieved to see no particular evidence that it would continue with a further series a la Netflix. I certainly wouldn't be keen on more.

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. It seems fairly clear that he's guilty, but Will manages to get him acquitted. The next thing he knows, Foyle has filed a complaint against Will. And here's where the problems with the script begin. 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. His next move is more heinous, and this time, Will sees him when he looks out the window. 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. Naturally we here in America don't know much about that. What we do know is how odd the U.S. courts can be, so nothing surprises us. 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. I enjoyed the acting overall as well. The script could have used a little more work in finding stronger motivations. I would guess that the writer had an incredible idea for a denouement and filled in the rest, but not very carefully.

Well, we love David Tennant (late of his Phileas Fogg presentation on PBS & Dr. Who, in the past). So, when this 2013 entry popped up on PBS-Prime, we jumped at the chance. Tennant plays an emerging Brit Solicitor (defence attorney) who is undefeated. Hence, he is given a case involving a nasty young man who (allegedly) ritualistically murdered a young female.

Tennant is happily married, with an adolescent son of his own in this 3-part story. He has misgivings about the case, but finds a way to get a result. Sadly, soon, things begin to go wrong. No spoilers here, but in part 3, Tennant is forced to take drastic action to protect himself & son. The outcome was nothing like one might expect, and, really incongruent to the story we started with.

I often find Brit mystery shows will deliberately omit details or fabricate plot holes to make the story work. Most of these are forgivable, but, in this story, it almost seems the writers had an axe to grind with the courts allowing dodgy defence tactics to win acquittals. I enjoyed the first 2 episodes, but the closing was WAY out of left field. No problem with the performances, mind you-but I would like to have a long chat with the writer.

7/10.

Definitely an implausible storyline and utterly far fetched, but then many compelling dramas have peculiar twists, and often events would never happen in reality. So I wouldn't consider this to be a valid criticism. The principal cast are talented and accomplished, and the acting is the strongest element. The final episode seems to cram into the plot too many crucial aspects of the story that weren't suggested or introduced in any way during the preceding episodes. This gave the impression that the story was somewhat rushed towards the end. Setting out the storyline in greater depth earlier in the series would have allowed the whole thing to make more sense. However that would probably have required an additional episode, which presumably the producers wished to avoid.