Chicago Justice

Chicago Justice was a solid, if short-lived, addition to the One Chicago universe. While it didn't quite reach the emotional or character-driven heights of Fire, P. D., or Med, it brought something unique to the table - a courtroom perspective on the same gritty, morally complex cases that ripple through Chicago's streets.

The standout was Peter Stone, whose intense conviction and courtroom charisma gave the show real weight. Carl Weathers as Mark Jefferies added authority and presence, and the legal drama format gave a new lens to crimes we usually saw through the eyes of cops or first responders.

Visually sharp, with the same Chicago backdrop we love, the show had potential. It tackled thought-provoking issues and offered a grounded look at how justice gets decided - not just on the streets, but in the courts.

It may not have had the emotional pull or homely nostalgia of the other shows, but Chicago Justice still felt like it belonged. With more time, it could've developed deeper connections and character arcs. Unfortunately, we never got to see it truly evolve.

Still, for fans of the franchise, it's a worthwhile piece of the One Chicago puzzle - one that adds context, closure, and courtroom heat to the city we've grown to love.

I'm so sorry this show only ran for one season then was not renewed. It's interesting that the "Chicago" series was created and intertwines. I know Chicago Fire is popular but after watching many episodes I couldn't get interested in it. But here comes Chicago Justice that I really like... and it gets canceled.

I like the actors, the procedural component, the direction, and the courtroom scenes.

It makes perfect sense to tie this show together with Chicago P.D. I suppose it was canceled due to low viewer-ship. Too bad for me.

There are two things that could be changed to make this show better. 1) There is no character development beyond the job. My wife and I always look for the romance behind the scenes. We don't want it to be overwhelming or even more than perhaps 5-10% of the content, but we don't want it to be zero. 2) The story lines are good but they fall apart, almost always. The cases are won in court with inadequate evidence and incomplete development. This, of course, is the crux of the show but it fails.

In spite of #2 above I would have wished for the project to continue with better writers and direction. Not cancelled.

Perhaps the Chicago collective can return with Chicago Law or something similar.

I really like legal dramas. What I like the most is not the "evidence-based" crimes but when they present actual dilemmas that we encounter in our lives. I mean the thin line between right and wrong. You hear the arguments of one side and you think they are right, you hear the arguments from the other side and you totally change your opinion.

Chicago justice tries to be such a legal drama, but unfortunately fails miserably. I just watched the 3rd episode that (supposedly) had some things to say about racism and cultural differences, and heroism, and taking action... Yet, it ends up to be a complete mess, blurring every message with ridiculous arguments and plot twists. The same feeling I had for the 2 previous episodes which by the way I have totally forgot what they were about.

The main actor is totally unsympathetic. His character seems also like a confused person. He acts like he knows what he is doing and saying but the situations prove him wrong every time. It's not a character that has "flaws". He is just a character poorly written.

Same goes for the rest of the cast which includes Rocky's Carl Weathers.

The script is bad. The music builds tension in places that don't justify such treatment. The plot of every episode is shallow and the resolution of each trial seems forced and pretentious with spontaneous and unjustified outbreaks from the defendants.

Another newcomer "The good fight" (a spin-off of The good wife) is surprisingly better in that department. Despite the fact that focuses in other areas and aspects of the legal world and its people, ends up to be a more solid legal drama in terms of the cases and the arguments and the "dilemmas" I previously mentioned.

Overall: Not a good legal drama. It focuses on the cases more than the lives of their characters (which is good) but it doesn't deliver. If you want a legal series with good arguments that makes you think, you have to look elsewhere.

I felt this show was hurt by it's slow start and some miscasting of characters. As the show went on, I thought it got much better & was glad I stuck it out. I do think some actors weren't right for this series, such as Carl Weathers. Unfortunately the two issues I mentioned hurt it ratings wise, which I'm sure lead to its cancellation after one season. Such a shame as it had potential. I feel viewers should have kept watching so as to give it a chance of making it for many more years. I do feel strongly that P. Winchester was right for his role. I enjoyed watching him in court and thought he had the looks and mannerisms of a real lawyer. Sad there are no more seasons. Will miss.

This one however, while not being bad exactly, leaves me unengaged! My mind drifts, it just has no riveting content. I find myself missing chunks, but it does not matter. There is nothing to miss.

The shame is, I really was looking forward to it, but have been left wanting.

It's not so much the cast, although Monica Barbaro looks far to young and delicate to be in the position she is.

For me it's the story lines, they are quite honestly feeble. Big wins, were really simple word play, that most of us could manage. The writing quite honestly sucks!

This really could be the only Chicago to fail!