Not a big mistake, but also lackluster

First of all, let's talk about the most conspicuous heroine: Viola Davis, Viola has always been good, and she seems to have won the Tony Award in 2001. (Don't underestimate this, the basic performance skills required by stage plays are not editable. The movies and TV can be compared.) Later, the performance in the suspicion of child abuse was also very explosive. After all, it's an Oscar nominee. You can't resist when a bunch of trolls rush out in gangs when you say they're not good at acting, right? But what if the characters seem less persuasive? For example, the former deputy judge who did not change his face when he murdered in court would collapse as soon as he found out that there was no evidence that his husband had killed a student. Whose problem is this? (Of course, if you think there are problems with the preconditions.) Of course, the screenwriter's problem, I don't know how you let this paragraph pass by sitting in front of the monitor? As far as the current situation of these two episodes is concerned, the screenwriter should pay attention not to use it too much. Not every line can be recorded without anger, and the performance and role performance must also be prioritized. The sense of rhythm can reflect the characteristics. In addition, there should be a little more things in the courtroom. You can't just rely on a few children and assistants to find some evidence for her and she will win. High-quality arguments and closing arguments can reflect the ability of this role, so that people feel Plump, believable, apt.
Next, let's talk about a few supporting roles. Many people in the comments feel that they have seen Yan control, and then feel that there is no depth at first glance. Personally, I think that TV is a kind of entertainment after all, and the actors are good-looking. As long as it does not violate the general principles of logic and role setting, it is not a bad thing to be eye-catching. It's not that you have to be ugly to be a sign of acting skills. From this point of view, there are no major mistakes so far. The only one is her female assistant. I can't remember where I watched it. The performance is very formatted. Less (except for the situation in the White House) all the supporting roles have very heavy traces of "acting".
Finally, let's talk about the plot and scheduling. I don't think the suspense of the plot is very high. It doesn't mean that I already know who the players are or that I have guessed the following plot. This drama uses the method of most genre dramas in the scheduling of the plot, which is a combination of long and short lines. Her husband and the death of the female student made a long-term plot, and then each episode has a short-line case plot (the end of the season or the ratings are not good). There may also be one or two middle lines, such as a case that only results in two or three episodes, or the death of one or two characters. These are all common methods. It is because it is an idiomatic method, so if you watch too many dramas, you will inevitably feel a little aesthetic fatigue. But then again, there's nothing wrong with that.
In recent years, especially in the past two years, the number of movie stars appearing in TV dramas has indeed begun to increase. On the one hand, the tastes of the audience are becoming more and more tricky, and on the other hand, movie actors are also human beings. Popularity is also good for actors. The current ratings of Getaway is not bad, indicating that at least most people think that the problem is not a big problem, and it should be fine to renew the subscription.

View more about How to Get Away with Murder reviews