 Welcome back to Think Tech. I'm Jay Fidel. We're going to talk about movies here on Movies We Can Learn From. We'll talk about a movie, actually a serial. It was done, I guess it's this year, called Jury Duty. And at first you think that's a high, there it is, a highly legal kind of experience, but it's not. It's really off the wall. George Mason joins me today for our regular, experience here, we're doing movies. And George is going to welcome to the show, George. George is going to give us the environment of this movie. It's not conventional. This series basically ostensibly shows a number of people on a jury in a court. And there's a twist at the end, and I'll explain that in a minute. And it's basically comedic because some of the things that go on are just absolutely hilarious. You'll be rolling in your chair, right? Body functions, defecation, urination, all kind of crazy things going on, people falling, but it's a comedic kind of thing. There's a lot of twist in this, too. And in the end, you get surprised that everyone is basically acting, and there's only one person there who is real. And he was recruited from an ad to be on a jury, but he didn't know everybody else is an actor. So basically, it gets really, really, I mean, there's eight episodes. And the last episode is basically just showing how the director and the assistant director put this whole thing together. Totally brilliant, the way they did this, right? Totally brilliant. So that's the just of it. And we can get into all the specific scenes, with all the different play, a very diverse crowd, which would be like when I was on jury duty, you have a very diverse crowd in LA, even here in the center. So it's a diverse crowd of different backgrounds, different personalities. And it really works very well. And I really enjoyed this series. It's just so many times I fell out of my chair. So I'll let Jay take over and get into some of the specifics and I'll get back and maybe add some things to what Jay wants to say. Yeah, I had the same experience, George. I was cracking up. My wife thought I was really losing it because this was this was so funny. And it was, you know, it was lots of nuance, you know, what you had to watch it to catch the strange kind of humor they had. Let me give you my reactions. Okay. Number one is, yeah, they put an ad in the paper and they got 2,500 responses to join the jury, but they only selected this one guy. And he had no clue that everybody else was an actor, including the judge. And he had no idea that in the next room beside the courtroom in this courthouse building, there were like 50 technicians who had planted cameras everywhere. And they made a movie out of every one of these camera shots. And then, you know, all the computers and the cameras and the high tech and they were cracking up because they were enjoying it as much as you enjoyed it and I enjoyed it. So it was kind of a Chitama Real kind of thing. And I kept thinking of Emil Zola, you know, who in the 19th century, he wrote the human experiment kind of books. And he would take a character and put the character in a completely untenable situation. And then he would play with the character and see how the character reacted. And that's what this was. Somebody must have read Emil Zola in order to conceive of this. They spent a lot of money on this. They had a lot of people and they did a lot. It was really like, you know, a high production movie. But it wasn't. It was all in the courtroom and in the jury waiting room and the liberation room and so forth to go a little further with it. This guy became the he became the foreman of the jury. And it was it was flawed in that sense because the foreman of the jury is generally chosen by the members of the jury. But but they they needed to have this guy tall how he got to recall his name. His real name is Ronald Gladden. Well, that was it was his real name and it was his name in the movie. It was his name on the credits. It's really anyway. So he was like the target of all this. And he was the Emil Zola character. They were changing changing things. They were setting him up on a million kind of subtle practical jokes. And the actors who played the other jurors and the and the witnesses and the parties and the lawyers were really good. But they were all completely kooky. The whole thing was kooky. And this poor guy Ron, he had had a lot of experience as a juror. So he didn't know what to explain. No, that judges do not select for four men or four women of the jury. It's the jury selects them. But the judge really the director really had to get Ron appointed as foreman because that was part of the way they were doing this. So they sort of stretched it and they complimented him on the way he ordered lunch. For the other members of the jury, they said you did such a really good job. The judge has decided to appoint you as the foreman of the jury. It was so absurd. And the people on the jury, you're right, I mean, they were completely off the wall. But it was a slice of Americana. You know, this was in Los Angeles and they were very diverse group. I mean, no two of them were like, like each other. They all came from different backgrounds. They all played different roles. They were all as kooky as could be. And they were actors and they could do it. It made you want to be there too. It made you want to try your acting skills and see if you could fool poor Ron into believing you were a legitimate juror. But some of the gags they did, and he had no idea he was swinging from pillar to post, trying to figure out what these people were doing and thinking, Hey, wait, this is a jury. It's very serious. But it wasn't serious at all. And so what you get is in case you have never been on the inside of a jury or the deliberations by a jury, and you thought that it was serious, this movie kind of fakes you out. And what it tells you was not, it's just ordinary people doing ordinary things. They're all a little crazy. And, you know, that's the way it works in this American system of justice. And, you know, in a funny way, it was the rule of law. It was the jury system. And everyone played a role consistent with that. What I mean is they all respected the system. They respected the judge. They respected each other, even though they were very, very, very diverse in their way of thinking and doing things and reacting. So I thought there were a lot of lessons in this. That's why I suggested it to you. The lessons about the jury, about the court system, about humanity, about Los Angeles, about how, you know, people treat each other. It was really a kind of introspective, introspective, you know, examination of how people conduct themselves in this Amiel Zola-esque kind of world. I really enjoyed it from pillar to post, from the beginning to the end. And let's not talk about the final, the final episode until we get to the end of our discussion. That was, that, that Nocturus Soksov is what happened in that one. Some of the, you know, bizarre things. For example, this very kooky geeky guy, the short fellow with the red hair, he comes in with this pair of crutches, which are somehow attached to his okole. And when he wants to sit down, he sits down on crutches and all his people are tested with what kind of absurdity is this. He can walk, he doesn't need the crutches, they help him sit. And he explains to everybody why he needs them, but it's not an explanation at all. So you say, you know, they're very kind to him. They don't dump on him. They treat him with respect, even though he's obviously, at least apparently out of his mind. It's a lesson at all of that. James Marston, who's an actor, you know, well-known actor, he plays himself too. And he's playing a role, you know, and he plays that role really good. And he fools Ronald Glenn, and he and Ronald Glenn sort of get close, you know, and get to be buddies, right? And the whole thing is at the end, as you said, the last scene was when Ronald Glenn is right in the seventh scene, seventh episode, they, at the end of it, they tell him what's going on. And in the eighth episode, as you said, they get into the particulars of that. But I mean, even the defecation in the toilet was a prop, you know. It was chocolate. It was chocolate. I thought it was pretty tacky, though. At the time I was watching this thing, I said, my God, they're not really doing this. But it was a gag, and everything was a gag. And at the end, you find out that it was a huge piece of chocolate. Exactly. And they had to put a wire to keep it in the toilet. So ridiculous, the whole thing. I mean, what was the other show we saw that was a lot of body things that you were laughing about, Jay? There was another one we reviewed. There was a lot of, oh, it was the Kaminsky show, the Kaminsky thing. Remember what Michael Douglas was playing this aging actor, an acting coach? Yeah. Into a lot of that, too. That was the one. I really got good reviews. I mean, a lot of people must, for some reason, really got in. I think Alan Arkham was in there for a while, wasn't he? He died recently. He was good. He's a really good actor. So the thing is, there was that prop and a few other props, as you said, the crutches on that crazy guy. And so many different scenes that just had me falling out of my chair. Really hilarious, hilarious stuff. They're making me laugh just talking about it. Then you had this elderly woman, Barbara, and she kept falling asleep. As you well know, at RA sometimes you fall asleep. I eat and I fall asleep. And she was hilarious, too. And she played that role to a team. And then I'm trying to think, and then you had, you know, the way they played some of the different minority people, you know, I mean, it was, I mean, just really, I mean, it might have been a little bit of a caricature of the Hispanic woman. Sure. This guy, he was actually a senior analyst for the University of California, but he played the role of an immigrant Korean. And he taught himself to speak very slowly, very softly. It wasn't him at all. He was acting. But that was very, they were playing this, this Korean game. And he, you know, he, he failed that the game was all set up. And he gave Ron a big win and told him he had, and Ron didn't understand the game at all. And he told Ron, you just won $2,000 from me. I got to pay you off now. In the jury room, they were gambling already. And Ron was so nice. He says, no, no, I'm not going to take you to $2,000. The whole thing, this is slapstick comedy, the whole thing. And as you said, that got brilliant analysts from the university. I think you're obviously Irvine, California Irvine. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. He played an immigrant Korean newly arrived, you know, with language difficulty, which was just a whole act, you know, I mean, in caricatures, you know, I mean, the whole thing, I mean, I'm trying to think of some of the other, other things, you know, who held out at the end, there was one person who held out one guy, tall guy, you know, white guy. And, and the reason is because he wasn't telling them his marriage was on the rocks. And he sort of, this was like, they became friends. And he didn't want to leave the jury because he sort of felt company. He didn't want to go home. He didn't want to go home. And this is, I mean, he's acting, of course, you have to remember that. He said he didn't want to go home. And his wife was really mean to him. And he wanted to hang out with the boys and girls in the jury for as long as he possibly could, because they made him feel good. So he, he kept saying that the guy was liable, the Trevor, whatever his name was, you know, the long haired guy, you know, they should, I mean, we didn't get into this. It seems that he collapsed in the factory and urinated on himself and defecated on himself. They got, they get into this right in the first scenes, you know, which is really hilarious, right? And then this, this model of glad and pretty sharp him is this African American guy who also very sharp. And they were looking around, they saw, they went and visually saw the factory and they actually visited the fact and they saw that there were marks on the ground. So it sort of justified what Trevor was saying that he passed out because of chemical, you know, exposure, right? So the whole thing, I mean, the whole case was absolutely off the wall. The jury is trying to understand what the evidence is. And really, there was no evidence. Trying to understand what the claim was. And there was no claim. The plaintiff, the plaintiff who played that part, whoever the writer was, tall, thin, American, howly American woman, elegant, right? She played that role to, you know, spoiled, spoiled, rich, you know, silver spoon. And then the thing is that her attorney was a real attorney and Trevor, the defendant's attorney was a real attorney. I mean, these people were actors, but they were all, they also had law degrees and had passed the bar and had previously practiced law, you know? So whoever did the casting to this? Well, you know, America where an LA where you have a lot of diversity and there were no two people on the jury alike, none. And they came from all walks of life and all mental conditions, if I may, which is real because I've been on a jury and you did get people from all, you know, even LA and here I've been on a, you get people from all walks of life, right? So that was realistic, you know, like, as you said in the previously, they did their homework, the writer, the producer, that they knew what a jury was like. And they pictured that up to a certain point, except for the fact that it's all a big joke, you know, it's a comedy, it's all not real. So I mean, this was just phenomenal. Can you think of anything else that I'm not thinking of any other scenes? Was the toilet scene? You remember the toilet scene? Yeah, that was what I was told, the chocolate, the chalk. I mean, that scene, I thought I loved the old Jewish lady who fell asleep all the time. Barbara, yeah. I was not sleeping, I was resting my eyes. She was good. She said, you know, she's acting, you know, I mean, Barbara over something burger was her real name. And they set him up. They set him up because one of the guys who, well, they had all these phony relationships, you know, they got to talk about their wives and girlfriends and all that. So they set him, they set this guy up to make a racist comment. And they try and try to blame Ron on the racist comment. Right. So that he would get thrown off the jury. You know, he was a nerdy guy, you know, real tight church, church, like they usually talk about the church lady, he was the church guy, real, you know, repressed sexually repressed. And then there's this young woman who's got the hots for him, plus they go to bed with him. And they go to her, the jury is what you call it, locked up. And so she, you have love affairs popping up between the various members of the jury. And this woman plays the, God, she was funny. She plays this role of this hot babe. And as she invites him, they invite a number of people to her room, seduce them. He doesn't want to have sex. So they get on the bed, they put him on top of her, you know, to have sex. And he doesn't want to have sex. So they're jumping on the bed. I think it was Ron and someone else. Oh, and James Marsden, to sort of get him to have intercourse with this woman, you know, have sex with her. The whole thing was slapstick comedy. And you can't help it. You know, in this day and age, as I've said, so much sadness of the world to see something like this, it just gets you away from all the bullshit that's going on everywhere. You can hear in Hawaii, you know, there's so much shit going on. So that's basically, you know, well, it was it was funny, but it was also, I thought it was also educational educational about the human condition. Yes. And these, these people, you know, did a really good job in acting their very strange roles. And you know, if you if you didn't realize what was going on, you wouldn't believe it. You would believe this is really happening. This is a real jury. It had to be quick. That's a spot that that problem. But it does show Jay the operation of a jury and that judge, he played the role. He was, he was fabulous. He was so believe it was, he's an attorney too. He was a, you know, he's in a, he said, was a retired attorney. So he knows exactly. I mean, it was so real. I mean, he really, I mean, you, you would not think if you ever saw him that he wasn't a judge and for Ronald, that was good because the judge is the most important person. And then the bailiff that have you said, yeah, yeah, she was terrific. I mean, they casted this. They went out for these meals because the jury was locked up. You know, they wound up with going out for these meals and they have to have a, an inspection of the factory, which was completely useless. It's not the real, it's not the real inspection of the fact. The one in, in real, I mean, Jay, you were, you were an attorney, but does that go on in real life? Oh, it happens. It could happen. How to eat it. What exactly was, you know, there was a snooping around at a factory and completely unsupervised. I don't think that would happen. And then they wind up, they wind up in this, in this restaurant bar affair on the way back from the factory and get good and drunk, all of them. Exactly. When he gets drunk, right? Oh my God. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Anyway, let's, let's go to the bottom line. The, the final part of this movie is such a revelation. It came as a surprise to me. I didn't realize what was going on. I suspected there was something fishy about what was happening here. But at the very end, he is the foreman. He rules in favor of this long-haired, greasy-looking defendant, who's just a real loser. Okay. He rules in favor and he, and he causes the jury to go unanimous on that decision. He stands up and announces it to the judge. The judge says, you know, can you bring your jury verdict form over? I would like to like, I'd like you to be right here next to me. Just have a seat, Ron. And then the judge who was so good explains to him that, you know, I told you at the outset that this is my last trial. But what I didn't mention is it's also my first trial. In fact, in fact, it isn't a trial. It isn't a court. This isn't a real jury. All the people around, you know, there's like 20, 25 people in the courtroom when you add them all up. All these people, they're all actors, Ron. And Ron is having a conniption. What, what did you say to me? And finally at the very end, he says, you know, you did a good job. You showed kindness and consideration. You were, you were sympathetic to all the people around you. You used your analytical skills to understand the quote evidence that you were seeing. You found things that other people didn't find. You did a great job on the jury. And, and, you know, you made this work. And we are so happy that we recruited you for this. And for this, we are going to award you $100,000. And the guy almost fainted. He had no idea that it was phony, but worse than that, he had no idea that they were going to give him money. And he was so good natured. I mean, even when he was shocked, every time something happened, even at this end, he was very good natured. And that's why they picked him, you know, because they could check that that was his personality that he was really very flexible, good natured person. So yeah, so that was the eighth. And then they showed, as you said, the other room with all the technicians and what was going on. And, and just, there must have been 12 or 14 technicians in the room. The room was full and all kinds of high take equipment. And they had hidden cameras everywhere. So the result is that when they put this movie together, they were taking shots from every angle you could imagine. And he knew they were going to make a documentary, but he had no idea how many cameras were involved and how sophisticated this all was. And it's similar to other reviews we've done where they actually show how the movie is made. This was this eighth episode shows basically all the behind the scenes things that were movies are made, you know, customizing the movies for Coppola, Francis Ford Coppola. You would actually see all the way the camera, the director, the, you know, with his camera and then the other people, you know, on staff and stuff. So you get to learn really a learning experience, Jay. This was a learning experience. Well, it was also a technology experience because they, they were put in cameras everywhere, the cameras in the corner of the ceiling, cameras, you know, behind what appeared to be a bookcase, cameras, you know, and every time there was a piece of glass, there was a camera behind it. And the shooting was very good, you know, the quality of production quality was very good. He had no idea. We had no idea how much effort they put into it. And I'd say they spent a lot of money there, a lot of people, a lot of thoughtful, you know, comedy preparation for it. So the question I ask you is, you know, a jury and illegal proceeding, you know, we are so fascinated with that. Look what happens with Trump, for example, you know, everybody's interested in, and the press doesn't give us a break. They're talking about it all day and all night about, you know, the law and the jury and the prosecutor. We're all taking a PhD in the jury process. And maybe that's why, or one of the reasons why it was so funny. But what I'm asking you though is this kind of, you know, secret camera thing. Is it going to happen again? Would it happen in another context? Could somebody make a movie like this with hidden cameras again? I mean, it was always appealing to me as a kid when I saw, you know, there was a show about the hidden camera. And I don't know if you remember Alan Font's candid camera. It was really funny and I've always watched it. I don't want to tell you some of my memories about the funny stories, but it was really interesting to see human nature play out. In fact, I'm going to tell you one story. So it's a mailbox. It's the most famous of all Alan Font's candid camera segments. It's the mailbox on the street corner in a crowded city, maybe New York. And this guy's walking past the mailbox and the mailbox calls out to him. Excuse me, sir. Sir, could you come over? I need to talk to you. And the guy turns around. There's nobody there. It's the mailbox. The mailbox is talking to him. So he goes over. He's curious. The mailbox says, you know, we're having a test here and we just want to see if, you know, people like to have talking mailboxes. What do you think? Do you like this? I said, yeah, this is really interesting. And mailbox. The mailbox says, you see that woman over there, the one in the blue coat? You know, I wonder, could you get her to come over here too? Because I'd like to talk to her and see if she feels the same way you do. So the guy goes, you know, down the other side of the sidewalk and he grabs this woman in the blue coat and he brings the woman over to the mailbox. And he says, the mailbox wants to talk to you. Silence. Rickets. Not a sound. Oh, God. So she thought he was absolutely crazy. So good. I mean, I watched that show all the time when it was on. And I said, kid too. And I love that show. Some of the reality TV that you have now is somewhat similar. You know, they're actually filming real life and it's not acting. Of course, some of it is staged, you know, Kardashian's craziness. But I mean, you know, it's staged. But it's the reality of life of what? Well, it's putting people as the Emile Zola thing. It's putting people in strange and sometimes very stressful situations. And how they react, you know, the nature of the candid nature. I think you like candid camera of human, you know, nature of psychology, you know, and that's what this was about. So I don't really go for anything like the apprentice, you know, or any of that reality TV that Trump made his bones on years ago. I mean, I never watched that because I felt that it was dishonest. He was abusive on that show. I mean, he was really abusive. He was abusive. And there was no fun to watch it. But a thing like this where they were kind to each other, a thing like this where they portrayed diversity of our system and our society, that was worthwhile. So I guess my question is, do you think this could happen in another context? Would it be as funny? Yes, I think so, depending on how they put the whole thing together. Yeah, it could be really funny in many different contexts, you know, other than a jury, you know, there's all kind of options, you know. So yeah, I think you could do that. Yeah, I admired the people also for the acting. I saw them in a kind of, you know, impromptu acting experience and they were all bouncing off each other. And you said, gee, you got to have a lot of talent to be able to do that, to react to, you know, changing circumstances and unpredictable things happening all around them. So it was an interesting view of acting and how people can do well at it. Anyway, I think we got to go. Why don't you give me your rating on this strange and crazy movie? 10. Really? I just loved it. I mean, every episode, including the eighth episode, just slapstick comedy, just super, just super duper duper. So I'll give it a 10, not a 10 plus, but a 10. I would come down a little lower than that only because of the chocolate problem. I really didn't like that. My God, they make me watch this. But, you know, everything else about it was so funny. And it was, slapstick is too heavy a word for it, I think. I thought it was elegant humor and very sophisticated, very well organized and written and played. So I'd give it an almost 10. Well, thank you, George. It's lovely to talk about these movies with you and to find value in them. And we'll be back in a couple of weeks with another one. Thank you so much. Thank you so much for watching Think Tech Hawaii. If you like what we do, please click the like and subscribe button on YouTube. You can also follow us on Facebook, Instagram, and LinkedIn. Check out our website, ThinkTechHawaii.com. Mahalo.