Doubt

Doubt isn't art, but it's a well-done piece of popular entertainment that, for Heigl, represents a welcome return to form.

Think of this as “Grey’s” in a courtroom, with a good New York cast, two legends (Gould and Bill Irwin, who plays a judge), a TV star and a TV pioneer.

The cases are what propel the drama, but it's the high-profile cast that will keep viewers coming back.

The show is competent for what it is. (Phelan and Rater know the territory.) And the series manages to address some real issues in evenhanded ways. So while it’s not my cup of tea, I wouldn’t write Doubt off.

It is a worthy, highly watchable effort. While a bit tonally uneven in early episodes and not especially groundbreaking--it is, at its core, yet another legal procedural--Doubt is elevated by witty banter and a stellar supporting cast.

At first glance, it seems like just another glossy, TV exploration of law and order, with Heigl in the role of fireball attorney crusading for justice while click-clacking through courtrooms in high heels. In a lot of ways, that’s exactly what Doubt is. But it also happens to be a solid showcase for Heigl and her fellow actors, including Laverne Cox.

There’s a brazen quality to Doubt that is frothy enough to be silly but grounded enough to take on topical, controversial subjects. It doesn’t require too much effort to let unfold, and with such a talented, deep bench of actors, it’s usually enough to watch them bounce off of each other while flaunting their impossibly stylish accessories.

As a soap opera, Doubt is pretty good. It's filled with likable characters played by a nice cast and features relatively interesting cases handled by a boutique New York law firm.

The conflict between idealism and reality runs through Doubt like a bright thread, sometimes restated in explicitly political terms. Sometimes the firm's lawyers seem to be giving their clients short shrift in deference to dubious leftist shibboleths about community. Is "snitching" really the word for testifying against a gang-banger murderer? That piquant political dilemma, coupled with the increasingly jagged story line of Sadie's dubious romance, keep Doubt more watchable than it probably has a right to be.

There’s nothing yet extraordinary--save for a casting choice--about the series. But it has enough compelling material that it can’t be written off completely.

While the cast is competent, Cox seems to have difficulty with her lines in some scenes. With time, she may relax into her role, but I have misgivings Doubt will be around long enough for anyone to get comfortable. Imitation Shonda Rhimes just isn’t as good as the real thing.

So far it’s strictly so-so on the storytelling front, but with some scenes that raise the bar beyond that. Those mostly involve Light, though. And she’s not the one who’s supposed to carry the load.

You don’t buy her boundary-crossing romance with Billy, because Heigl and the writing can’t you make you believe she’d ever be flawed enough to do that. You simply don’t doubt her enough for Doubt to work as well as it should.

After its overwrought pilot, Doubt could settle into being a perfectly watchable show for fans of the genre. The jury, however, remains out.

Sadie and Billy predictably debrief each other, supposedly complicating the ongoing case, but we’re more caught up in the weekly cases, especially when Cam Wirth is handling them. Cox sashays away with the show, which ends up being a feeble and not especially imaginative “The Good Wife” wannabe.

Doubt assembles such an impressive cast it's easy to wish they had more ambitious material with which to play. As is, this CBS legal drama delivers a steady dose of "The Good Wife"-lite-type banter, without presenting much of an argument to keep watching.

The pilot feels more focused on introducing names and faces than actual characters worthy of our investment. The cases feel like standard “Law & Order” fare, which is fine on “Law & Order” but less compelling here. There is promise in the ensemble cast.

Comfort food appeal to some viewers who could certainly do worse than this series that tends to be more lighthearted (listen for the bouncy music soundtrack), with enjoyably quirky supporting characters. It’s just unfortunate the show’s primary story is often overwrought and obvious.

It’s a courtroom drama that happens to be fine enough for viewers willing to follow the twists and turns of legal jargon that is remarked upon and divined by the writers, rather than delivered through investigative drama.

It’s very clear from the dialogue, pacing, and tone that Doubt would really like to remind you of still another CBS show--The Good Wife--but, sorry, it’s nowhere in the same league.

Doubt does win some points back for stacking its talent roster so deep that it can afford to keep people like Judith Light and Becky Ann Baker around just for minor roles. But even given the talent of the cast and what seems like a surprisingly strong push for diversity, even for Heigl fans there’s nothing about Doubt that makes it close to appointment television.

The producers surround [Katherine Heigl] with a strong supporting cast as her fellow lawyers, including Elliott Gould, Psych’s Dulé Hill and Orange Is the New Black’s Laverne Cox. But the cases are dull and formulaic, watering down hot-button issues to fit in the show’s neat, simplistic framework.

A soapy legal procedural that feels like a subpar version of The Good Wife by way of a subpar version of a Shonda Rhimes-free ABC Shonda Rhimes show (though still not quite as subpar as Conviction and Notorious, ABC's own confused efforts to do Shonda without Shonda).