Monk quickly figures out that a husband, a long-haired sculptor with a surly attitude, killed his wife, but then must face the accused man's lawyer, played by Jay Mohr. The lawyer and Monk have crossed swords before, and the lawyer soon makes mincemeat of Monk's testimony. The killer walks, but as we have seen before, you don't want to cross Mr. Monk. In a subplot, a young man whom Disher once mentored is accused of killing a store clerk. Disher asks for Monk's help, and pretty soon ... well, see the episode for yourself. Mohr and Shalhoub play off each other very well. And wait until you find out what happened to a missing two-ton piece of quartz, which has to do with the surly artist with the dead wife (again, see the episode).
11 Reviews
He Must Have Been Interrogated Harshly Before
Hitchcoc18 April 2020
When one considers that idiosyncrasies are a daily part of Monk's life, one has to imagine that they have shown up before when he is the most distinctive witness. Here, a fast talking jerk is able to turn him to rubble (like the driveway). He is so quick to quit when things aren't perfect. But on tis show, there is always a second chance.
SNL alumnus Jay Mohr appears
safenoe18 June 2020
Warning: Spoilers
What surprised me was that Jay Mohr didn't get Special Guest Star status for this episode. Jay is an SNL alumnus!! Also, Jerry Maguire star Jonathan Lipnicki should have got a And Re-introducing status in this episode, because he was such a huge star as the cute kid in the Tom Cruise movie. Anyway, despite the negative reviews, I liked this episode, especially knowing that we are coming close to the end of this fine series. Jay Mohr really chewed the screen, and he was very underrated as an SNL performer.
Easily the funniest episode
UniqueParticle5 January 2021
Warning: Spoilers
I absolutely loved this one Monk almost gets defeated because of a top notch lawyer except like most criminals in Monk the killer was sloppy. I laughed very hard at several parts because of the way Adrian was being, I've even seen the series several times before 8 seasons in still very effective!
Not the worst episode
Aroura643 November 2019
Lazy, sloppy, writing with that court scene
takeahike-830901 September 2022
Warning: Spoilers
I really like Monk. It's a bit silly, and the deduction logic is nowhere close to Sherlock Holmes, but Tony Shalhoub makes this a fun show to watch. This episode, though, was wrecked for me, mostly because of the first court scene.
I'm willing to suspend plenty of disbelief on shows like this, because the show is mostly about Monk's peculiar character. But that court case was beyond my ability to suspend my disbelief. Right from the get-go, the prosecutor asks Leland basically one question, about how Monk suspected the defendant because of the perfect weapon he didn't use. That's it - No questioning about any real evidence. And then the defense "super-star" lawyer (played by Jay Mohr) took over and took Leland apart. They mentioned the word "evidence", but never presented anything remotely evidential.
Then Monk took the stand and the story went directly to the defense cross-examination. Monk's *theory* (not *evidence*) was that the defendant, a sculptor, chopped up a marble block with an electric jackhammer and spread the pieces on his driveway. So the defense brings in a wheelbarrow of small marble pieces from the driveway and says if they all came from the same block, he should be able to put them together, like puzzle pieces. Probably hundreds of thousands of pieces, and the lawyer picks up a couple and says, "This doesn't fit. Not this one either". I don't think I need to explain why that's such a ridiculous "argument". The one thing that could have saved this would be if Monk actually was able to put some of the pieces together. That would have been silly, but much more in line with the type of thing that happens on a Monk show.
Oh well, they can't all be gems. Thankfully, they stayed away from courtroom scenes in most (if not all) the other episodes. Not their strongest subject.
I'm willing to suspend plenty of disbelief on shows like this, because the show is mostly about Monk's peculiar character. But that court case was beyond my ability to suspend my disbelief. Right from the get-go, the prosecutor asks Leland basically one question, about how Monk suspected the defendant because of the perfect weapon he didn't use. That's it - No questioning about any real evidence. And then the defense "super-star" lawyer (played by Jay Mohr) took over and took Leland apart. They mentioned the word "evidence", but never presented anything remotely evidential.
Then Monk took the stand and the story went directly to the defense cross-examination. Monk's *theory* (not *evidence*) was that the defendant, a sculptor, chopped up a marble block with an electric jackhammer and spread the pieces on his driveway. So the defense brings in a wheelbarrow of small marble pieces from the driveway and says if they all came from the same block, he should be able to put them together, like puzzle pieces. Probably hundreds of thousands of pieces, and the lawyer picks up a couple and says, "This doesn't fit. Not this one either". I don't think I need to explain why that's such a ridiculous "argument". The one thing that could have saved this would be if Monk actually was able to put some of the pieces together. That would have been silly, but much more in line with the type of thing that happens on a Monk show.
Oh well, they can't all be gems. Thankfully, they stayed away from courtroom scenes in most (if not all) the other episodes. Not their strongest subject.
I just can't
robertdlar16 March 2022
Being a Criminal justice major I have a hard time with many shows about lawyers and specially court room shows, and even though I know they did it for comedy sake, this was HORRIBLE! You want to see a funny comedy about courtrooms watch, "Nightcort", at least they get it (bacially) correct. There was SO Much wrong with this its not even worth my time to mention them all, but lets highlight the worst thing...NO ONE that takes the STAND is allowed to guess or speculate, nor can they testify on 'hunches' 'feeling' or 'beliefs' specially of people other than themselves. No lawyer would allow such questioning without objection and the judge would make sure it was stricken from the record.
Again if other shows had NOT managed to 'set the bar' for courtroom commedy (My Cousin Vinny/Night court) I would let this slide but I just can't.
Again if other shows had NOT managed to 'set the bar' for courtroom commedy (My Cousin Vinny/Night court) I would let this slide but I just can't.
Poorly written plot story.
hartpaul-112 June 2010
Warning: Spoilers
I enjoy Monk because of his eccentricities as well as his deductive logic. But remember all this is a product of the story writers and in this episode they must have taken a day off. With so many other forensic and detective shows around now days (CSI, Castle, Bones, NCIS) the writers have to be on the ball.
In the first trial scene it appeared that the prosecutor was a wimp and not very educated about the case, part of this blame must also lie with the detectives who did not do the required work to make it easy for the prosecutor to refute. The detectives seem to do very little work and leave it up to Monk to deduce the guilt.
1. There should have been two records of the slab of Belgian Grey Marble sold and delivered to that residence, one for the alibi at 5 pm the night of the murder and one at some past date for him to sculpt. 2. Monk suggested that the delivered slab now decorated the driveway. The gravel in the driveway would have clean surfaces, no bio-film (at the first rain microscopic spores would land on rough exposed surfaces and begin to grow with in a week of exposure, even dew would be enough), no weathering thus fresh. Also where was the murderer's receipt for that gravel? Each of these could have been independently verified and not required Monk's testimony, but then if that was used then the story would have ended in half an episode.
In the first trial scene it appeared that the prosecutor was a wimp and not very educated about the case, part of this blame must also lie with the detectives who did not do the required work to make it easy for the prosecutor to refute. The detectives seem to do very little work and leave it up to Monk to deduce the guilt.
1. There should have been two records of the slab of Belgian Grey Marble sold and delivered to that residence, one for the alibi at 5 pm the night of the murder and one at some past date for him to sculpt. 2. Monk suggested that the delivered slab now decorated the driveway. The gravel in the driveway would have clean surfaces, no bio-film (at the first rain microscopic spores would land on rough exposed surfaces and begin to grow with in a week of exposure, even dew would be enough), no weathering thus fresh. Also where was the murderer's receipt for that gravel? Each of these could have been independently verified and not required Monk's testimony, but then if that was used then the story would have ended in half an episode.
Worst. Episode. Ever.
snkdavis11 September 2009
Warning: Spoilers
Big fan of Monk since the beginning. Again. Worst episode ever. Spoiler part: Spent entire episode building for a face off between Monk and the lawyer, then totally skipped it. It was like watching the Natural with no Home Run scene, or Hoosiers showing the team playing up to the championship game, then skipping the game to show them celebrating afterward. Or maybe A Few Good Men without Cruise interrogating Nicholson, just the arrest scene. Like I said. Worst. Episode. Ever. I'll give it a 2 instead of a 1 because they set it up well. (Loved the speech by the therapist about the tell. Been great if that had actually played into the show.) I guess if the show wasn't normally pretty good, it wouldn't have been as big a deal, but come on!
Agree it is worst episode
rdc-424 April 2010
Warning: Spoilers
I am a Monk fan. Although some suspension of belief is required at times, the clues and conclusions generally hang to gather pretty well. In the court room scene in this episode where the lawyer brought in a wheelbarrow of gravel and said Monk had no case because the pieces did not fit together like a jig saw puzzle was not believable. Have the writers ever looked at gravel - it would be virtually impossible to find two pieces off a drive way that were the original joining pieces and therefore be able to fit together like a jig saw. Maybe they were running out of believable ideas in the last season? Anyway, a great last season in spite of this episode.
Overstuffed and under-cooked prosecution
TheLittleSongbird29 September 2017
'Monk' has always been one of my most watched shows when needing comfort, to relax after a hard day, a good laugh or a way to spend a lazy weekend.
Don't agree respectfully that "Mr Monk Takes the Stand" is the worst 'Monk' episode. It's not even the worst of Season 8. A contender for that's "Mr Monk and the UFO", which along with "Mr Monk and the Big Reward" and "Mr Monk Takes a Punch", "Mr Monk and the Rapper" and "Mr Monk and the Really Really Dead Guy" are lesser efforts too, is one of the worst 'Monk' episodes to me. However, it was an episode of great potential that has its moments but comes up short, how it could have easily solved what made the episode lacking was doing more with less material.
There are certainly good things. The courtroom scenes are fun and tense, with a wonderfully arrogant attorney in Harrison Powell that pits off against Monk and his friends in as satisfying a way as the best 'Monk' killers. There are good moments here, such as Monk's poignant feelings in how he was ripped apart on the stand and one of the best supporting character lines in the history of 'Monk' in Powell's reaction to Natalie's "how do you sleep at night?".
One of the best things about 'Monk' has always been the acting of Tony Shalhoub in the title role. It was essential for him to work and be the glue of the show, and Shalhoub not only is that but also at his very best he IS the show. Have always loved the balance of the humour, which is often hilarious, and pathos, which is sincere and touching.
As ever, Traylor Howard, Jason Gray-Stanford and Ted Levine give great support, while Jay Mohr enjoys himself thoroughly as Powell, a different role for him. Former child star Jonathan Lipnicki does fine, and it was refreshing to have a serious Disher subplot that gave the episode heart.
Visually, the episode is slick and stylish as ever. The music is both understated and quirky. While there is a preference for the theme music for Season 1, Randy Newman's "It's a Jungle Out There" has grown on me overtime, found it annoying at first but appreciate its meaning and what it's trying to say much more now.
On the other hand, "Mr Monk Takes the Stand" is primarily let down by that it tries to do too much and doesn't do enough with its content. This is especially true in having not one but two cases, both of which could have been more compelling, one of which has an alibi that is in the top 5 flimsiest alibis on the whole of 'Monk', something that even the less observant of people would notice. Neither case are hard to figure out either (likewise with the killer's identity), the second case is very uninspired.
It disappoints too that the latter parts of the episode don't satisfy very much. The episode was crying out for a face off for Monk to get deserved satisfaction and for Powell given a taste of his own medicine, that it doesn't materialise gives an anti-climactic feel, while the conclusion is one of the show's most tacked on and predictable.
Powell mostly is devious and brilliant on top of his arrogance, but he is not without the odd sloppy moment in the writing. Primarily the thing with the gravel (again another thing that even the less observant would pick up as sloppy), someone as brilliant as he would have the common sense to say the complete opposite of what he actually says. The writing has its moments, but not enough. The humour, pathos and quirks come more in spurts than as a consistent whole.
Overall, watchable but unsatisfying. 5/10 Bethany Cox
Don't agree respectfully that "Mr Monk Takes the Stand" is the worst 'Monk' episode. It's not even the worst of Season 8. A contender for that's "Mr Monk and the UFO", which along with "Mr Monk and the Big Reward" and "Mr Monk Takes a Punch", "Mr Monk and the Rapper" and "Mr Monk and the Really Really Dead Guy" are lesser efforts too, is one of the worst 'Monk' episodes to me. However, it was an episode of great potential that has its moments but comes up short, how it could have easily solved what made the episode lacking was doing more with less material.
There are certainly good things. The courtroom scenes are fun and tense, with a wonderfully arrogant attorney in Harrison Powell that pits off against Monk and his friends in as satisfying a way as the best 'Monk' killers. There are good moments here, such as Monk's poignant feelings in how he was ripped apart on the stand and one of the best supporting character lines in the history of 'Monk' in Powell's reaction to Natalie's "how do you sleep at night?".
One of the best things about 'Monk' has always been the acting of Tony Shalhoub in the title role. It was essential for him to work and be the glue of the show, and Shalhoub not only is that but also at his very best he IS the show. Have always loved the balance of the humour, which is often hilarious, and pathos, which is sincere and touching.
As ever, Traylor Howard, Jason Gray-Stanford and Ted Levine give great support, while Jay Mohr enjoys himself thoroughly as Powell, a different role for him. Former child star Jonathan Lipnicki does fine, and it was refreshing to have a serious Disher subplot that gave the episode heart.
Visually, the episode is slick and stylish as ever. The music is both understated and quirky. While there is a preference for the theme music for Season 1, Randy Newman's "It's a Jungle Out There" has grown on me overtime, found it annoying at first but appreciate its meaning and what it's trying to say much more now.
On the other hand, "Mr Monk Takes the Stand" is primarily let down by that it tries to do too much and doesn't do enough with its content. This is especially true in having not one but two cases, both of which could have been more compelling, one of which has an alibi that is in the top 5 flimsiest alibis on the whole of 'Monk', something that even the less observant of people would notice. Neither case are hard to figure out either (likewise with the killer's identity), the second case is very uninspired.
It disappoints too that the latter parts of the episode don't satisfy very much. The episode was crying out for a face off for Monk to get deserved satisfaction and for Powell given a taste of his own medicine, that it doesn't materialise gives an anti-climactic feel, while the conclusion is one of the show's most tacked on and predictable.
Powell mostly is devious and brilliant on top of his arrogance, but he is not without the odd sloppy moment in the writing. Primarily the thing with the gravel (again another thing that even the less observant would pick up as sloppy), someone as brilliant as he would have the common sense to say the complete opposite of what he actually says. The writing has its moments, but not enough. The humour, pathos and quirks come more in spurts than as a consistent whole.
Overall, watchable but unsatisfying. 5/10 Bethany Cox
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
