Law School Discussion

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - kermit

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5
Black Law Students / Re: Hustle & Flow (the movie)
« on: July 29, 2005, 07:31:25 AM »
Sorry to hijack this thread and start talking about crash. 
On the subject of Hustle & Flow, have not seen it but want to.  I liked Terrence Howard in Crash and the preview looks great.

Don't waste your money. A very pathetic attempt to be a meaningful movie.

I completely agree with you.  I do think people should go see it, but I think far too many people were uncritical of the movie because it was one of the few movies coming out of hollywood that deals with race and racism directly.  It was almost as if it was taboo to think ill of it.  I thought it was way too melodramatic (with too much use of violins and other cues telling me when to cry or gasp).  I also had a very difficult time caring what happened to any of the characters because they were all so one-dimensional.  Characters were basically stereotypes of themselves.  I love A.O. Scott's (NY Times) review.  He says something like, "Every character in this movie is multidimensional: they each have exactly two sides."  And the dialogue was soooo preachy.  The characters seemed less like human beings and more like characters in an allegory; rather than having their own, authentic voices, they are mouthpieces for the writer's views and opinions.  All in all, there were some really great performances, and I think the intent of the movie was good, but the method was somewhat clunky and I am still unsure what the message was (unless the goal of the movie was solely exposition).  Most importantly, I do not want people, and particularly white people, seeing this movie and thinking they "get" race in America.  If you like morality tales where characters serve a function and communicate a message, then you'll probably enjoy this movie.  But if you like realism (which I think people without prior consciousness of race issues might mistake this moving for having), then this is not the movie for you.  But I still think it's worth the ticket!

Read the A.O. Scott review.  I think it's brilliant:
full review:

Law School Admissions / Re: "trends" in GPA (and my app in general)
« on: June 14, 2005, 08:28:05 PM »
do you mind me asking where you were accepted?

I second the above two posts.  Go to a school which will either give you a lot of money so that you can actually afford to do public interest law or to a school with a good loan repayment program for those who pursue public interest careers (and generally speaking, the more elite schools have better loan repayment programs).  If you look at the people working for the organizations the OP mentioned, I would wager the majority of them went to a T14 school.  I think if you are choosing between comparably ranked schools, it might make sense to choose the one with the greater public interest focus, but if you are talking about schools that have a large ranking difference, it makes more sense to go to the more highly ranked school (if you can see yourself there) because your chances for getting hired by certain organizations (where tons of people want to work) are higher as are the chances that there are already alumni from your school working at them.  I think that these days, most of the better schools all have pretty good clinical legal education programs, public interest curricula, student journals and student organizations, and funding for non-paying or low-paying summer job opportunities.


The LSAT isn't trying to figure out your natural intelligence, it's trying to figure out how well you deal with logic (mostly), and like any riddle, there are solutions to the problems posed that anyone can work out once you learn the rules.  It is not a general knoweldge or IQ test that depends (in a significant way) on either your natural ability or your ability to have mastered a variety of academic subjects over the course of your previous educational endeavors and experiences.   


I highly doubt that.  Yes, a VERY significant percentage of your score reflects your preparation, but most people hit a ceiling at some point, and I think that ceiling represents the limits of some kind of natural ability.  Whether that ability is "intelligence" or something else is up for debate.  Furthermore, the ability to understand rules and how they interact with he each other and the ability to engage in deductive/inductive reasoning are not purely learned skills.  They rely heavily on some underlying mental ability.

what do you think would happen if schools with already stellar/impeccable reptuations - and i am speaking now strictly of yale/harvard/stanford - colluded to not release their gpa/lsat information for a period of 3-5 years.  The usnews could not use them in their ranking since they would be missing information crucial to their methodology and without their top three scoreres, the entire ranking system would crumble.  (right?)  i mean, and who really needs a list to tell anyone that harvard, stanford, and yale have extraordinary law schools?

i just think someone needs to break this cycle. . .it's all about raping us for $$$.  the only thing i don't understand is what benefit law schools with longstanding (i.e., pre-usnews) reputations for quality and competitiveness gain out of being a part of these rankings.


I agree it would be difficult for Princeton to increase their actual prestige, which is already top-notch. 

And, as noted, it appears they have made a conscious choice not to develop professional programs, for various reasons. 

However, just to play devils advocate, there would be certain advanages to creating a law school, besides the potential financial benefits (which could be considerable).  Namely, creating a law school would potentially place many more Princeton grads in positions of power and influence, both within the legal profession and within government.  This could be considered a valuable asset for any university.  (Not that there aren't already influential Princeton grads in business, academia, and government, but this would certainly enhance that.)

That's true, but trust me, the alumni network at Princeton is already probably the strongest (in terms of alumni giving and crazy, cult-like devotion) and one of the most well-placed in the country.  Plenty of Princeton grads hold influential positions in the legal community.  They just went elsewhere for law school!  Personally, I think Princeton is wise to use its endowment to develop competitiveness in a particular niche (undergraduate education with the best financial aid in the country and academic graduate education with the best fellowship support in the country).  Princeton is in a position where undergraduate and graduate applicants sometimes turn down Harvard or Yale not because of some specific personal reason (e.g., location or relative strength of a certain department), but because of the financial incentives.  I don't think it could do that anymore if at this phase of its development it incurred huge start-up costs trying to develop a law or a business school.  I think the benefit to Princeton would not necessarily be in having more highly placed alumni (Princeton already does pretty well in that respect), but in having a more recognizable brand like Harvard and Yale do.  But who knows?  If Princeton one day gets another Robertson-like endowment (the financial foundation of the Woodrow Wilson School), they may decide expanding their programs make sense.  Ultimately, I chose to pursue my undergraduate education at Princeton precisely because it is smaller and for those four years, you really feel like all the money, attention, and care are lavished on you, that because you are an undergrad, you are special.  (The grad students, incidentally, get shafted in many ways by the system.)

i agree

hahaha!  Sorry!  I think i must have been confusing it with some other large donation that happened while i was there. . .

Dean Julie,

What is the university's policy on lateness and absence from class?  Also, how does one get on law review?



Law School Admissions / Re: Why do you want to go to law school?
« on: June 09, 2005, 05:01:08 PM »
um. . .sweatshop labor is not a product of socialist/communist systems.  it's a product of national poverty and weak legal protections for labor.

i don't know what to say about this whole conversation other than that i really just don't see how someone could want to be a lawyer and then believe that rights are protected by the marketplace and not by the constitution. 

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5