You miss my point- the linear method is boring. Think about the great comedians- what made them great? They had a certain schtick, an angle, something about them that people remembered.
Your essay should be no different.
I remember the science fairs I went to as a kid. Everyone made volcanoes. Some sucked and some were cool, with puffs of smoke and little rivlets of red paint (a la the Brady Bunch). But they were all volcanoes. After a while, the judges qrew so sick of them that volcanoes weren't allowed in competition.
Personally, I think that adcomms are looking for the unorthodox essay, because in law school it is the student who can think "outside the box" that eventually becomes the best lawyer. Being an attorney involves challenging and debating the law, not figuring out the most straightforward way to reword it. In that sense, an essay that defies the norm would speak to your abilities better than a generic formulaic one- which by the way, they might suspect could have been written by anyone.
And it's not creative to show underlying skills that would help you in law school. That's commonsense.