we revisit the movie Goodfellas, as well as a number of other movies that use narration or a voice over. Using the two-part strict scrutiny test from constitutional law, we ask (1) was there a compelling interest  to use narration in the movie? and (2) if so, was it narrowly tailored to serve that interest? In other words: Was there a really good reason to use narration? Was it only used when necessary? 

We take a look at all the compelling interests you would have for using narration and look at some examples from movies that have done so, including Fight Club, The Lobster, and The Shawshank Redemption. And we talk about how best to narrowly tailor those interests in the movie. 

Next, we define narration and voice over to determine when we should apply the strict scrutiny test. We also look at what the remedy is when a movie fails the test. Plus, we talk about how different Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court might find ways to make a movie pass muster.

And, finally, we do a lightning round and apply the test to our list of movies. Then we end Season 1 with a quick look at a few of our favorite episodes.

Follow us on Twitter @theICRpodcast

Email us at [email protected]