This chapter explores, as its central theme, the relationship between popular culture and jurisprudence. Simply put, this chapter asks as follows: what is to be gained from studying popular culture’s aesthetic representations of jurisprudence? In answer to this question, the gain is, in a word, considerable, as popular culture provides a rich storehouse of signs, symbols and stories that not only render, but reimagine jurisprudence through critique. So here the limitations of Law and Economics’ notion of ‘efficiency’ are unpacked as a kind of Minority Report ‘precrime’; Kelsenian legal science is exposed as revolving around an ‘obscure object of desire’—the grundnorm or ‘Basic Norm’—as fantasmatic as the ‘One Ring’ of Tolkien’s (and Jackson’s) Lord of the Rings; rights’ playing field is ‘outed’ as anything but level in the ever-shifting rule system of The Hunger Games’ fierce, do-or-die struggle—a depiction that owes as much to Karl Marx’s vision of the law, as it does to Collins’s other, more explicit sources (the Minotaur legend, Battle Royale, Rome’s panem et circenses). In so combusting jurisprudence, popular culture invites its audience to construct juridical alternatives, envisioning a justice beyond efficiency, a normativity of substance rather than form, a rights discourse of connection as much as autonomy. All of which suggests that this supposedly ‘light’ form of entertainment—popular culture’s films, TV programmes, video games, music and pulp fictions—is anything but escapist; for, when ‘read jurisprudentially’, it sheds a penetrating and searching probe light upon some of the most persistent and abiding questions of jurisprudence—and through those, of law itself.