The gap between what is entertainment and what is truth is quite wide.
My experience as a juror (2 cases, 1 civil, 1 criminal) pretty much proved the old saying "truth is stranger than fiction".
In the civil trial, the lawyers were a bunch of clowns brandishing laptops with projectors and unstable, free standing screens, flip charts and "squads" of easels with various pre-printed charts. the judge was constantly rolling his eyes, the bailiff sitting behind the judge's platform (visible to us, but not the lawyers) with her hand clamped over her mouth to muffle her giggles and the court recorder turning red behind the silencing cone around the microphone she was repeating the questions, testimony and comments in to. We, the jury, had to step on our own toes to maintain the serious demeanor expected of us. Fortunately the directive to not discuss the case during breaks didn't apply (the bailiff told us) to (private, in the jury sanctum) comments about the lawyers' antics.
The criminal trial wasn't much better. Mostly, it was very grim, so we didn't have to fight ourselves to stay serious. But the lawyers' (yes, including the prosecutor) antics were just as bad.
My experience made the TV version look orderly and civilized. Granted, just 2 trials (out of many times called for service), so YMMV applies.