Showing posts with label courtroom drama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label courtroom drama. Show all posts

Obsessed (2002) Review

Obsessed (2002)
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
I JUST WATCHED THIS MOVIE ON LIFETIME LAST NIGHT HAVING NO DOUBTS IT WOULD BE GOOD. I WAS RIGHT, THIS WAS A REALLY INTERESTING MOVIE THAT REALLY KEAPT YOU HOOKED THROUGHOUT THE FILM. THEN I FOUND OUT IT'S COMING OUT ON DVD! I CAN'T WAIT TO BUY IT. IT'S TOO BAD THAT OTHER LIFETIME MOVIE AREN'T COMING OUT ON DVD BECAUSE THERE ARE ALOT OF REALLY GOOD ONES OUT THERE THAT YOU CAN ONLY SEE ON T.V. BUY THIS MOVIE, YOU WON'T REGRET IT.

Click Here to see more reviews about: Obsessed (2002)

In a Chicago jail cell, clever and charming Ellena Roberts recounts for attorney Sara Miller the details of a one-night stand that led to a heated love affair with prominent surgeon David Stillman. David's version of the facts differs entirely and he insists that he never slept with Ellena. Sure that the doctor is the one who's lying, Sara is preparing to defend her client in court when some disturbing facts emerge.

Buy Now

Click here for more information about Obsessed (2002)

Read More...

A Civil Action (1999) Review

A Civil Action (1999)
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
Sometime in the late 1960's, a hideous act of pollution took place in Woburn, Massachusetts, a small town north of Boston. Over the next fifteen years, twelve people died of leukemia. Eight of those were children. The firm of Jan Schlichtmann, Kevin Conway, James Gordon, and Bill Crowley take on the case on behalf of Anne Anderson, a woman who lost her child to cancer. For her, money isn't the point. All she wants to know is what happened, and for the responsible parties to come over and apologize to her and the other families. Thing is, corporations apologize with money, and if the corporations have deep pockets, it's a case worth taking, so money does indeed become the point in A Civil Action.
Schlichtmann uncovers the culprits, a chemical company, WR Grace and Beatrice Foods, who provide services for a tanning company owned by Riley. With that, he files a lawsuit, the legal equivalent to a declaration of war, and hires a geological team to provide scientific evidence should it come to trial.
Jan then does a couple things that leads to his downfall. One, he gets personally involved. In a news broadcast, he holds up snaps of the Woburn kids who have died. He shows empathy, which is a grave disservice to the legal profession because it clouds his judgment. He says it's like a doctor recoiling at the sight of blood. That leads to his demanding of WR Grace and Beatrice Foods a multi-million dollar settlement, including money for a research foundation, to cover expenses, and to provide for the families for thirty years, which the corporations refuse, which in turn takes the case to trial. He does this without consulting his partners, which doesn't bode well. James Gordon, the accountant, points out that they need to work on other cases to provide a cash flow. Schlichtmann has sunken a million into the Woburn case, and pretty soon, they teeter on the waterfalls of insolvency to the point of mortaging their homes. It's become a source of pride, which has undone many an attorney as opposed to idiot witnesses, lousy evidence, and the hanging judge put together, as Jerome Fasher tells his law class.
Fasher, the attorney for Beatrice, is a statesman-like man of experience, but has a detached air coupled with some eccentricities. Yet he is a clever man, and his observation on the justice system is true, at times sickening. When Schlichtmann tells him he's searching for the truth, he tells him, "You've been around long enough to know that a courtroom's not the place to look for the truth." And he accurately says that the case stopped being about children the moment Schlichtmann filed for action.
The movie is sprinkled with legal commentary from Schlichtmann, which lays out how callous, ugly, and illogical the justice system is. He begins by talking about which types of clients are worth more, i.e. are winning cases. Whites are worth more than blacks, men more than women, a long agonizing death over a quick one. A white male professional in his 40's, in his prime, is worth the most. A dead child is worth least of all. Well, Schlichtmann finds out that children are worth something after all, especially when he imagines an agonizing scene where the LaFierros were taking their son to the hospital and died en route.
While John Travolta's best known for Grease and Saturday Night Fever, A Civil Action proves he can handle serious drama and he turns in one of his best ever performances. However, the real Jan Schlichtmann came to Farmington. He's close to seven feet tall, and in terms of resemblance, could've been played by Richard Gere. As Anne Anderson, Kathleen Quinlan is the other great performer, playing a woman changed through her ordeal into someone who has a tired and sad visage. The scene where Al Love (James Gandolfini), a conscience-stricken tannery employer personally apologizes to her shows that maybe the only real meaningful apologies come from humans, not corporations.
Trials and lawsuits are examples of how corrupt and rotten the legal system and some lawyers are. Is it worth having a system where the first party to come to their senses (i.e. to cut their losses and call for a settlement) is the loser? A Civil Action also shows that despite the need for compassion, it's better to have a lawyer who thinks more with the head than the heart.

Click Here to see more reviews about: A Civil Action (1999)

Jan Schlichtmann is a cynical, high-priced personal injury attorney who only takes big-money cases he can safely settle out of court. Though his latest case at first appears straightforward, Schlichtmann soon becomes entangled in an epic legal battle ... one where he's willing to put his career, reputation, and all that he owns on the line for the rights of his clients! Also featuring Robert Duvall, William H. Macy, and John Lithgow -- this gripping, widely acclaimed hit delivers edge-of-your-seat entertainment!

Buy NowGet 20% OFF

Click here for more information about A Civil Action (1999)

Read More...

Rules of Engagement (2000) Review

Rules of Engagement (2000)
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
Tommy Lee Jones and Samuel L. Jackson are excellent as usual in their roles: two old friends from Vietnam whose careers took different courses after a firefight that badly injured Jones. Jackson's Marines rescue a cowardly ambassador and his family from an embassy pelted with rocks, insults and the occasional sniper's bullet. In return for this service, the ambassador will testify that Jackson lost control and opened fire on a crowd full of unarmed civilians, because his superior at the Department of State thinks he should to save the American reputation in the Middle East.
The basic story is good and the actors have amazing presence, but there are a number of amusing inconsistencies in the script, like:
1) Dale Dye, as Samuel L. Jackson's commanding officer, asks him whether he wants private counsel or the base legal office to represent him (if you watch this in a theater full of military personnel, expect this line to be among the funniest in the film). This occurs right in the middle of him briefing the man whose court-martial he will convene, which happens absolutely never.
2) Why didn't anyone analyze the bullet holes in the embassy wall to establish trajectory?
3) How the hell do you find a Vietnamese company captain from an action that occurred thirty years ago with no sort of attention at any previous time? (This probably makes no sense to you if you haven't seen it, and it really won't in the film, except to make the point that even officers on opposing sides have the common trait of valuing their troops' lives more than anything else on the field of battle.)
The conflict between functions of state and defense isn't as implausible as the reviewers appear to think, particularly in a time when we deploy our soldiers and Marines to the world's least desirable corners as beat cops. Whether you set this story in Yemen or Kosovo or somewhere else, it can happen, it has happened and will probably continue to happen. State wants its wars to resolve neatly into ends comfortably discussed in meetings over tea, and gets annoyed when Defense reminds them that rules of engagement always make room for an exception necessary for saving lives.
Rent it before you buy it.

Click Here to see more reviews about: Rules of Engagement (2000)

Facing a court martial after the peacekeeping mission he led in Yemen ends in disaster, Col. Terry Childers turns to Hays Hodges, a lawyer whose life he saved in Vietnam.Genre: Feature Film-Action/AdventureRating: RRelease Date: 28-MAR-2006Media Type: DVD

Buy NowGet 10% OFF

Click here for more information about Rules of Engagement (2000)

Read More...

Judgment at Nuremberg (1961) Review

Judgment at Nuremberg (1961)
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
This is truly an astonishing movie. After seeing it one wonders that Spencer Tracy did not win the Academy Award for his performance here. Of course, another actor in the cast, Maxmillian Schell, playing the German defense attorney, did! In many ways the movie is the senior brother to "Schindler's List", acting to probe thoughtfully through the mist of euphemisms, excuses and exaggerations of the era. And sifting out some remarkable, memorable, and noble notions about what human beings should be held responsible for in terms of their social attitudes, civic behavior and public actions.
Ostensibly, the action takes place after the more sensational trials of the Nazi hierarchy, when the public appetite for blood, revenge, and harsh justice had been somewhat abated. Tracy plays a relatively obscure retired rural American judge called upon to act as one of the three presiding judges in overseeing the trials of prominent German jurists who had co-operated, collaborated, and then presided over the gradual civil drift from a nation whose conduct and laws were based on a corpus of jurisprudence to one characterized by crackpot eugenic policies, blatant racism, & officially-sanctioned violence and mayhem.
Burt Lancaster plays a pre-eminent German judge, one famed for his legal treatises and international reputation as a jurist. Through the prism of the testimony of both the judges on trial and their cross examination by a zealous American military prosecutor played masterfully by a young Richard Widmark, the viewer begins to understand much more about the slippery slope most of the jurists had unwittingly embarked upon. Add into this equation the introduction of a sensational set of key witnesses played by Judy Garland and Montgomery Clift, and the full emotional impact and profound significance of what these judges had allowed to happen truly gels.
This is an unforgettable and remarkably unique movie, truly a classic and cautionary tale based on the historical record of what the Germans did to each other, based on fact. And by the way, be sure to listen carefully to the final several scenes in which Tracy takes full advantage of several opportunities to cut through all the equivocations, half-truths, and "honest mistake" nonsense, literally electrifying the screen with the power of his monologue and his superb acting. He was truly one of a kind, too. Wow! Don't miss this

Click Here to see more reviews about: Judgment at Nuremberg (1961)

Nominated* for eleven Academy AwardsÂ(r), including Best Picture, Judgment at Nuremberg is "magnificent" (Los Angeles Times), "continuously exciting" (The New Yorker) andboasts brilliant performances by an all-star cast. American judge Dan Haywood (Spencer Tracy) presides over the trial of four German jurists accused of "legalizing" Nazi atrocities. But as graphic accounts of sterilization and murder unfold in the courtroom, mounting political pressure for leniency forces Haywood to make the most harrowing and difficult decision of his career.*1961: Actor (Maximilian Schell, won); Actor (Spencer Tracy); Supporting Actor (Montgomery Clift); Supporting Actress (Judy Garland); Director; Adapted Screenplay (won); Cinematography (B&W); Art Direction (B&W); Film Editing; Costume Design (B&W).

Buy NowGet 30% OFF

Click here for more information about Judgment at Nuremberg (1961)

Read More...

Hart's War (2002) Review

Hart's War (2002)
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
First of all let's get one thing straight, although the setting of Hart's War is during World War II, this is not an action movie along the lines of Black Hawk Down or Saving Private Ryan, instead, it is more of a who-done-it type of drama film. With that out of the way, Hart's War is about the experiences of Lt. Thomas Hart during his stay at a German POW camp (the Stalag 6A) in 1944, nearing the end of the war. Inside the compound he meets Col. William McNamara, the highest ranking officer in the place, even in prison, all US soldiers and officers still answer to McNamara, and the chain of command is expected to be followed. Things start to get out of hand after two black fighter pilots enter the camp, and when one of them is accused of murder, Hart is assigned to defend him in the court martial, if he fails, the man will face the firing squad.
The strongest part of Hart's War is the performances, not just by the leads but also the supporting cast. Bruce Willis proves once again that he is a talented actor, not just another action star. His portrayal of McNamara was right on, it's as if the role was tailored specifically for him, and in every scene he held a commanding presence. Colin Farrell also did a good job as Hart, compelling and measured, I really like how his character struggled between his allegiance as an officer and his duty to his client. Fairly new to Hollywood, he's definitely someone to keep an eye out for in the future.
The script is another big plus for the movie, I found it ironic that these soldiers were sent to Europe to fight a war against the Nazi and the their so called ethnic cleansing, but instead, they are fighting their own racial prejudices in the POW camp. The hatred some of these enlisted men have for their fellow African American comrades was sometimes even more intense and pronounced than what they shown towards the enemies, Hart's War was able to accurately illustrate the hardships blacks have to face in the war even among allies. Top it off with excellent dialogues, Hart's War is one solid drama.
The only problem I had with the movie was the ending, it's not bad, just a little unexpected, but not enough to ruin the whole experience for me. I strongly recommend Hart's War to anyone who wants a little change of pace from all the big action war films we've had (and are going to have in the upcoming months,) I sure wasn't disappointed.

Click Here to see more reviews about: Hart's War (2002)

Bruce Willis stars as an imprisoned officer who refuses to give up his fight to defeat the Nazis inthis "absorbing" (Roger Ebert) WWII adventure. Co-starring Colin Farrell (Minority Report) and packed with "crisp action sequences" (Los Angeles Times), Hart's War is a powerful and "stirring tribute to soldierly courage and honor" (L.A. Daily News).When Col. William McNamara (Willis) is stripped of his freedom in a German POW camp, he's determined to keep onfightingeven from behind enemy lines. Enlisting the help of a young lieutenant (Farrell) in a brilliant plot against his captors, McNamara risks everything on a mission to free his men and change the outcome of the war.

Buy NowGet 40% OFF

Click here for more information about Hart's War (2002)

Read More...