Runaway Jury Review
by Karina Montgomery (karina AT cinerina DOT com)October 20th, 2003
Runaway Jury
Matinee with Snacks
Honestly, I doubted I would ever like a John Grisham film adapation. Even the best of the batch was only pretty good (I am not detracting from his writing, but the adaptation process). Sophomore screenwriter Brian Koppelman managed to take a pretty convoluted set of circumstances, motivators, a room full of jurors, and a whole mess of intrigue and mystery, and spin it into what has to legitimately be described as a taut thriller. "Taut?" you might be saying, "That sounds like one of those blurbs for sale they stick on the poster." Yeah, but I am telling you, it actually applies here. The pacing is excellent, and the dialogue and editing is snappy and exciting. While the opening scene in Dylan McDermott's office is so incredibly ponderous and tense with it's "something bad is going to happen any second" music, the rest of the movie does not telegraph nearly so much. Promise.
Longtime friends and first time costars Dustin Hoffman and Gene Hackman delve into their career-long personae to create fascinating opponents in this game of buying a jury's verdict in the now-universal themes of moral responsibility versus col hearted profit. Contrary to the impression the preview gives, Hackman is not a lawyer, but rather a professional juror wrangler, of sorts. Amusingly, midway through the movie, I turned to my companion and said, "Hey, Hackman and Hoffman aren't even going to be able to have a scene together!" Apparently Koppelman also realized the lost potential there and wrote them one, so never fear, Acting Fans. You'll get your jollies there.
Hackman is a perfect actor for a role like this. As a man, he can radiate cuddly trustworthiness and vulnerability (Royal Tenenbaums) or over the top, ice cold villainy (Extreme Measures) and he uses these dual qualities to good measure here. Hoffman is best when he appears to be out of his depth - he doesn't do that cocky confidence man thing so well as he does homey and truthful. Together they do indeed rock the house. The jury is populated by more than a few familiar faces as well, which helps when they as characters by necessity have very little to work with. It surely made me want to read the book.
But wait! We are forgetting the key point in the triangle that arises in the courtroom of this controversial gun-rights precedent setting trial. John Cusack. We don't know Cusack's motivation, his agenda, or his feelings. He keeps everything very close to the chest, and yet it is a delight to watch him play everyone in the room with a subtle grace that you can't help but wish you could manage at key moments. Hoffman and Hackman notice too - and the dance begins. Meanwhile Rachel Weisz also is dancing, outside the courtroom and on the streets of New Orleans. Her character recalled for me her performance in The Shape of Things, in her inscrutability.
It's a unique and interesting (and paranoia-inducing) fable of greed and morality but also determination and focus and planning. I don't want to give anything away, of course, but boy is it satisfying. I actually had expected some scene chewing on the part of our elder statesmen, and then Cusack doing that earnest, investigational thing he did so well in Identity. Instead, I was treated to a dark view of three mens' underbellies and it was really a great ride.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
These reviews (c) 2003 Karina Montgomery. Please feel free to forward but credit the reviewer in the text. Thanks. You can check out previous reviews at:
http://www.cinerina.com and http://ofcs.rottentomatoes.com - the Online Film Critics Society http://www.hsbr.net/reviews/karina/listing.hsbr - Hollywood Stock Exchange Brokerage Resource
Originally posted in the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup. Copyright belongs to original author unless otherwise stated. We take no responsibilities nor do we endorse the contents of this review.
