Roman J. Israel, Esq

There is a certain type of contemporary Hollywood movie that, formally at least, is reminiscent of classic 1940s studio-era outings. A couple of examples at random would be The Judge (2014) and Flight (2012) – comprehensively well-crafted films, with morally-focussed plots and bankable stars (Denzel Washington provided the illumination in the latter. Robert Downey Jr in the former). Most are not great films but they are solidly entertaining ones. Roman J. Israel, Esq. is a case in point.

Washington plays the title character, a solicitor in a two-man practice who finds himself high-and-dry when his partner suddenly dies and his family calls in a hot-shot lawyer, George Pierce (Colin Farrell), to close the practice. Roman, a prickly character stuck in his salad days during the civil rights struggles of the 1960s and ‘70s has been kept in the background because of his near-autistic behaviour but George recognizes that he is also a brilliant legal researcher and invites him to join his firm. But can George keep control of this loose cannon?

Fans of Washington will want to catch his against-type performance here as he adopts a flat-footed, slouching gait (one thinks of Forest Whitaker in the role), ill-fitting, worn out suits, topped by big glasses, an Afro 'do and headphones hooked up to a Walkman which is Roman’s constant companion as he ambles from one faux pas to another. Told entirely told in flashback, the film opens with an enigmatic scene in which Roman casts himself as prosecutor and defendant in a case of undisclosed moral turpitude before sending us three weeks back in time for an explanation.

One of the drawbacks (and pleasures) with watching those 1940s films is that they are so obviously studio bound, not just in settings, but plot and characters. These days the default bar of realism is set much higher. This is where Gilroy’s film falls down. It’s too contrived to convince.

Thus the ineluctably gauche Roman is provided with a distractingly gorgeous romantic interest (Carmen Ejogo) who idolizes, if not him, then his moral rectitude. Then at the other end of the spectrum it is hard to know what to make of Farrell’s super-smooth operator, why he would have had any common ground with Roman’s deceased partner (an explanation is given but it’s not very convincing), why so many of his clients are ordinary Joes and Janes yet can afford his up-scale fees, or why he is so charmed by Roman as to start doing pro bono work. And if this is not enough, Roman stumbles in the last lap, betrays his own principles and gets involved with some very bad people bringing the story to an efficacious but overly-tidy and improbably optimistic end.

You’re not going to swallow it but it is fun and Washington, as is so often the case, makes it all worthwhile.

 

Want something different?