Browse all reviews by letter     A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z 0 - 9

USA 2003
Directed by
Gary Fleder
127 minutes
Rated M

Reviewed by
Cynthia Karena
2.5 stars

Runaway Jury

Synopsis: A former disgruntled employee comes back to work with a gun and shoots down former workmates. One widow decides to sue the gun manufacturer for damages as their product, an easily available assault weapon, killed her husband. It’s a multi-million dollar case and a lot is at stake. The gun manufacturer hires expensive, ruthless and successful Jury Consultant Rankin Fitch (Gene Hackman) to select and manipulate a sympathetic jury, and intimidate if required, to manage a favorable verdict. He has a whole room full of computers, technicians, investigators, thugs and psychologists. The widow’s lawyer, Wendell Rohr (Dustin Hoffman), is an old-fashioned lawyer with no high-tech gadgets and a belief in the legal system. There is also juror Nick Easter (John Cusack) who has his own agenda and his own reasons for winning the jury over and manipulating them from the inside. This precipitates a cat-and-mouse game between Fitch, Rohr and Easter.

Along with other John Grisham books turned into films, Runaway Jury makes an enjoyable Sunday Night Movie. There are good guys, bad guys and twists and turns that are fun to watch in your jim-jams eating pizza in front of the telly.

Gene Hackman is fantastic as the cool, calculating and arrogant Fitch, and Dustin Hoffman does what he can with the stereotyped Pollyanna lawyer who believes in the integrity of the system. A totally unbelievable character. Surely being in the legal system for any length of time would open people’s eyes to the inequity and injustice of the so-called justice system. John Cusack is perfectly cast as Nick Easter, doing his normal thing of being the likeable lad. Rachel Weisz proves she can do roles with some depth as Marlee, Nick Easter’s girlfriend, who negotiates a huge sum to deliver a favorable verdict to the highest bidder.

The film does manage some suspenseful moments and has a nice twist to it, which is to be expected in a Grisham-based piece. And despite the templated approach the film does seriously question the extent to which juries can be manipulated and it left me wondering if this sort of stuff really happens. Even so, if you want to be both entertained and challenged there are better options particularly given the film's schmaltzy ending.

 

 

back

Want more about this film?

search youtube  search wikipedia  

Want something different?

random vintage best worst