Props for those who get the reference in that headline.
I should probably state at the outset that I'm not a US citizen, and am looking at the American justice system from the outside - which is probably why I'm having so much trouble making up my mind about this film.
First the basics - it's well-written, well-directed, well-shot and well acted. Jamie Foxx in particular deserves praise for making a repulsive character likeable by the end. Tommy Lee Jones' everyman, on the other hand, didn't quite convince. I was also left frustrated by the way the root cause of his financial difficulties - his business arrangement with someone who later went to gaol (and who doesn't even appear in the film) wasn't explored in any detail.
Instead, we get a protracted courtroom drama on a seemingly-simple case of contract law, which was allowed (for reasons which are not explained) to take bizarre detours into areas which had no bearing on the case (including the political views on one of the lawyers' deceased grandfather).
As an outsider, I had several WTF moments, including the fact that a coffin (casket, if you must) was considered reasonably-priced at $750 at 1995 prices.
Then the verdict. Mr O'Keefe was stiffed - that was plain. He deserved justice - no argument from me. He originally asked for eight million dollars, in the hope of being awarded six. Fair enough, I suppose.
Then he gets awarded half a billion. WTF? I suppose I shouldn't have been so surprised as the US is a country where McDonalds can be successfully sued because they served hot coffee - but if this was a fair outcome, I'm a banana.
That said, I'm supposed to be reviewing the film, not the US justice system. As a film, it scores high in terms of drama and suspense, and I won't get it out of my mind for a while - which makes it a success.
I should probably state at the outset that I'm not a US citizen, and am looking at the American justice system from the outside - which is probably why I'm having so much trouble making up my mind about this film.
First the basics - it's well-written, well-directed, well-shot and well acted. Jamie Foxx in particular deserves praise for making a repulsive character likeable by the end. Tommy Lee Jones' everyman, on the other hand, didn't quite convince. I was also left frustrated by the way the root cause of his financial difficulties - his business arrangement with someone who later went to gaol (and who doesn't even appear in the film) wasn't explored in any detail.
Instead, we get a protracted courtroom drama on a seemingly-simple case of contract law, which was allowed (for reasons which are not explained) to take bizarre detours into areas which had no bearing on the case (including the political views on one of the lawyers' deceased grandfather).
As an outsider, I had several WTF moments, including the fact that a coffin (casket, if you must) was considered reasonably-priced at $750 at 1995 prices.
Then the verdict. Mr O'Keefe was stiffed - that was plain. He deserved justice - no argument from me. He originally asked for eight million dollars, in the hope of being awarded six. Fair enough, I suppose.
Then he gets awarded half a billion. WTF? I suppose I shouldn't have been so surprised as the US is a country where McDonalds can be successfully sued because they served hot coffee - but if this was a fair outcome, I'm a banana.
That said, I'm supposed to be reviewing the film, not the US justice system. As a film, it scores high in terms of drama and suspense, and I won't get it out of my mind for a while - which makes it a success.