| Overall Grade: |
D |
|
| Story: |
C- |
|
|
| Acting: |
C |
|
|
| Direction: |
C- |
|
|
| Visuals: |
C- |
|
|
Major disappointment (minor spoilers)
by Nope! (movies profile)
Sep 6, 2007
529
of
730 people found this review helpful
First off, this movie would have been 100 times better if they had stuck with the book and made this about tobacco. The gun plot line just didn't work and it weakened the entire movie. I LOVED this book and this movie was a heartbreaker. So disappointing! Could have been SO much better, even WITH the gun story line!
First off, kids do not need to see this movie. A couple of scenes are very violent.
If you have not read the book, you will like this movie a lot better than those who have. They changed a lot and not one thing they changed was an actual improvement from the book.
This movie is preachy to the point that it's immature: anti-gun people are good. Guns are bad, and so are the people who buy/own/sell them. When people get shot, it's the gun manufacturer's fault. Nobody who has ever sued a gun manufacturer is in it for the money, they're in it on principle. Lawyers and plaintiffs who go after gun companies are heroes trying to save us all. Gun manufacturers care only about profits, not lives. Blah, blah, blah. This was practically a 2-hour commercial for the Democratic Party.
The gun people are so evil in this story, and the anti-gun people so angelic, that the point Hollywood is trying to make is painfully obvious. What pisses me off isn't that they were making the point that guns are bad, but that they used *nothing* -- and I repeat, nothing -- but emotion to do it. If you're going to argue against guns, use something more than footage from poor little Johnny's birthday party showing Johnny having fun with his daddy who gets blown away a few days later.
This movie also needed to be a good half hour longer. They halfassed letting you know what was going on with the jurors (how the gun company was trying to swing the verdict, I mean). They could have had some REALLY good scenes but instead of taking time to explain it, they just flash a few scenes on the screen and if you haven't read the book you're sitting there going "huh?"
Casting was decent. John Cusack did NOT pull off Nicholas Easter, though. The girl that played Marlee did a very good job, however her part should have been even bigger. Most of the casting on the jury was very good but they changed some names and descriptions from the book and there was NO need to whatsoever. It didn't add to the plot.
This movie should be entitled "The Runaway Juror." The jury didn't play much into the movie, it's all about Nick and Marlee. Yes, it was all about them in the book too but the book tells you WHY the jurors swing the way they did. In this one, they're mostly just a bunch of bleeding hearts who feel sorry for the widow.
The suspense you are in to find out why Marlee and Nick are screwing with the verdict is predictible, disappointing and, of course, emotional. The ending is lame.
Wait till Blockbuster has it or, if you must, go see the matinee. This one's not worth full price. If you loved the book, you will want to cry. How could John Grisham let one of the best books he's ever written be made into such a crappy film is beyond me. He'd better not even THINK of letting Hollywood make a movie into "The Testament." |
My Public Profile 
