|
|
Almost forgotten today, but did you know that Judd Nelson was a big movie star in the 80's? I can almost definitely predict that this movie killed his career until he had somewhat of a comeback with New Jack City and not to mention becoming involved with a 90210 star.
The movie was made in the 80s, is about the 80s and even has a line about yuppies in it. Judd doesn't really embarrass himself but if the story had been more about his character and not the grisly murder case he is handed, it would have been a little more interesting. Don't get me wrong. The murder trial is very well staged but so is an episode of The Practice or Boston Legal. Ironically, David E. Kelly had a hand in both this and the above mentioned titles.
The first part is a sly satire about, for a lack of a better word, yuppie culture. Young man rises to the top with twisting the screws in an unorthodox manner. It's funny how he almost gets it all in 10 seconds. Were the 80s really like that? I guess so for some people at least.
Of course, the yuppie gets his comeuppance. That's when the story turns. Dan Monahan spells it out for us: "This ain't fun anymore". Indeed it isn't. Just because the story takes a more serious tone doesn't make it better, though. Nelson's performance gets weaker the more serious the story gets. John Hurt's defendant is well played but you somehow know from your gut that he can't be innocent. After all, it is John Hurt.
The court proceedings are mostly of the dramatic license variety and has very little to do with actual court proceedings. That would be okay, if the case surrounding it wasn't so cut and dried. We know the defendant is guilty and there isn't very much surprise in the outcome.
Too bad. This could have been a good movie, not a great one, but good. All you had to do was had a little surprise twist. What if the John Hurt character was guilty but was acquitted?
score 3/10
policy134 14 November 2010
Reprint: https://www.imdb.com/review/rw2338682/ |
|
20-2-2021 12:07:07