Jan Schlichtman is a personal injury lawyer of a small legal firm who is pressured live on radio by Anne Anderson to take on the case of their small town of Woburn where eight children died of leukemia suspected to be caused by dumping of chemicals near the river by a company. At first, Jan drives there to tell them he won't be taking the case, but upon seeing the contaminated river, he changes his mind and starts doing preliminary investigation. He hires geologists to inspect the area, and talks to an employee who had seen chemicals being dumped by the company. Finally, Jan files a lawsuit against the company, but it is represented by his rival, the more experienced lawyer Jerry who sabotages the process. Ultimately, due to a shortage of money, Jan agrees on a settlement of 8 million $, which doesn't satisfy the families of Woburn, and his firm is dissolved.
The 2nd directorial work by screenwriter Steven Zaillian ("Schindler's List", "Awakenings") is this excellent legal thriller-drama based on the real-life Anderson vs. Cryovac case which involved the contamination of the drinking water by dumping trichloroethylene near the river, and offers precise, concise and expert dissemination and analysis of the legal challenges in trying to build up a lawsuit against a much more wealthy opponent. Besides "The Thin Red Line", it is arguably the best 90s film featuring John Travolta following his post-"Pulp Fiction" boost, and delivers intelligent writing by Zaillian, which engages effortlessly until the end. The dialogues are simply snappy and clever—the opening is wonderful in establishing everything so fast by presenting the sly protagonist, personal injury lawyer Jan, bringing his plaintiff on a wheelchair in the courtroom, and even helping him drink water in front of the judge, causing the lawyer of the opposite side to write him and offer of 2 million $ on a paper, just to settle out of court, as Jan narrates: "It's like this. A dead plaintiff is rarely worth as much as a living, severely-maimed plaintiff. However, if it's a long slow agonizing death, as opposed to a quick drowning or car wreck, the value can rise considerably. A dead adult in his 20s is generally worth less than one who is middle aged."
"A Civil Action" was described by Roger Ebert correctly as "John Grisham for grown ups", since it shows sobering real-life problems in trying to build up a case for a lawsuit: the lawyers need evidence, but to find them, they need to hire experts, which all costs, until they realize they lost all their savings without even knowing if they have a clear case or not. Their small law firm is not a match for the big company they are fighting against, showing this as a battle between David and Goliath. Jan's narration is consistently fascinating: "Only one and half percent of all cases ever reach a verdict. The whole idea of lawsuits is to settle, to compel the other side to settle. And you do that by spending more money than you should, which forces them to spend more money than they should, and whoever comes to their senses first, loses". Robert Duvall is weaker as the aloof, more experienced lawyer Jerry, but even he has great lines which are inserted "strategically" in the movie to comment on some situations, such as when Jerry speaks to his students: "Now the single greatest liability a lawyer can have is pride. Pride... Pride has lost more cases than lousy evidence, idiot witnesses and a hanging judge all put together." Zaillian is less inspired as a director, since the whole execution is more formal than genune, yet even here he has some fine cinematic techniques, such as jump cuts of several family members exchanging sitting in the office while Jerry all asks them the same questions, trying to obfuscate that the company is at fault for their health problems. As the finale bitterly concludes, justice—or rather in this case, a negotiated justice—is sometimes not very profitable, summing up a surprisingly elegant, intelligent and honest legal film.
Grade:+++
No comments:
Post a Comment