Mississippi. Two racist white men abduct and rape a 10-year old African American girl, Tonya Hailey, leaving her permanently infertile. The two are arrested, but then shot and killed in the police station by the girl's father, Carl, as revenge. The police thus arrest Carl. Lawyer Jake is given the task to defend Carl on trial for murder, pleading insanity. Reluctantly, Jake accepts the free help of lawyer Ellen. At the same time, the Ku Klux Klan is trying to intimidate Jake into giving up on the case by attacking his home. Ultimately, the judge rules Carl not guilty.
One of the seven film adaptations made in the 90s based on the popular novels by John Grisham, "A Time to Kill" is a somewhat clumsy and inconsistent meditation on the thin line between vigilantism, revenge and legal justice, yet still good enough, honest and genuine to engage the viewers even today. The crystal clear cinematography by Peter Menzies Jr. makes even conventional scenes look good and aesthetic, though the best component is Samuel L. Jackson's emotional and powerful performance as Carl. The major flaw is that the movie wastes too much time on its middle part, depicting overlong preparations of the lawyer Jake for the case, as well as his cliche rejection of Ellen's assistance again and again, only to in the end accept her help, anyway, when in fact more time should have been invested into Carl, into what his psychological profile is, and in what emotional state he was left when he shot the rapists of his daughter. Some more philosophical lines and sharp quotes are scarce, yet they stand out, such as the one where Jake's mentor, Lucien, now an alcoholic, contemplates: "If you win this case, justice will prevail, and if you lose, justice will also prevail. Now that is a strange case... It ain't easy saving the world, even one case at a time." Jake also comments on Lucien's alcoholism: "They took away your license, but they can never take away your mind, unless you allow it." More of these kind of scenes would have been welcomed. The moral compass of the movie is skewed and controversial since Carl should have pleaded guilty, and not "not guilty", due to the problematic message that vigilantism and revenge are acceptable in certain circumstances, yet the final legal segment has enough suspense and power to stand out in the foreground.
Grade:++
No comments:
Post a Comment