I found this movie to be just as good as "The Verdict". Both were outstanding. Am I the only person who felt that way? The IMDB scoring was 6.2 vs. 7.6 in favor of "The Verdict" but maybe it was Paul Newman popularity that made the difference. I also wondered whether the judge was just prejudiced against Frank because of the latter's poor reputation or was he corrupt and on the take from Concannon?
shareThe judge was prejudiced by his reputation firstly, but what really sealed his fate was when Frank intimated that 'settling and waking away' was beneath him and even said to the judge 'I'm sure you would'.
A man with Frank's reputation who had been nearly disbarred was impuning the professional integrity of another attorney, and a judge at that!!
The Verdict will likely never be touched anything in the courtroom drama genre for one reason:
The arc of character change that the protagonist goes through in pursuit of the case is so classically dramatic.
The first act shows us so clearly, visually, what Frank has become. Both in the bar and the funeral home. His need for redemption is clearly spelled out. And what we don't know then, but gradually understand, is that Frank didn't self-destruct, he was victimized by the 'legal system'. And what happened to the girl in the hospital, and nurse Kaitlin at the hands of the 'medical system', parallels perfectly with Frank's dilemna. In the process of redeeming them, he will redeem himself.
In most movies of this sort, the plot would have simply shown Frank fighting the medical system. But it's a stoke of genius to show that he was also still fighting the legal system, in the form of a spy, and the prejudice of the judge. There's constant echos of both what had destroyed Frank, and what had destroyed the girl.
Thematically, and structurally, 'The Verict' is very hard to match.
[deleted]
Thematically, and structurally, "The Verdict" is very hard to match.
You know, there's another thing I've always thought about movies. If you want a proper and engaging dramatic arc, stay away from true stories. The Truth rarely cooperates dramatically.
'A Civil Action' had that going against it. You couldn't change the dramatic stakes of any of the main protagonists. Nor the inciting incident, nor the way things turned out in the end. So, the movie comes off as only being about greed, ego, and money. Because in real life, that's all the characters were focused on.
There are some...possible exceptions, Erin Brokevich comes to mind. But on the whole, non-fictional legal stories don't hold much promise as screenplays. Not the least of reasons is because they're always written by a lawyer or a journalist, from a legal perspective. Maybe that's why EB seems to defy my rule.
Now, fictional legal stories written by lawyers? They do well! Just ask Grisham or Baldacci. Because a lawyer can imagine all sorts of double dealings, complications and machinations that the rest of us would never think of. Most of all, they know how very small things can have dramatic effects on outcomes.
How about that scene when he sabotages Newman in the courtroom? Motherf_cker just wanted to eat lunch! What an a__hole.
"You're just jealous because I'm a genuine freak and you have to wear a mask!"
I'm not sure it's as good as "The Verdict" but it IS good.
shareThe Verdict is a better film in terms of courtroom drama, but Class Action is still an enjoyable film. I just watched Class Action for the first time recently and what I enjoyed most was the extremely believable father/daughter relationship between Gene Hackman and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio. Watching their relationship develop over the course of the film was more enjoyable than the court case.
share[deleted]
Honestly, I enjoyed this film more than The Verdict. Gene Hackman is wonderful. Not that Paul Newman wasn't great but I like my lawyers with grit and not feet of clay.
share