Rating: 
Summary: What a crime.
Review: Bias stance against gun ownership lacks not only the respect for the freedom of gun owners but denies them their freedom of speech as well by not giving them a voice to be heard (A scary thread this country is going though at the moment). The original books premise is about the dangers of big corporations lying about their product, which were the heath dangers of tobacco. The motives of the characters that were in the book fit the structure of that story but their motives in this film does not fit the story of this film because in reality gun owner ship is gray subject, and you know no one is trying to hide anything in this debate. The acting is fortunately the only redeemable thing in this film because you can see that the actors involved are giving everything they have to make a good film. Gene Hackman is great as always and brings charisma to his role, and Rachel Weisz give a great performances and nearly steals the movie from Hackman. John Cusack does a fair job and Dustin Hoffman does well but considering his character is small in the book, he does not have much to do here. Because of these fine actors (Hackman and Weisz especially) that I give this film a two star review but the rest of the movie does not do anything to warred anything better.
Rating: 
Summary: Nothing special
Review: "Runaway Jury" is entertaining and well-acted, but nothing about it is special. Cusack and Hackman are their typical clever selves, and Weisz acts decently as a conflicted woman. Ultimately, there is no great inspiration derived from this film or all that much humor or suspense. I just sat mildly entertained for two hours and realized that I could have turned on almost any cable channel to watch a comparable movie, so rent or it or wait until it comes out on cable, but don't bother buying it.
Rating: 
Summary: More liberal Hollywood BS
Review: A formula film that is an insipid anti-handgun political statement, I made the mistake of renting this offensive garbage. It's funny how the liberal Hollywood elite is always willing to tell us normal folks how we should live. This movie makes me want to go out and buy a few more guns to support the 2nd Amendment.
Rating:
Summary: Terribly, Terribly Disappointing.
Review: I purchased this DVD because I had read the book and the original story was
outstanding. When it suddenly dawned on me while I was watching the movie
that the trial was not about tobacco, but instead about guns - I literally felt
sick to my stomach. But I watched the whole movie; more disappointments
followed. The clever and insidious manipulation of the jury (fantastically
presented in the book) was not presented in an intriguing or suspenseful manner
in the movie... pieces were just thrown in like an afterthought. There was nothing on the DVD package to indicate this obscene change in
the storyline. I was ripped off. I should've read the AMAZON reviews first -
this is my punishment for purchasing a DVD at a store!!
Rating:
Summary: Avoid, other than the acting, there is nothing here to see.
Review: I'm sorry but not even the acting could save this embarrassing liberal exercise in self-righteousness. The characters are nothing more than cut outs of movies done better before, even though Gene Hackman, Rachel Weisz, and Dustin Hoffman do a good job in trying to keep your attention while the movie self destructs all around them, and the liberal bashing of the gun manufactures is so obvious that they just should have change the title to Attack the Liberal gun control squad. The direction has no spark, and the editing should have been better in trying to move the story a long but with no story to tell other than a agenda by the filmmakers own view, I don't blame the people in charge on sleeping on the job. Other than the effort of the actors, the movie is still not worth your time.
Rating:
Summary: Weisz and Hackman steal the show but can¿t save this movie.
Review: If they could give actors an Oscar for keeping people interested in a uninteresting movie, Rachel Weisz and Gene Hackman would defiantly get it. Because the movie just never leaves autopilot for the two hours that it runs. I did not read the book but I hope the book is not as bad as the movie was, and has a least a sensible plot that has some kind of pay off to it. The movie goes no where for the first 45 minutes, then when it starts to get a bit interesting, it falls flat on its face with a cloak and dagger espionage angle that does not even fit the theme of the movie. Gene Hackman does his villain role again with some spice, and Rachel Weisz matches him every step of the way with heart and grace but they are not playing with a fully realize plot and you can see in their faces that they know this, but they deliver anyway, and pull off two very good performances. The rest of the cast is good as well with Dustin Hoffman, and John Cusack doing their usual performances but the movie just is not up to their talents. I suggest you rent the movie before you buy it, just to see how good actors like Gene Hackman and Rachel Weisz pull off two very complex and graceful performances in a movie that is as thoughtful as a wafer.
Rating:
Summary: Movie OK, Book much better
Review: I can not believe they didn't stick with the original plot of the book. Why change it to gun control rather than big tobacco? Whether it was a personal agenda or not, I'll never know. But it sure didn't play out very good compared to the book. The movie moves along nicely, and there are some quips about "big tobacco" as if to say, "see we didn't totally go away from the book". But overall, the movie was a disappointment. Nothing against the actors, the book was just plain better. The DVD features are completely minimalistic and I can't think of a single reason to purchase it. Ultimately, this is an OK rental, but I can't recommend it for a purchase.
Rating:
Summary: I NEED ANOTHER JURY
Review: <<>>>I read the awesome book! I saw the people on the CBS Show Big Brother see the preview and they seemed to love it. So I watched it. I have NEVER before read a novel and then seen the movie, not by my designs, but rather accident. I NEED ANOTHER JURY (in my own head) to give this movie another chance. Thus far the movie is dissappointing, but not on it's own merit, but when compared to the novel. In order to change the 'target' from tobacco to guns, the first scenes of the movie are violent. I felt that this extremely gratuitous violence was better suited to an action movie. This sets the tone of the movie yet the tone was not well developed since this is a movie of mystery, intrigue, motivations, and manipulation. While books have the time to develop deep characters compared to movies, this movie didn't develop the characters at all, though the performances of the actors was good. The failing of this flick is the screenplay itself. This screenplays' plot was choppy. Director's decision to include too much sex and love between Easter (John Cusack), and his girlfriend, Marlee (Rachel Weisz), are gratuitous, and detracts from the true relationship being based on MANIPULATION. Marlee manipulated Easter years before the story and manipulation was a much bigger part of the story, though Easter's involvement is based on love of Marlee. But then again, Rankin Fitch would have had a fling with Marlee himself because she is irrestistably hot for not only being sexy but elusive, smart, bold, brave and in control. However, in all fairness, when the freshness of the novel is out of my head, I will watch the DVD and re-rate it based on it's own merit rather than a comparison to the novel. Essentially, I have learned to watch the movie first, and then read the book, since I assume that such disappointments are normal due to lack of time to build characters and plot. My review is based on the movie (seen late in it's release at the dollar show) I am buying the DVD online which prompted this review, so that says a little! I give it 3 1/2 stars
Rating:
Summary: Court drama that losses touch with reality.
Review: The movie is good with what it has, which is in the fact the acting but loses creditability during the second half where reality should have been given more weight to help the story along. Can a Juror with an outside accomplice really take control of a jury? I don't think so but the actors do a damn fine job in making it seem real. Gene Hackman and Rachel Weisz are great as rivals who want to control the jury, and Dustin Hoffman and John Cusack support them well in their roles. The setting is fine but we don't really grasp New Orleans as a whole, and the story, which was taken from the book from John Grisham, does not do it justice. I recommend it for the great acting of Gene Hackman, and Rachel Weisz, and the great support of Dustin Hoffman and John Cusack. But I can't say that the movie is based on reality because it really is not.
Rating:
Summary: John Grisham should keep his books to himself.
Review: Very bad rendition of his best-selling book lacks Grisham's real voice of legal ethics and tight plot point in order to cry about the gun argument to an annoying tee. The screenplay feels like a summery than a story, and the direction needed more to it for me to feel compelled to sit though the movie. I feel sorry for all the actors involved for giving their all for this lackluster of a movie. I will also give special notice to Gene Hackman and Rachel Weisz for giving outstanding performances in a movie that really did not deserve it, and to Dustin Hoffman, who took a bit part and made something special out of it. Despite their efforts,the movie remains a good reason for authors to not sell their works to filmmakers because they will butcher it for their own views. .
|
