Rating: 
Summary: Propaganda You Pay $ for
Review: I was tricked into seeing this at the theater. I went to the theater manager and demanded my money back. It is Hollywood's worst type of propaganda. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the proceeds from this trash went to HCI. If you want to pay to have the intellectually bankrupt political agenda of Hollywood crammed down your throat, then rent 'Reefer Madness': at least you'll get a few laughs. Better yet, if you want to be preached at, go to church: it's free!
Rating: 
Summary: Runaway Jury
Review: I give it 2 stars, rather than a half star, on merit of the acting talent alone.
Clearly, juror #9 was not the only one with an agenda. This otherwise diverting suspense / thriller was given a lethal injection of Hollywierd's left-wing rhetoric. Big surprise, the "academy" doesn't think we've been spoon-feed our daily quota of gun control propaganda. Well, not to worry; I'm sure the next generation of people that matter is already brainwashed to the point where the entire U.S. Constitution will be abolished (that is, assuming they survive being slain by all the gun totein' loonies). The court case at the crux of the movie was utterly ridiculous. It was no more reasonable than suing the DMV for issuing licenses to people who, later, get into accidents. Get real America! PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE, not guns, not cars, not knives, not sharp rocks or pointy sticks, but PEOPLE! This movie could have been good, had it stuck to the material in the book, rather than making gun use / misuse central to its plot; but no, the bleeding hearts of tinsel-town just couldn't pass up an opportunity. Folks, forget about any kind of control that society seeks to sanction: raise your children with love, intelligence, moral values, and discipline, and they won't grow up to be murderers. Pass on Runaway Jury - it is no more than thinly veiled liberalism, falsely advertised as entertainment.
Rating:
Summary: Can I sue the Author and Director for deceiving me???
Review: Lets keep this simple. I am a huge Grisham fan, I own and have read every one of his books. This was an excellent BOOK. I was excited to see it come out as a movie. Then Hollywood and all the "important" people change the whole story. I can't believe what Grisham allowed them to do. John, you have the power. You are big now. Don't let them compromise your work with this trash. In short, don't watch the movie if you have read the book, and if the movie has too many holes for you then pick up a copy of the book and you will enjoy it.
Rating:
Summary: Not Worth your time.
Review: Runaway Jury is as bad as they say it is. The story makes no sense what so ever, and the politics involved don't jell with the message sent. The acting is good with Rachel Weisz, Dustin Hoffman, and Gene Hackman doing their best to keep the movie afloat while the script keeps punching holes into it. See it for the performances of Weisz, Hoffman, and Hackman because they do make this movie a better experience that it's really is, despite the bias politics involved.
Rating: 
Summary: The Gun Did It? Good overall, with a message
Review: This is a very interesting movie, wrapped sadly in a message that has obvious political overtones. A great Grisham story with a great plot, good acting and casting, edge of your seat suspense. This movie really had me going. John Cusack's character was really nepharious and the movie had you always wondering what he was thinking, so......you didn't. That is what made the movie itself an excellent piece of filmography. I was always wondering what was behind the suspense. Who were these guys working fo? I had not read the book and had no spoiler issues except brief reviews and trailers. Hackman plays a hard fisted lawyer with a history and does a good job, Hoffman performs adequately as the plaintiff's attorney, yet not as deep and rich a job as he has done in other venues. Cusack is great and Rachel Weisz stays in character for the whole movie. You recognize other characters and that makes you feel comfortable right from the start. So, if you want to get a good movie to watch, good casting and good and overall plot that is what you get and the reason for the 4 rating. It would have been a five if it was not a gun/antigun movie. You only see the gun, never the killer, so the issue here is guns. But get the movie anyway. However, the movie is on the same level as other Grisham movies as far as overall plot and that makes the movie worth a watch and even worth owning.
Rating:
Summary: Wonderful example of propoganda
Review: The entire plot breaks down into this, republicans (you know the "bad guy" is republican because he says "the only people i hate more then baptists are democrats") are evil, insensitive, fat cats who sell arms directly to criminals. The good guy is a liberal anti-gun lawyer who wears casual suits (appealing to the everday man) and when he speaks to the jury or makes a point, a light, uplifting music is soothingly played in the background, same as when the verdict is to sue the crap out of the gun company. By the way, no logical arguments are presented, and since logic and reason is taken out the leftist in them comes out and they rely heavily on sentiment and emotions. The message is that if you disagree with thier views youre the equivilent of a baby eating murderer. One instance of this is when (in the middle of court by the way) they roll out a tv and show the court a video of the sons birthday with the late father. Now, the opposition did get a voice, but that was ruined 15 seconds after it was made. The main argument agasint the anti-gun slant was the gun lobbyists yelling "2nd AMENDMEMT 2nd AMENDMENT" on and on without reason, making thier argument appear weak and unfounded with no other sources then the constitution. Things are simply so biased i enjoyed it on the mere fact that it was so incrediably out there. The evil republican even has a russian thug and arsonist to do his bidding while the liberal lawyer gets self-rightous and decides not to give them the money to sway the jury. There was no mention to the number of lives SAVED by guns or how many crimes stopped or prevented, only that guns kill loving fathers and small children. So if you're a republican or conservative, the movie is reduced to humorous fodder.
Rating:
Summary: Good cause with no intelligence behind it.
Review: I m for gun control, and I do feel that the gun manufactures should bear some responsibility for the violence in our neighborhoods but this movie does not really express those issues with any kind of intelligence or with any kind of real fact. It rather make those things into movie cliches concerning good guys and bad guys, and have none of the real life problems that steams from the issues its trying to raised. This is more a Hollywood fantasy than a real movie, and that where the problem lies. It should have been more grounded in reality than it was and it just does a huge disservice to the problem other than try to address it. I agree with the majority that the acting is the only plus here with Rachel Weisz, and Gene Hackman giving real performances in an other wise product of Hollywood fantasy. I though of them as real characters with real problems, and real conflicts. I credit that achievement to Weisz and Hackman as actors because they make you feel for them as people, while the script makes you feel nothing at all. They are the reason that this movie is better than it really should have been, and that if you think about it is pretty impressive considering that the movie as a whole fails miserably in what is trying to do.
Rating:
Summary: I wanted to like this film....but alas
Review: I was shocked at how lame this film was. I really like most of Grisham's films, so I was excited about this one, especially given the cast. Basically the plot involves a woman who sues a gun manufacturer after a maniac kills her husband at the office. Okay, so a maniac uses the gun to kill her husband, and she sues the gun company?!! Hokey premise, but of course, the gun company hires Gene Hackman, as a hot shot attorney to 'fix' the jury so that his high-priced client wins, unbeknowst to him, one of the jurors, played by John Cusack has his own manipulations in mind. Rachel Weiss turns in a nice performance as his co-conspirator. The problem in this film, is not the acting, or performances. It's the lack of punch. Hackman is never truly evil or bad, and the consequences of the outcome are not that earth shattering. I was hoping for a film like Grisham's 'The Rainmaker' with Matt Damon, but unfortunately I got a bad rerun episode of tv's L.A.
Law.
Rating:
Summary: Rachel Weisz, Gene Hackman,and Dustin Hoffman deserve better
Review: The two stars I'm giving to this movie is for the effort made by the actors in keeping you glued to your chair with their performances even though you know that the movie is not going anywhere. Rachel Weisz, Gene Hackman, Dustin Hoffman, and John Cusack shine by giving a real sense of conviction to their characters and that passion the reason I sat throe this film. The film in question is not as good as the actors involved because it really does not know what it wants to be. It trying to be poignant in its views about violence but the views express are not really clear, and in trying to put forth its massage, the movie resorts to play on the tragedy of School violence to make its point. This would be a noble effort if it was done in the right way with some intelligence behind it but it looks gratuitous here because it rather play on the outrage of the violence perpetrated other than to stick to reason and logic to defend its case. The actors involve in this movie deserve better than this because their performances are reason enough to make you see this movie, yet their time and energy is wasted in a movie that does not do them or the issues its trying to raise any justice.
Rating:
Summary: Quality in Quantity
Review: I've seen most of the movies adapted from John Grisham novels, but I had not heard of Runaway Jury prior to this film. And man, am I glad, because if you don't know the book, then you will - like I did - really enjoy this DVD. The suspense builds up, and details and clues are revealed slowly.
.
Having read other reviewers' comments, I see that in the book the court case is directed at the tobacco industry rather than a gun manufacturer, but I feel that Michael Mann's film "The Insider" already tackled the (tobacco) subject rather well, and besides, you just can't deny that guns - and how easy it is to get them - in the States is an issue. It's all fair game anyway, after all, it's just movie entertainment. The cast is very impressive. Hoffman, Hackman, Cusack, Weisz, are the major players - all excellent, but there are other well-known actors that play smaller roles (too many to mention), but I was especially won over by Cliff Curtis. I am a big fan of A-list actors playing small roles in films, lending their magic touch to scenes or characters. Curtis played a mesmerising Iraqi innocent in Three Kings, a menacing Latin American gangster in Training Day, and also recently appeared in last year's Whale Rider, filmed in his homeland of New Zealand. In Runaway Jury his part is rather small, but he just nails his character with so little screen time, which is the other reason to watch the movie: with so many talented actors, you just ache to see them all given their chance to shine. The scene written specifically for the movie to take advantage of having Hoffman and Hackman together on the big screen for the first time is very cool as well. I know I didn't help you with the plot much, but in part it is because I hope you have the chance to watch the film with the same open mind as I did (having little prior knowledge about the film or its story). It's a good mix of a courtroom thriller, drama, and Hollywood fluff with a conscience, plus that unbeatable cast. If you know the book, I hope this film still makes you smile despite the inconsistencies; seeing all the fine actors involved should at least amuse you. As for the DVD extras:
Full marks!! 20 minutes of scene rehearsal footage, and several interviews with Hoffman and Hackman talking about the movie, their characters, and how they met when they were young. None of that pretentious "oh he's so talented" nonsense that all these other actors always ooze about each other, just refreshingly honest and self-effacing chats with two movie legends. There are also two deleted scenes, some nice featurettes, and the obligatory commentary by Fleder, which is relatively interesting - but he's not the most charismatic director I've heard. Could be worse though, could be 8 people talking at the same time! As you can tell, I really like this movie. My four stars are very representative of the overall quality of this DVD release, so my marks reflect the film AND the excellent DVD extra features (particularly those with Hoffman and Hackman are a treat). This is one to own.
Highly Recommended.
|
