Rating: 
Summary: A Paean to Will Power
Review: "The Verdict" opens in a bittersweet, comical way, in which Paul Newman's portrayal of the alcholic lawyer Frank Galvin sort of recalls Walter Matthau's "Whiplash Willie" Gingrich from Billy Wilder's "The Fortune Cookie" (1966). We see Galvin sink beneath the gutter as he presses his business cards into the palms of grieving mourners. But, similarities end there: Given the most unlikely circumstance -- a malpractice suit -- Galvin sees the light at the end of the tunnel, redemption for the sorry mess he's made of his life. This movie unfolds like a revelation, but slowly, so that along with Galvin, we discover the small shred of remaining integrity within him that rises up and becomes courage: He turns down an insurance settlement to do battle against two renowned physicians, a corrupt Boston cardinal (played by the great character actor Edward Binns), a corrupt judge (Milo O'Shea) and the city's largest, slickest, law firm, whose legal team is headed by James Mason, in his final role as the suave and cynical Concanon. Galvin's transformation from self-professed ambulance chaser to a true man of the law fighting for nothing but justice is one of cinema's most inspiring performances, because Galvin *is* a weak man, set upon by demons from his failed past, and by fear of an uncertain future. Still, he trudges on, sinks his teeth in and never backs down, despite one unlucky turn after another: His star witness disappears, his hired "expert witness" has a second-rate medical background, and the judge strikes out almost every shred of evidence favourable to his case. Yet, through his conviction and sheer will power, Galvin convinces the jury of the malpractice commited against his client, a woman put in a coma by negligent doctors. Watching Frank's transformation is simply awe-inspiring, because screenwriter David Mamet wrote it so subtly, and because it happens to Newman over the course of the movie. There's no "light bulb look" that comes over him all of the sudden; Rather, we can see the dim flicker slowly and gradually burn to a raging flame. Director Sidney Lumet brilliantly captured the human drama of "The Verdict" by letting the actors and the dialogue carry the movie; It's far less cinematic than his earlier movies such as "Serpico" or "Twelve Angry Men." This really lets the viewer get into the characters: Not only do Newman and Mason shine, but Jack Warden (as his gruff mentor), Lindsey Crouse and Charlotte Rampling really help flesh out the movie and make it utterly believable through their conviction to character. "The Verdict" ends properly: Laura Fischer(Rampling), who has seduced Frank and reluctantly betrayed him, telephones him to make amends. But Frank, stronger from the ordeal of his life, maintains his integrity, knowing who is on the other end of the line, never picks up. Now not only has his client won, but he's won back his soul. Straight cut to black, titles. I was so taken by this movie, that I was certain that Newman and Mason won Oscars for their performances. I was wrong. In real life, justice does not always win the day.
Rating:
Summary: A Paean to Persistence
Review: "The Verdict" opens in a bittersweet, comical way, in which Paul
Newman's portrayal of the alcholic lawyer Frank Galvin sort of recalls Walter Matthau's "Whiplash Willie" Gingrich from Billy Wilder's "The Fortune Cookie" (1966). We see Galvin sink beneath the gutter as he presses his business cards into the palms of grieving mourners. But, similarities end there: Given the most unlikely circumstance -- a malpractice suit -- Galvin sees the light at the end of the tunnel, redemption for the sorry mess he's made of his life. This movie unfolds like a revelation, but slowly, so that along with Galvin, we discover the small shred of remaining integrity within him that rises up and becomes courage: He turns down an insurance settlement to do battle against two renowned physicians, a corrupt Boston cardinal (played by the great character actor Edward Binns), a corrupt judge (Milo O'Shea)
and the city's largest, slickest, law firm, whose legal team is headed by James Mason, in his final role as the suave and cynical Concanon. Galvin's transformation from self-professed ambulance chaser to a true man of the bar fighting for nothing but justice is one of cinema's most inspiring performances, because Galvin *is* a weak man, set upon by demons from his failed past, and by fear of an uncertain future. Still, he trudges on, sinks his teeth in and never backs down, despite one unlucky turn after another: His star witness disappears, his hired "expert witness" has a second-rate medical background, and the judge strikes out almost every shred of evidence favourable to his case. Yet, through his conviction and sheer will power, Galvin convinces the jury of the malpractice commited against his client, a woman put in a coma by
negligent doctors. Watching Frank's transformation is simply awe-inspiring, because
screenwriter David Mamet wrote it so subtly, and because it happens to Newman over the course of the movie. There's no "light bulb look" that comes over him all of the sudden; Rather, we can see the dim flicker slowly and gradually burn to a raging flame. Director Sidney Lumet brilliantly captured the human drama of "The
Verdict" by letting the actors and the dialogue carry the movie; It's far less cinematic than his earlier movies such as "Serpico" or "Twelve Angry Men." This really lets the viewer get into the characters: Not only do Newman and Mason shine, but Jack Warden (as his gruff mentor), Lindsey Crouse and Charlotte Rampling really help flesh out the movie and make it utterly believable through their conviction to character. "The Verdict" ends properly: Laura Fischer(Rampling), who has seduced Frank and reluctantly betrayed him, telephones him to make amends. But Frank, stronger from the ordeal of his life, maintains his integrity, knowing who is on the other end of the line, never picks up. Now not only has his client won, but he's won back his soul. Straight cut to black, titles. I was so taken by this movie, that I was certain that Newman and Mason won Oscars for their performances. I was wrong. In real life, justice does not always win the day.
Rating:
Summary: Well written with fantastic performances. Lumet is a master
Review: An all time fave. David Mamet's fine screenplay is acted out beautifully by a superb cast. Sure handed direction by Sydney Lumet. Fantastic character study without lull.
Rating:
Summary: best movie ever made
Review: because this film deals with the reality of reality, newman as frank galvin says to the jury, today you are the truth..not symbols of freedom or aspirations of liberty, but the real thing...you will decide what is just...this film is not really about doctors, malpractice, or the church..it's about the nobility of man's spirit..about overcoming and bulldozing through deception and lies...it deals with human character and the ability to climb from the ashes; to identify and choose the high road..and anyone who belittles james mason's performance as cocky counselor just doesn't get it: that redemption cannot be bought, and that the truth has no price....this movie is not overrated..it's underrated until it becomes recognized as the greatest movie ever written, acted, and filmed(mamet, newman and lumet).... .it's an inexorable hunt for the truth which identifies those paths of glory that lead but to the grave.
Rating:
Summary: Story Story Story - The Verdict is a Writer's Bible
Review: David Mamet is utterly relentless, and his plays and films never give a character a break. People in his world start out desperate and stay desperate trying to do the wrong things for the right reasons, or doing the right thing despite their own corrupt souls. The Verdict is one of Mamet's finer works, and in the hands of director Sidney Lumet, it becomes a shining example of how story makes character, character makes story, and both force a vision on a sensitive director. Set in the maximium Catholic world of Boston, the Verdict tells the tale of a pretty boy whose failure to believe in deep corruption has turned him into a numb fool. The Church preaches redemption, but offers none, and Frank Galvin knows this deep in his soul, which is why he can't leave the womb-like sepia of his bar to face the blue cold. He is pityful, useless and defeated as only a pretty boy can be wrecked. But this modern reading of the Book of Job doesn't end there. Offered a gimme case, Galvin heads right for the gutter, until, in a moment of clarity, he visits the bleak ward where the object of the lawsuit rots in the arms of mother Church. Arrayed against this consummate loser are God, and the Prince of Darkness in concert. James Mason's valedictorian role is among his finest, so clean, so unafraid of turning men and women into whores and liars; he is a black hole of confidence and Mamet shows again and again how Concannon and his people are great lawyers, while Galvin can barely think. Things go from bad to worse: the family of the destroyed woman want to settle; the doctor tapped for testimony disappears; the expert witness is a hack doctor (and the unspoken racial overtones of who is credible and who is not are one of the most shocking parts of this film); and his key testimony and witness are disallowed unfairly. This is a writer writing properly: no breaks, no luck, no hope in the slightest for Frank Galvin. He wants redemption, he's going to get a belly full of it. The vicious dialogs between Charlotte Rampling's troubled character and Newman are so perfect and acidic that I cringe. A great example of two characters working from different internal scripts. There is so much good in this film, that I watch it over and over again, sometimes for the East Coast winter ambiance, sometimes for the joy of watching James Mason sneer, sometimes to watch Paul Newman beg Milo O'Shea. There is so much to learn from this film. Neither Lumet nor Newman has ever done better. Mamet's gold standard is Glen Gary Glenross. I would love to have seen this cast in that film. Alas. Too late. It's a sad and sick world, one Frank Galvin would recognize, that grants awards to Ghandi (boring,)Gladiator and A Beautiful Mind, but fails to see gold before their eyes. If you are a writer, or want to write, sit down and watch this film, take notes, and see if you can reforge a character, which is what the Verdict is really about.
Rating:
Summary: The Verdict Is In
Review: Director Sidney Lumet's The Verdict from 1982 stars Paul Newman as Frank Galvin. Frank is a washed-up alcoholic Boston lawyer who has been reduced to ambulance chasing to earn a living. One particularly strong scene that shows the depths to which Frank has sank comes when he is forcibly removed from a funeral home by a grieving family after he tries to wrangle a case out of the death. Frank is content to spend his time at a local bar getting drunk and shooting pinball until his pal Mickey (played wonderfully by Jack Warden) gives him a surefire winning civil case. The lawsuit involves a comatose woman who was misdiagnosed in a Catholic hospital. The Church wants to avoid an embarrassing trial and offers a healthy settlement. But Frank sees a chance to win big bucks and rejects the settlement to go to trial against a big law firm lead by defense attorney Frank Concannon (played with an icy swarm by James Mason). In the interim, Frank becomes involved with Laura Fischer (Charlotte Rampling) who is actually working for Concannon's firm trying to dig up information on Frank's strategy. Another effective scene is where Frank finds out about Laura's deception and smacks across the face in a hotel bar. Laura has fallen for Frank and understands and accepts the blow. The film's main plot is the legal battle between the big and powerful Church and hospital and the helpless little guy, but the real crux of the film is Frank's struggles for redemption. Mr. Newman's performance may well be the best of his career. You root for Frank not just to win the case, but the overcome the demons he has been struggling with for so long. Mr. Newman's performance is deeply nuanced and he shows his brilliance throughout. The film was nominated for 1982 Best Picture, Director & Actor, but was swept away by the Gandhi tide of that year.
Rating:
Summary: Oscar Robbery: Newman Gets the Shaft, Part 2
Review: During the first 25 years of his career, Paul Newman played characters who were confident and self-assured. Being a great actor, Newman was always able to infuse his characters with frailties and vulnerabilities that made them well-rounded and three dimensional. From Rocky Graziano to Cool Hand Luke to Doug Roberts (The Towering Inferno), Newman played self-confident characters who were strong and took charge of a situation. Perhaps this lack of frailty is the reason why Newman was able to play much younger characters well into his 50's (in 1981's Absence of Malice, the audience fully accepted that the then 56 year old Newman could be romantically involved with the then 35 year old Sally Field). In The Verdict, however, Newman is almost shocking in his hesitancy and self doubt. As attorney Frank Galvin, life has beaten him down so much, he seems like a man far older than his years who is afraid to do anything for fear that tragedy and bad luck will once again crush him. For the first time, Newman seems more like a victim than a survivor -- stammering, hesitant, weak, alcoholic and defeated. Even his courtroom summation at the end of the film is halting and hesitant. In a film full of fine actors (James Mason, Charlotte Rampling, Jack Warden, Milo O'Shea, Lindsay Crouse, etc.), Newman still manages to give the best performance. It's an unbelievably great performance and a great companion piece to The Hustler -- "Fast Eddie" Felson after life has chewed him up and spit him out. Unfortunately, Paul Newman, once again, did not win the Oscar for Best Actor -- Ben Kingsley won for Ghandi. Unlike with The Hustler, however, Newman wasn't really robbed, but was actually the victim of bad luck. Kingsley was born to play Ghandi and gave the performance of his life. In most other years, Newman probably would have run away with the Oscar. In 1982, however, he had the bad luck to be up against an actor who literally became one of the most revered and admired men in history. While no one can say that Kingsley didn't deserve the honor, it is still a shame that Paul Newman did not win an Oscar for his flawed, weak and defeated Frank Galvin. (For Part 1 see The Hustler)
Rating:
Summary: A MUST See Movie !...
Review: For fans of lawyer, courtroom type of movies, this is a real "Must See!" Paul Newman playing the role of an alcoholic, "has-been" lawyer, Frank Galvin tries one last case only to face so many obstacles, like his key witness, all of a sudden "taking a vacation" in one of the Caribbean Islands; the girl(Charlotte Rampling) he meets and gets to feel for and trust turning out to be actually a mole planted by the "all powerful" opponent lawyer(James Mason); the judge who seems biased against him etc. Yet despite all these odds, Frank was very persistant and keeping to his principles to do what is right, he went ahead to try the case instead of settling out of court. With the end result that he won the case overwhelmingly and this gives a real good feeling to the viewer! So get this movie. You definitely won't regret it.
Rating:
Summary: An outstanding courtroom drama
Review: I agree with the other reviewers that Paul Newman gives the best performance of his career in this intense, well-designed film. There are numerous scenes which are shown without a cut, providing the viewers with an uninterrupted examination of the actors' interactions. Some include (without giving away too much): Newman's character (Frank Galvin) in conflict with the judge's actions toward the court proceedings, Newman and Warden preparing for the trial and the circumstances weighing heavily against them.
All the supporting actors are excellent. Among the noteables: James Mason as the powerhouse defense attorney with a malicious underhand, Milo O'Shea as the unsympathetic judge, Jack Warden as Newman's friend, mentor, and seemingly sole supporter, Charlotte Rampling as Newman's girlfriend with a shady side to herself.
There are a few plotholes and moments of overly dramatic "courtroom hysterics" within the film. Overlook them and enjoy an otherwise very strong movie.
Rating:
Summary: An Inspirational Film. Good. Evil. And the Journey Between.
Review: I first saw the Verdict 20 ago, in my early 20's and it inspired me then. I recently watched it again, and realized that over the last 20 years I've met the real life counterparts of many of the characters in the film. The film shows the many different stages of "selling out" in modern society; From the doctors who turn their backs on incompetent collegues to the lawyers that defend them. Anyone who tries to undo this sorry and hypocritical state of our mainstream society is rewarded with attacks and grief. But if one can survive the attacks, ultimitately, justice can prevail. This movie though goes way beyond the surface issues of the legal and medical systems, its a broad indictment on the raw greed and power that permeates much of our world. Left unchecked it has no moral bounds.
Paul Neuman's intense mantra "There are no other cases, this is the case" sums up this beautiful film; he slowly regains an obssesive drive to do right no matter what the personal cost, and what the odds are.
The film's supporting theme of the blessing of surrounding yourself with true friends and collegues (Jack Warden) who will stand by you in good times and bad blends seamlessly into the plot which is at once spare and profound.
When you compare the film to much of what is on the screen today, your realize that this film is "gimickless". It doesn't need any contrived plot tricks to make it work. Each scene builds a complex picture of both the central character brilliantly played by Neuman and the society that has slowly been consuming him over many decades physically, emotionally and intellecutally.
Hollywood needs more films like The Verdict.
|
