Rating: 
Summary: Great because it kept you guessing until the very end
Review: The great thing about this film is that right up until the very end, it wasn't at all clear how it was going to end. Very suspenseful. Very well acted. It is the kind of film that you can pick apart if you want to, but I think it is more fun to just let it alone have let it take you for a ride. Oh, and I'm in love with Rachel Weisz.
Rating: 
Summary: Bias Morality Tale.
Review: Bias morality tale that rather point fingers than help find a solution to the gun problem. Should gun manufactures be held responsible for the rash of violence that is taking our country? In my opinion maybe, but the responsibility still falls on the people themselves and if we excuse that fact, then the problem will never go away. This is not address in this film unfortunately, and because of that, I think the film is not worth much in its practice of morality. Despite how bias the film is though, the acting is very well done, with Rachel Weisz and Gene Hackman giving great stand out performances as well as John Cusack and Dustin Hoffman. Performances that the movie itself does not try to capitalize on with a real and compelling story that actually addresses the gun problem with some clarity and some sense. Something that the real problem has in spades.
Rating:
Summary: Weisz and Hackman keep this film going, even when it stalls
Review: Preachy John Grisham movie from the equally preachy book lacks the conviction to put on a fair fight for both sides. There is no gray area in this film about the gun issue and there is no real answer to satisfy ether party in this heated debate. It's really a movie that is rescue by its performances, and the performances sadly are wasted in this ambiguity of a film. Gene Hackman really is a great actor, and great actors always brings their best game with them where ever they go even when the movie itself is not worth it. Rachel Weisz also brings her best game along for the ride, and gives Hackman something he had not had in a long while, a equal to not only play off of but who can literally almost blow him off the screen as well. They are best things going for this legal mess, and that is a lot to say when the movie itself not only stalls in the half way point but makes a huge mess of a very, very sensitive issue. An issue that should have been respected on both sides.
Rating:
Summary: Gene Hackman gives a great performance
Review: Runaway Jury is a suspenseful, exciting, and intelligent behind-the-scenes drama about high stakes jury tampering. Set in New Orleans, the story deals with a multi-million dollar suit against gun manufacturers, brought by a widow whose husband was shot to death. The gun cartel hires jury consultant Rankin Fitch (Gene Hackman) to guarantee they don't lose the case. Fitch knows what he's doing: He has a crack team of researchers, spies, and teckies holed-up in a secret war-room, where they analyze the most intimate details of the jurors' lives for potential black-mailing. The prosecution team is lead by dedicated attorney Rohr (Dustin Hoffman), who has also hired a jury expert, although this one is a rank beginner compared to Fitch. Enter reluctant Juror #9 (John Cusack) and his mysterious girlfriend (Rachel Weiss) and the action really takes off. Gene Hackman is superb as the ruthless and unscrupulous Fitch. He is utterly convincing as a powerful and sophisticated villain we love to hate. On the other hand, Hoffman's performance is weak and forgettable. He is the only actor in the film who attempts a Southern accent; it sometimes sounded like the voice he used in "Tootsie" which I found distracting and amusing. John Cusack has a chronically sleepy-eyed expression and, while satisfactory, could have been replaced by a number of other actors; for instance: Dylan McDermott (who, unaccredited, opens the story with a thrilling murder scene.) Rachel Weiss was excellent as Cusack's tough co-conspirator and she definitely holds her own in scenes with Hackman. The outstanding direction by Gary Fleder pulls all the action together and makes it a winning film. I also noted the lighting: Close-ups were all filmed in a warm half light/half shadow that intensified the mood. The film doesn't belabor the question of whether gun makers should be held responsible for deaths, although they are clearly portrayed as heartless money-lovers (in the same light as the big tobacco sellers in similar real-life cases). What I like most about the film was the constant level of suspense and the way the writer keeps gives just a little information at a time, leaving you on the edge of your seat waiting for all the pieces to fit together. A movie about jury manipulation didn't sound interesting to me before, but Runaway Jury is a well-written, action-packed suspense drama that you will enjoy.
Rating:
Summary: (4 1/2) Excellent Performances - Five Stars Despite Flaws
Review: THIS REVIEW IS BY A JOHN GRISHAM FAN WHO HAS NOT READ THE BOOK. I thoroughly enjoyed this film despite my criticisms at the end of this review, although I did debate whether to round my rating up or down. However, I concluded that the casting was excellent and that several of the performances (including those by Gene Hackman and Dustin Hoffman - two of my favorite actors) are good enough to merit an overall rating of five stars. The characters are interesting, the story is fast moving although with a generally predictable plot despite a few surprise twists, and the actors complement each other well. I am sure that I will enjoy watching this film several times, although I will have to see it again before deciding if it rises to the level of wanting to purchase the DVD. The storyline is very straightforward. The widow of a businessman killed during a shooting rampage in his office decides to sue the gun manufacturer for negligence in the distribution of their products. (Do guns kill or do people?) Attorney Wendell Rohr (Dustin Hoffman) believes he has a very strong case (perhaps even some smoking gun testimony) that actually raises the odds that he might be able to overcome the industry's unblemished record of previously successfully defending against all lawsuits trying to establish manufacturer negligence and liability in such incidents. As the trial approaches and jury selection is about to begin, enter Rankin Fitch (Gene Hackman), jury consultant extraordinaire for the defendants. (Hometown lawyer against city slicker.) We also meet Nick Easter (John Cusack), a seemingly reluctant juror whose plan to influence the jury with the help of his friend (accomplice? business partner?) Marlee (Rachel Weisz) gradually unfolds. As the trial proceeds the intrigue intensifies and it is not clear whose manipulations will eventually succeed - Nick and Marlee or Rankin Fitch. But it is quite clear that this trial is about a lot more than twelve men and women deciding the case only on the basis of unbiased testimony introduced under oath in the courtroom. My reservations and criticisms are as follows. First, this film is meant to deliver an in your face message about the justice system (it is being manipulated) and the gun manufacturers (they are just uncaring, greedy businessmen). In fact, the industry involved in Grisham's novel was tobacco, but since they've now basically lost their battle it is apparently time to target guns. It could have been nuanced and informative, instead of straight propaganda. Second, I would have loved to see this cast in a modern day version of TWELVE ANGRY MEN. Instead, most of the manipulation takes place outside the jury room, and the methodology of Easter's supposed ability to control the deliberations themselves was shortchanged. Third, near the end Fitch and Easter's abilities became so extreme as to become unbelievable. Fourth, the conclusion is basically totally feelgood as an offset to all the intense emotions that we have experienced; it is foreshortened and simplistic. So, if you want realism and subtlety, this movie will not be a five star experience for you. But if you want a film with excellent performances, a story of some complexity, and an exposition of the flaws of our justice system by a knowledgeable and articulate storyteller (Grisham), then you should enjoy this film as much as I did. Tucker Andersen
Rating: 
Summary: Questionable movie and message
Review: I read the book "Runaway Jury" and I enjoyed the plot and suspense as I do most of Mr. Grisham's books. However, the movie was a major disappointment to me. I thought Gene Hackman played a great role. However, changing the major theme from the tobacco industry to an attack on the gun industry was all but inspiring. I think it was Hollywood's ploy to send it's anti-gun (a.k.a. anti-constitution ) message to the hard-working movie-watching world. In addition to portraying the gun-manufactures as the killers of society, the director also attacks the NRA. Same as it did in Lethat Weapon III. Oh well, I hope this is not a reflection of John Grisham's writings to come. with the exeption of Hackman, the acting was so-so.
Rating:
Summary: Frantic Grisham drama that misses the mark more than hits.
Review: Good but not so good John Grisham book made to unfaithful movie has all its targets lock on a great movie but misses them more than hits. Gene Hackman is fine in a role we all know he could do blind folded, and
Dustin Hoffman is great for the expanded character he has (his character is not a major character in the book.) John Cusack is great as well, and Rachel Weisz blows them all a way with a performance that is better than them all. She is the best thing in this film, and with the entire plot rip away for a moratorium for guns, her performance is one of the few good things about the movie. The other things that make this film fairly decent is the setting which is not from the book at all, but New Orleans is a fine setting for any movie, and The score by Christopher Young is a good choice for this movie. Because of Rachel Weisz, The setting and the score, the film is a fair Friday night at the movies, but don't expect much more than that.
Rating: 
Summary: Well Acted but Morally Questionable
Review: In this John Grisham thriller, we are obviously supposed to "root for" Cusak and Wiez's characters. The movie doesn't give us a good reason to, however. Cuzak and Wiez's sleazy tactics are no different from the movie's alleged "villain," played by Gene Hackman. They lie, cheat, steal and bribe in order to achieve the "greater good" of winning a lawsuit against a gun manufacturer. To go along with the protagonsits' rationale for sleazy, crimnal activity, you have to accept the idea that gun companys are the modern equivalent of Nazi death factories. If your thinking about the issue of gun control is a bit less simplistic, well . . . This film wants to have a gun control message, but it doesn't come across that well. The message seems to be that old rich people are the source of all modern evil, whereas struggling young people are the patron saints of the 21st century. It's a moral that's had to swallow and even silly. The ensemble cast delivers great performances, but the material at its core is lame.
Rating:
Summary: Rachel Weisz and Gene hackman are the only reason to see it.
Review: Lazy, and incoherent adaptation to the John Grisham novel not only guts its own story for a stupid plot about responsibility for guns but strips a lot of the characters of their main purpose of the original book. The acting is the main draw here, and the best acting from this ensemble film comes from Gene Hackman, who is a main stay of all the John Grisham movies, and Rachel Weisz, who not only upstages the rest of the cast with her great acting chops but is at the same level with Gene Hackman himself, a rare feet even for a great season actor to do. The movie unfortunately is not as good as they are, and the mystery surrounding the jury can be spoiled by the film's own trailer. Hopefully, the next time they adapt a Grisham book, they would at least stay true to the story of the book.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent and powerful movie
Review: I'm greatly moved and uplifted by this movie. The cinematographic
technique is excellent. Each screen shot is powerful, concise and gripping. The actors are doing their best job. I love John Cusack. He looks calm and clever. What's more, he is a hero in true spirit. Gene Hackman did an excellent job of portraiting the villian. He becomes the most interesting person in the movie.
This movie touches an important topic that's relevant to everyone of us: gun violence. In addition to delivering fun and entertainment, this movie takes a serious look at gun issue, such as illegal selling of assault weapons and easy access to guns by criminals. It also reveals some shocking data, that more than 30,000 people in US die each year from guns. This movie has heart and soul. I highly recommend it.
| 
