Rating: 
Summary: I watched it because of Debra Winger.
Review: "Robert Redford...got snookered badly" in this movie? What about Debra Winger? She is too good for this film, and the behind-the-scenes friction between her and Redford are only noticeable on-screen because of him. As usual, Debra's a pro. The movie is totally mediocre, though, even for a light-weight comedy. And what's up with Daryl Hannah? I was only a kid back in the 80's, so I don't remember. Was that woman actually taken seriously?Anyhow, if you're a serious fan of any of the actors involved, you may enjoy this. Otherwise, don't do it.
Rating:
Summary: I watched it because of Debra Winger.
Review: "Robert Redford...got snookered badly" in this movie? What about Debra Winger? She is too good for this film, and the behind-the-scenes friction between her and Redford are only noticeable on-screen because of him. As usual, Debra's a pro. The movie is totally mediocre, though, even for a light-weight comedy. And what's up with Daryl Hannah? I was only a kid back in the 80's, so I don't remember. Was that woman actually taken seriously? Anyhow, if you're a serious fan of any of the actors involved, you may enjoy this. Otherwise, don't do it.
Rating:
Summary: I watched it because of Debra Winger.
Review: "Robert Redford...got snookered badly" in this movie? What about Debra Winger? She is too good for this film, and the behind-the-scenes friction between her and Redford are only noticeable on-screen because of him. As usual, Debra's a pro. The movie is totally mediocre, though, even for a light-weight comedy. And what's up with Daryl Hannah? I was only a kid back in the 80's, so I don't remember. Was that woman actually taken seriously? Anyhow, if you're a serious fan of any of the actors involved, you may enjoy this. Otherwise, don't do it.
Rating: 
Summary: Great movie.
Review: I'm a 17 year old movie fan, and just to put my two cents in, I think this movie is awesome. It's not well known, but even so, I watch it every time it's on television. Thumbs up.
Rating: 
Summary: ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Review: If you're an insomniac.........I've found the cure!
Rating: 
Summary: AMUSING ROMP THROUGH, WELL, TOO MANY THINGS
Review: It doesn't stink as much as some reviewers have foisted off on this site, but don't go expecting a tight plot.
Somewhere along the way the scriptwriters seem to have gone berserk with expensive attempts to be all things to all people -- goofball romantic comedy, courtroom melodrama, high-octane thriller with flaming pyrotechnics. The overloaded plot revolves around an assistant D.A. who gets involved with a defense lawyer to solve a convoluted case that includes arson, art robbery, insurance fraud, even murder.
It's almost as if the plot was not the point. The 22-carat charisma of Robert Redford and the starry-eyed charm of Debra Winger is what keeps the film afloat with some delicious chemistry. Daryl Hannah is very effective as the spaced-out daughter, who spends most of the movie seeming sexy and/or guilty.
The whole mishmash ends up significantly less than the sum of its parts, which is sad because with only slightly better editing it stood on the brink of being an excellent film. That, it isn't.
Rating:
Summary: Comedy???
Review: My feeling is that "Legal Eagles" works better if thought of as a murder mystery rather than as a comedy. The movie begins with a birthday party that ends in a fire, killing a little girl's artist/father. Hardly a laughing matter. There is a secondary story line that plays off of the budding relationship between rival lawyers played by Redford and Winger, and it involves some mildly funny moments, but the main focus is always on missing paintings and, as things develop, murder victims. The laughs are chuckles, not belly laughs. "Beverly Hills Cop" this isn't. The romance is tepid, too, but the acting is good and the mystery is involved enough to keep you interested. As a light murder mystery, this film works reasonably well. It's not memorable, but it's OK.
Rating:
Summary: a fine comedy, one of the best
Review: There no stronger words to define this comedy. It's fine, surprising and all the actors reach the summit of the art. It's not a Grisham's novel with an unbelieved story with FBI and CIA all around. It's lawyers games but those lawyers are human with a normal life. Just look at the play of Redford in the court. If you want to see the most fantastic example of the perfect attorney, just print this scene in your memory. I don't count the number of times I view this tape.
Rating:
Summary: Worth a Second Look
Review: This film, which came out in the mid-'80's, actually ages well, as it strives to emulate classic Hollywood screwball comedies in the vein of Howard Hawks and David Cukor. Director Reitman aimed high, giving this movie a sense of good, clean fun, and weaves an intricate plot that while being a tad hard to follow, thankfully does not insult the viewer's intelligence. While it has a few week moments, especially the last third of the movie, it's not that far off the mark. Redford and Winger, who play opposing lawyers, do have a certain chemistry, and the plot is wacky and convincing enough to keep the viewer interested. Redford, as usual, is terrific and those fans hungering for the comic genious that he demonstrated back during his early days of "Barefoot in the Park" and "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid" will be pleased. Same for Winger, (surprisingly!), who underplays her eccentric character with a crackerjack deadpan line delivery. There are some wonderful laugh-out-loud moments, such as Redford and Winger's simultaneous cases of insomnia in their apartments the night before their case goes to trial - he gets up and tap dances; she raids the refrigerator. The supporting cast is equally fine: the stunning Daryl Hannah continues her trend of playing spacey but loveable characters, Christine Baranski and Brian Dennehy show up in stock-character supporting roles, and Terence Stamp plays an uptight art museum currator. If you like "Bringing Up Baby," "The Philadelphia Story," "His Girl Friday," or "Adam's Rib," you will probably appreciate this movie.
Rating: 
Summary: Low key but enjoyable
Review: This is Ivan Reitman's first film after his mega hit "Ghostbusters". Some will even recognize an exterior or two that was used in both films. I will always remember this film because I got a pass to a preview screening for it from my art teacher. This was before preview screenings were done as much as they were now by radio stations and more. It was a bit of a special thing in my mind. I remember enjoying it on a interplay between Redford and Winger level and thinking of it as a good but not great movie. About a month later, the film opened to mediocre reviews and business. After that, the movie would turn up on TV and when I caught it, I found myself seeing it thorugh to the end (only to be surprised when the TV version had an altered ending). Anyway, Legal Eagles became that "old comfortable shoe" of a movie that when it popped up on cable (and for a while it often did)I would go "ahhhh" and keep on watching. I would've gotten it on VHS, but I was all too aware of how the movie was cropped and zoomed and that was good enough to watch on TV but not good enough to buy. I would wait until I got a laserdisc player and get it in widescreen (laserdiscs, those things that look like big DVD's before they had DVD's) The rest is history of course, then came DVD. When I got a DVD player, a widescreen Legal Eagles DVD was available for about [44] so there you go. This was the first release (from Image) though, single layer non-anamorphic widescreen and no extras. The single layer made for some noticable compression artifacts when I viewed it on my newer high tech TV (especially on Daryl Hannah's face during her performance piece). Also, the audio on the disc seemed a bit weak. But then, just a couple weeks ago, I saw the newer release for Legal Eagles. Dual layer, anamorphic widescreen (which my new TV can take advantage of)plus a trailer and a vintage featurette. Terrific. This transfer is much improved from the first release, though it still has a bit of softness and grain to it. The soundtrack is improved from the first release too, more accurately reproducing the Dolby Surround mix I remember hearing in that preview screening. Please note that this new release has misprints on the specifications on the back. It lists the video as "1.85 to 1 anamorphic widescreen" when it's actually 2.35 to 1 Anamorphic. It also lists the audio as "2.0 mono" when it is actually 2.0 Dolby Surround. So, people thinking of picking up this on DVD remember to get the updated version (with the blue tone background on the cover) instead of the old one (with the pinkish tone background on the cover).
| 
