Glen F
why is this movie so poorly rated? it involves plenty of human emotions. death of a child, arrogance, recognition of arrogance, redemption, etc. You have James Gandolfini in a good role. Bobby Duval is excellent as is John Travolta and Sydney Pollack and others. I think it's a wonderful movie and I bought it on DVD and watch it every time it's on TV. Give it a viewing.
kapelusznik18
***SPOILERS**** Despite being based on a true story the movie " A Civil Action" seems to get mired in its own screenplay that by the time it ends is when it gets its most confusing. Ambulance chasing Boston shyster Jan "Slick" Schlichtmann, John Travolta, gets himself involved in a toxic waste dumping case that over the last 30 years has cost a number of children in the small town of Woburn MA. to come down and die of deadly leukemia. At first not all that eager to take the case Jan soon, by checking out the dumping of toxins in a local river, smells big bucks and decides to file a major law suite against the small tanning company own by multi billion Beatricefoods and W.R Grace Chemical for major damages to the people of the town.Right from the start W. R Grace was willing to make an out of court settlement with Jan for a cool 20 million but not apologize publicly for it's actions that leads to a falling out among some of Jan's clients. Who then, against the strong advice of his fellow firm of lawyers, Jan goes the whole nine yards despite the obstacles he faces in going on trial. That in the end leads to a costly "victory" for him where he ends up going bankrupt together with the members of his three man law firm. It was defense lawyer Jerome Facher, Robert Duvall, who's endless and expensive holding actions in court that left Jan's law firm not only bankrupt but in debt for some 8 million dollars. The saving grace to Jan's self made financial disaster was that finally someone who worked at the tanning plant was willing to talk and thus bail him out of the mess he made for himself.*****SPOILERS**** After almost two hours of suffering through the movie a happy ending was finally on the horizon but by then nobody really seems to care not even thous involved in the law suite. You had to have a Harvard as well as Yale law degree to even grasp what the movie was all about in just how complicated it was with its endless court scenes that never seemed to go anywhere. It was good that in the end justice was done but even those who benefited from it like the major complaint in the case Anne Anderson,Kathleen Quinlan, seemed to have lost, like those of us watching, all interest in it! There's also a pre Sopranos James Gandolfini as W. R Grace employee Al, the father of 8 children, Love who among others breaks the case wide open by finally admitting that the company he works for has been responsible for polluting the countryside and poisoning the people. As for the spaced out looking Al he looked as if he himself was poisoned or on drugs in showing almost no emotion, like a Zombie, in almost all the scenes that he was in!
mentalgirl12
First of all, if you want a rehash of the plot, go read another review. This is a great movie. It's not your typical courtroom drama, but more of a legal drama. And it's a bit more realistic than what we're used to on the screen (but only a little), and some don't feel comfortable with stories told like it was. (The reason I say 'a little' is because I used to work for lawyers and I can't see any of those guys going that far out on a limb for a case.) But this was a true story and the filmmakers really stuck to the truth. It doesn't have the usual courtroom scenes, yet it still depicts what a hellish, slippery slope (and costly one) it is to win justice for your client in the only venue permitted: a court of law. I don't believe there's ever been a film that's told this story quite this way before.I always wondered why our protagonist in the film (that's Jan) took the case in the first place. I always assumed it was forced on him, but don't know where that came from. (I'll probably have to look it up in the book since I don't own the movie.) If it was voluntary, he had to have seen dollar signs in it somewhere. But I don't know because Jan doesn't know. He doesn't even remember the case, let alone why he took it. He sure doesn't remember Anne Anderson when she calls him on the air of a radio show, and asks him why he doesn't return his client's phone calls, which makes him look, sound, and feel like a real jerk.And exactly when he realized Beatrice Foods was Granddaddy to a plethora of stuff that America consumes daily, that's fuzzy too. It's after he's been humiliated on the radio that we see he's got the file and talking to one of his partners about Beatrice Foods' deep pockets. And his partner (I think it was Macy) tells him that kind of case is just a "black hole" and he should get rid of it. So he goes out to Woburn to meet with the families for the first time (he's had the case 2 years!) supposedly to get rid of them. But after hearing their stories, he can't do it. He's too much of a coward. I also think he's embarrassed by their unbelievable loss and suffering; maybe he feels somewhat sorry for them. But I really believe that the increasing obsession he soon develops over securing the highest number he can for his clients isn't due to a sudden awakening of conscience, or a heart burgeoning with pity, which is what it looks like on the outside. But there's been no character change yet. His anger grows, but it has little to do with the crimes committed by the big corporations against his clients. What really jerks his chain more than anything at this point are those pompous defense attorneys; how they act and how they treat him makes him furious. He's consumed with beating them down and knocking them out of the game for good really because of hurt pride. Jan Schlictman is no hero. One reviewer aptly wrote that he had "feet of clay." He's a hot-shot. I wouldn't say he "loves the law;" I would say he loves having knowledge of the law which allows him to manipulate it, and that gives him power. He doesn't appear to respect the law. We see him getting a speeding ticket on the way to Woburn, and again — from the same cop — on the way back. As he takes the ticket and insolently slams it into his glove compartment that's just teeming with others, he resembles a rebellious teenager. And the filmmakers made sure to show us that early in the film.In my opinion, his character starts to change ― and here comes a spoiler ― the moment near the end when he picks up Grace's number off the floor. (That part always kills me!) His partners have read him the riot act and walked out on him. He's sitting on the floor, his body slumped over the phone as he picks it up and dials. His body language reflects utter despair. Note: To those who get bored when there's not enough action, and/or can't tell what's happening with a character because there's no dialog to explain, learn to read the actor's body language. If he or she is an above-average actor, (and you are somewhat intelligent), you should be able to get it.As for Oscar nominations, for once I can see why the Academy didn't nominate Travolta for his acting here. I compared this performance with Travolta's take on Tony Manero in "Saturday Night Fever," and again with Vincent Vega in "Pulp Fiction." For me, it just doesn't compare. He's not that skillful at the underplaying thing. Robert Duvall's nomination didn't surprise me.Having read the book, I thought the writers accomplished the ending fairly well, even if they omitted a heck of a lot from the book's ending. (It seems to me the families actually did get to testify, but I could be wrong.) There are too many movies that are dumb, pointless, predictable, and a waste of two hours, with too few being clever, absorbing, stimulating, and different. I can never pass this up whenever it's on. But it bores most of my friends, too— probably for the same reasons others have stated — no action, no high drama. Also, Travolta underplays his performance for the most part, (which allows Duvall all that scene-stealing) and I think that was an excellent decision for that role, whose ever it was. And whenever an actor does that, sometimes people don't get it; they think nothing's going on, that the star is holding back. Trust me, they did this one right.
edwagreen
Excellent film with Robert Duvall and John Travolta riveting as opposing lawyers in a case involving leukemia victims suing due to contamination of water.The story shows how the Travolta character got caught up in this mayhem. Of course, we see corporate greed at its worst along with their high priced lawyers who will do anything to hush up the case, even if that means not allowing the families of the victims to testify in court.It really comes down to at what price shall there be a settlement. The defense led by Travolta is driven to poverty by how much money they have to spend in conducting this lawsuit.Very good action drama. Duvall, again, is memorable in his sarcastic, but cunning performance.
