Robert Duvall Movie:

				Salesrank: 279250
		Used Price: $6.19
		MPAA Rating: PG-13 (Parental Guidance Suggested) Media: DVD

Editorial Review:
Jonathan Harr's nonfiction bestseller was a shot in the arm for those seeking more than last-minute heroics akin to a John Grisham thriller. Here was a labyrinthine case involving industrial pollution by two highly regarded corporations, contaminated drinking water, and the deaths of innocent children in New England, circa 1981. The case has hundreds of twists and takes our hero--a steady, respectable lawyer named Jan Schlichtmann--and turns his life into personal disaster. Instead of celebrating the law, the story is a maddening and rewarding look at the elusiveness of the courtroom case.

Steven Zaillian, who won an Oscar for adapting Schindler's List and directed Searching for Bobby Fischer, boils Harr's 502-page book into a complete, satisfactory film experience. Book readers will no doubt jeer the streamlining Zaillian had to perform to make the movie flow. Most changes can be quickly defused with the exception of the film's portrait of Schlichtmann. The lawyer has been turned into a movie star, an ultra-slick, cold-hearted gentleman who finds his purpose in working the case. Casting a stalwart John Travolta again diverges from the book, which right from the opening pages showed us a Schlichtmann with feet of clay. As Schlichtmann's partners (including William H. Macy and Tony Shalhoub) descend into the case, the unbridled sense of power and money is abandoned. This case is ultimately about survival.

Zaillian provides an excellent narrative for the sordid facts of personal injury suits, in which money is the only reward for lost or broken lives (deftly introduced in the film's opening scene). Zaillian also stays away from dwelling on the illness of the children involved, focusing on the gaunt faces of the parents who survive (Kathleen Quinlan, James Gandolfini) in controlled anguish. His evil characters--an industrial plant's owner (Dan Hedaya) and a corporate lawyer (another fine acting spin by director Sydney Pollack)--are so human it's terrifying. Zaillian's final ace in the hole is Oscar-nominee Robert Duvall. Perfectly cast as Travolta's opposition, Jerome Facher, Duvall steals scenes with the abbreviated dialogue; he turns a fancy settlement meeting into a farce with one line. Facher is not a callous, love-to-hate-him lawyer like James Mason in The Verdict. Facher represents the law at its brilliant foundation: to best represent one's client. With a taped-together briefcase and dry humor, Facher, not Schlichtmann, is the character who captures us by the film's end. --Doug Thomas

A Civil Action [Region 2] Reviews:
Pretty darned good. Travolta is excellent. A sad portrayal of big-time civil litigation
2009-09-27 - There is a lot in this film that rings true regarding big-time (or any) civil litigation. What resonated with me is the fact that the protagonist law firm really busted its tail for its clients, and ultimately the clients were not grateful. Show me the lawyer who has not experienced this! The film's depiction of the ungrateful lead client is priceless.

Travolta is outstanding as the motivated plaintiff's attorney, and Robert Duvall turns in his customary excellent performance as the Beatrice defense counsel. There are apparently significant differences in Massachusetts rules of civil procedure from those in California (where I practice). The problems that the plaintiff had as depicted in the film would not occur here. (No more details for fear of spoilers.)

Overall, this is an accurate picture of some of the dynamics of contingency civil litigation. If nothing else, it educates the viewer as to why most civil litigation is not done on a contingency basis, contrary to what the public often perceives.

I enjoyed this one and would watch it again, but this is not an uplifting film, which is too bad. RJB.

Good for whole family
2009-05-13 - My family is very cautious about what we watch, and this is the perfect family movie. It is suspensful and entertaining, very heartfelt. Great acting.

Cleaning Up a Mess
2009-05-06 - A voice explains the worth of a person in tort law. A young child is worth the least, a white middle-aged professional is worth the most. A Massachusetts hospital is being sued, the lawyers agree to a settlement after the jury is selected. [Does this match your experience?] Personal injury lawyers are the sole defense against a corporation for the average citizen. The small town of Woburn lost a dozen young children to leukemia. They blame contaminated drinking water, but that may be difficult to prove. Will Jan Schlichtman take this case? It takes a lot of money to bring a case to trial. Fate brings Schlichtman to that industrial site where waste is dumped into the river. The need for a lunch hour is explained (to promote sanity in a hectic environment).

The judge seems biased against personal injury lawyers. Rule 11 is old and ambiguous. Discovery goes on to learn about waster disposal from the industries. One witness knows something. "Did you ever eat peanut butter?" Silicone and TCE are spilled on leather for waterproofing; where does the waste go? The costs for doctors and geologists are high. They must borrow money from a bank for expenses. One employee tells more to Jan. Another man tells what they did: just dumped it in the ground. Most cases are settled not tried. Jan gives his price for a settlement. Too high?

The trial begins. A civil suit is over money for suffering and damage. The witnesses testify. A phone call brings Jan to the judge's chambers. If they can't prove the chemicals reached the wells there is no case. The jury must decide three questions. Jerry talks about Truth and a Court of Law. Will Jan settle for $20 million? Or less? What is the trial about? Money or Justice? There is a settlement. After costs and fees there is $375,000 per family. Will that site be cleaned?

Jan remembers about spilling that glass of water. Somebody had to clean it up, and there will be records. How could a fire ignite water? Jan would file an appeal, the odds are against it. But he can't afford it so he sends the records to the EPA (they have the resources). The result was the closure of the factories in Woburn. Jan filed for bankruptcy. What happened? After paying off debts Jan took on a similar case in Toms River NJ.


Fair
2009-02-18 - The cassette was in very good condition. The story: my wife loves real life movies and if it has her favorite actor... imagine. She loved it.

I repeat >> snalen "snalen" .................
2008-11-02 - I copy and paste >> snalen "snalen" - (another reviewer's commentary here) who expressed it perfectly. "snalen" said:

Jan Schlichtmann (Travolta) is a Boston tort lawyer and something of an ambulance chaser who is initially reluctant to take on an industrial pollution case involving some children dead of leukemia in rural New England. He changes his mind when he realizes the likely defendants are a couple of big companies with particularly deep pockets and smells the possibility of serious money. Over time, however his interest in the case becomes a moral obsession. The cynical becomes a crusader, refusing offers to settle as his company's finances spiral downwards towards bankruptcy.
If you like courtroom dramas, this is highly recommended. It's one of the best specimens of the genre to come out of America since `The Verdict'. It's interesting to compare it to `Erin Brockovich' released a couple of years later. EB is about how a heroic small timer takes on the big boys of corporate America and how her pluck and determination triumphs over all obstacles, something of a legal feelgood movie in other words. Which this, to its great credit, is not. Its central character, for starters, is far more amibivalently likeable: initially just out for a fast buck, moral seriousness has to creep up on him and take him by surprise (perhaps reminding writer/director Zaillian of Oskar Schindler whose story he scripted for Spielberg a few years earlier) and the story's development paints a significantly more ambivalent picture of what pluck and determination can accomplish. It's a highpoint of Travolta's acting career even if he is comprehensively upstaged by Robert Duvall, on brilliant form as his quietly cynical adversary, bigshot lawyer Jerome Facher who knows far better than to look for the truth in a courtroom...

And I add, a VERY entertaining and interesting movie with some redeeming social value, a very provacative movie that should inspire many 'thoughtful' viewers to an enlightened perspective ... that may not have ever been considered before!