Dr. Ram Mahohar Lohiya National Law University 2018-2019: S: E P O: M R

DR. RAM MAHOHAR LOHIYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY 2018-2019

SUBJECT: ENGLISH PROJECT ON: MOVIE REVIEW

SUBMITTED BY:

SUBMITTED TO:

Kushagra Tripathi Enrollment number - 180101074 (English) B.A.LL.B (Hons.) Semester-II

Dr. Alka Singh Assistant Professor

Page | 1

RMLNLU, Lucknow

Declaration I hereby declare that the project work entitled “Movie Review” submitted to the Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, Lucknow is a record of an original work done by me under the guidance of Dr. Alka Singh, Assistant Professor, English , Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University and this project work is submitted in the partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of B.A. LLB. (hons). The results embodied in this thesis have not been submitted to any other University or Institute for the award of any degree or diploma.

Page | 2

Table of Contents Declaration............................................................................................................................................2 Acknowledgement.................................................................................................................................4 Movie Review: The Verdict...................................................................................................................5 Introduction.......................................................................................................................................5 Statement of the Problem......................................................................................................................6 Aim....................................................................................................................................................6 Research Methodology......................................................................................................................6 Review...................................................................................................................................................7 Storyline:...........................................................................................................................................8 Implication:.......................................................................................................................................8 Movie Review: The Lincoln Lawyer...................................................................................................10 Introduction.....................................................................................................................................10 Statement of the Problem.....................................................................................................................11 Aim......................................................................................................................................................11 Research Methodology........................................................................................................................11 Review.................................................................................................................................................12

Page | 3

Acknowledgement I would like to express my gratitude towards all those whose help and constant support the project would not have reached its current facet. Foremost I would like to thank Dr. Alka Singh for her kind guidance and for quenching my queries on many doubts and technicalities which I came up during the making of this project. I would take advantage of this situation to thank the Hon’ble Vice Chancellor, Dr. Gurdip Singh, esteemed Dean (Academics) Prof. Dr. C.M. Jariwala and Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National University for providing me with such an enriching opportunity to work and research on this topic. This project would not have seen the light of the day without the constant direction and guidance of my parents and guardians to whom I owe a lot. I would also like to use this opportunity to thank my brother in helping me out with the nitty-gritty of formatting. I would also like to thank all of my friends and seniors who aided me along the way. I must also extend my gratitude to the library and library personnel who provided me with research material and good books to work upon and the distinguished authors, jurists and journals for providing in the public domain such invaluable information.

Page | 4

Movie Review: The Verdict Introduction The Verdict is a 1982 American courtroom drama film starring Paul Newman as Frank Galvin, Charlotte Rampling as Laura Fischer, Jack Warden as Mickey Morrissey, James Mason as Ed Concannon, Milo O'Shea as Judge Hoyle and Lindsay Crouse as Kaitlin Costello Price. The film, which was directed by Sidney Lumet, was adapted by David Mamet from the novel by Barry Reed. It is about a down-on-his-luck alcoholic lawyer who takes a medical malpractice case to improve his own situation, but discovers along the way that he is doing the right thing. The Verdict garnered critical acclaim and box office success. The film was nominated for five Academy Awards, including Best Actor in a Leading Role (Paul Newman), Best Actor in a Supporting Role (James Mason), Best Director (Sidney Lumet), Best Picture and Best Adapted Screenplay (David Mamet). Frank Galvin is a down-on-his luck lawyer, reduced to drinking and ambulance chasing. Former associate Mickey Morrissey reminds him of his obligations in a medical malpractice suit that he himself served to Galvin on a silver platter: all parties willing to settle out of court. Blundering his way through the preliminaries, he suddenly realizes that perhaps after all the case should go to court: to punish the guilty, to get a decent settlement for his clients, and to restore his standing as a lawyer. A lawyer sees the chance to salvage his career and self-respect by taking a medical malpractice case to trial rather than settling. Frank has a new spring in his step, enough that he attracts the attention of Laura Fischer, the two who begin a relationship. Despite having whatever the truth is on his side, that truth which he does not know, and having an expert witness of his own, Frank has an uphill battle in that the Archdiocese has retained the services of Ed Concannon, a high priced lawyer who has a large team of associates whose task is to help Concannon and the Archdiocese win at any cost. Concannon's task seems even easier as Judge Hoyle, the presiding judge, is already biased against Frank for taking the case to court.

Page | 5

Statement of the Problem The movie takes a hard look at the human havoc wrought by institutional incompetence and corruption; it examines the ways in which professionals abuse those whom they serve; and it puts forth the value of idealism in a world tainted by cynicism.

Aim The artful cinematography of Andrzej Bartkowiak accents the film's theme of the forces of light doing battle against the forces of darkness. How a man rises to an important challenge, shakes off the cobwebs, resuscitates his law practice and fights furiously to help good triumph over evil. As near miraculous transformations go, this one's not bad at all, considering the fact that it's accomplished in only slightly over two hours' screen time.

Research Methodology The research methodology is purely analytical. The facts and information already available have been analysed to make a critical evaluation.

Page | 6

Review The title of this movie is deceiving. THE VERDICT suggests a courtroom drama, something like TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD, or INHERIT THE WIND. It does have some riveting court scenes, but what happens outside of court and to Paul Newman is the real attraction here. The title not only refers to the inevitable decision of the important case of the film, but also to how the Newman character is going to live the rest of his life. Should he sell out and take the easy settlement, or take the highly regarded archdiocese of Boston to court for real justice. These are the questions Newman must face in this profound drama that seems more like a picture of the 70's than an 80's film. Director Sidney Lumet has dealt with the legal system before in his first film, 12 ANGRY MEN. He takes it to a more personal level and Paul Newman, one of the finest actors of the past 40 years, is the person to do it. He is a legend and he bares his soul as attorney Frank Galvin, a lonely, corrupt drunk whose license to practice law is hanging by a thread. Jack Warden plays his trusty assistant who gets him a case that could help Frank change his life. Warden, however, has had enough. Newman plays an excellent drunk, even cracking an egg into an 8am beer to start his day. This is a dim looking movie, shot during a cold winter in Boston. There are no great shots, or even any emotionally-rousing speeches, but this is Lumet's style. It is plodding and we see into the life of a lawyer on the ropes. James Mason is perfect as the slimy defense lawyer. Newman is constantly underestimated because of past failures. He is a drunk, but he still has some tricks up his sleeve. "The Verdict" is simply one of the best legal dramas ever done. Of course much of what happens in the movie is unrealistic and wouldn't happen in a real case but the movie isn't a study in courtroom procedure (watch the fantastic "Anatomy of a Murder" for that) it is a study about redemption and in that respect it excels. This movie captures Paul Newman's finest screen performance and that alone makes it an important movie. The scenes where Newman hardly says anything show how great an actor he is---his look of self-loathing when he's thrown out of the funeral home, his palsied hand and lost look when he's trying to drink his whiskey, his panic when Charlotte Rampling lambastes him for being a failure. Then throw into that his terrific courtroom scenes, his arguments with the judge in chambers, it is just a sensational performance all around. The level of acting is high all around in this movie. James Mason was Oscar nominated for playing the silky smooth, totally corrupt defense attorney. Jack Warden shines as Frank Galvin's world-weary former law partner. Lindsey Crouse has a small role as a nurse but is given the most powerful and dramatic moment in the entire movie. Her cross-examination by James Mason is where the movie really shines and shows that Paul Newman can keep his ego in check. How many movies give the most powerful and dramatic moment of the film to one of the secondary players? How many lead actors would be willing to just sit there quiet in a chair while a bit player and the second male lead share the big moment? It was a bold decision by both Newman, director Sidney Lumet and writer David Mamet and it is unforgettable. The movie shows the two extremes of the practice of law. James Mason's win-at-all-costs cheating and Paul Newman getting so emotionally wrapped up in the case that he is no longer protecting his client's interests and instead is out to settle his own personal scores. A great, great movie. Page | 7

Storyline: Frank Galvin was once a promising Boston lawyer with a bright future ahead. An incident early in his career in which he was trying to do the right thing led to him being fired from the prestigious law firm with which he was working, almost being disbarred, and his wife leaving him. Continually drowning his sorrows in booze, he is now an ambulance chasing lawyer, preying on the weak and vulnerable, and bending the truth whenever necessary to make what few dollars he has, as he has only had a few cases in the last few years, losing the last four. His only friend in the profession is his now retired expartner, Mickey Morrissey, who gets Frank a case, his fee solely a percentage of what his clients are awarded. The case should net Frank tens of thousands of dollars by settling out of court, that money which would at least get him back on his feet. It is a negligence suit brought on behalf of Deborah Ann Kaye by her sister and brother-in-law, Sally and Kevin Doneghy, against St. Catherine Labouré Hospital, operated by the Archdiocese of Boston, and Drs. Towler and Marks. Kaye was admitted to the hospital for what should have been a routine delivery, but something that happened while Kaye was on the operating room table led to her brain being deprived of oxygen, resulting in permanent brain damage, and Kaye now being in a totally vegetative state requiring hospitalization for the rest of her life. Frank eventually learns that the cause seems to be that Dr. Towler, the anesthesiologist and an expert in the field, used the incorrect anesthetic for the situation. However, all but one person that was in the operating room that day has provided depositions that nothing improper occurred in the operating room. The one holdout is the operating room head nurse, Maureen Rooney, who is not talking, period, to Frank or the other side. Upon seeing the state Kaye is in, Frank unilaterally decides to do what he believes is the right thing by declining the lucrative out of court settlement offered by the Archdiocese and take the case to court. In doing so, he hopes the truth that the hospital and the doctors truly were negligent comes to light. Feeling that this case may be a turning point in his life, Frank has a new spring in his step, enough that he attracts the attention of Laura Fischer, the two who begin a relationship. Despite having whatever the truth is on his side, that truth which he does not know, and having an expert witness of his own, Frank has an uphill battle in that the Archdiocese has retained the services of Ed Concannon, a high priced lawyer who has a large team of associates whose task is to help Concannon and the Archdiocese win at any cost. Concannon's task seems even easier as Judge Hoyle, the presiding judge, is already biased against Frank for taking the case to court.

Implication: There is a moment in "The Verdict" when Paul Newman walks into a room and shuts the door and trembles with anxiety and with the inner scream that people should get off his back. No one who has ever been seriously hung over or needed a drink will fail to recognize the moment. It is the key to his character in "The Verdict," a movie about a drinking alcoholic who tries to pull himself together for one last step at salvaging his self-esteem. It has a strong implication based on the following terms: 

Faith: Despite the illegal dealings of the defence team, the unjust behaviour of the judge, the credibility problems of the defence “expert,” etc., the jury accepts there was a wrongdoing by the defendants without certain proof of their guilt and correctly finds them guilty. It clearly shows that sometimes, people should get their faith rewarded.



Morality: Frank decides to bring the case to court because he believes he can get a larger award—it just isn’t right what they did to that poor young woman; he also doesn’t want the

Page | 8

physicians, people who are supposed to help other people, to be free to continue harming others through negligence. 

Responsibility: Frank felt it was his responsibility to reveal the jury tampering for which he was almost disbarred, he feels responsible for the comatose woman which almost gets him kicked off of the case, and he thinks he is responsible for Laura’s interest in him which almost loses the case because she is a spy for the defence team.



Psychology: Laura “psyches-out” both Frank and Mick. She lures Frank by playing hard to get and worms her way into his heart, being something she is not. She staves off Mick’s doubts by being assertive and open about his suspicions of her.

Page | 9