A Time to Kill

On T List of Movie Reviews

(For optimum viewing, adjust the zoom level of your browser to 125%.)

A Time to Kill (1996)

Rate: 7
Viewed: 4/04, 5/08, 10/23

TimeKIll
5/08: Unlike many Joel Schumacher's pretentious artsy pictures that were loaded with 80's clichés, A Time to Kill is a serious courtroom picture that may be the best adaptation of a John Grisham novel ever.

A big treat is the number of outstanding performances turned in by the cast. Forget Dave Wooderson of Dazed and Confused. Matthew McConaughey shows what a real talent he is. The closing speech for the trial is the greatest of his career. I won't be surprised if he wins an Oscar one day.

I have a strong dislike for Sandra Bullock, but she isn't bad this time around. It helps a lot when she's less of Sandra Bullock and more of somebody else. Kevin Spacey, Samuel L. Jackson, and Oliver Platt are fun to watch, but it's Patrick McGoohan as Judge Noose who steals the show because his character is easy to hate.

What I like is how the outside forces are put together to create an explosive case for the media to jump into. It's the primary reason why 150 minutes went so fast. I found myself laughing when Kurtwood Smith announced himself as "Stump Sisson": a pure redneck name if there's one. It's even funnier when he's set on fire. Of course, nobody but the KKK cared when his death was announced.

All in all, A Time to Kill may be guilty of being dramatic at times, but it's a compelling picture about serious issues.

10/23: What had bothered me about A Time to Kill for the longest time is Jake Brigance's closing argument.

So, I read the book first to determine the origin and whether or not he made such statement because lawyers are prohibited from appealing to the jury's emotion instead of logic. It's also known as the golden rule argument which starts out like this: "I want you to place yourself in the victim's position and imagine..." In the book, the tactic was actually employed by one of the jurors during their deliberations which is fine by me and not illegal.

Then, I was surprised that Kevin Spacey as Rufus Buckley chose to remain silent throughout when he's within his rights to object incessantly, interrupting the flow of the closing argument, hence ruining Jake Brigance's credibility. At that point, there was enough grounds for Judge Noose to declare a mistrial. When Brigance mentioned the circumstances surrounding Dr. Bass' felony conviction, it should've been stricken for "facts not in evidence."

Buckley could've done the same thing when Brigance brought up the rape, but he let the door wide open by mentioning it first during the opening argument in the book when there's no reason for him to do so because Billy Ray Cobb and Pete Willard hadn't had their day in court. Therefore, the trial on hand was supposed to be concerned with whether or not Carl Lee Hailey killed them, and if he's found guilty, then it's murder in the first degree and twice at that.

Anyway, back to the overall story, the book isn't terrible, although flawed and slow-paced, that's well-sketched in terms of characters, setting, and plot, but I didn't like Jake Brigance who preferred to drink as lot as possible during the trial when he should've acted professional for the sake of his doomed client. I give props to Matthew McConaughey for making him tolerable to bear, but I won't go so far as to label his performance Paul Newman-like (The Verdict). His character was only concerned with the final verdict given he didn't have much to work with in spite of his client's obvious guilt. The hero stuff he pulled off like punching people and throwing the dynamite stick into the air is bananas.

The rest of everybody else is perfectly cast. However, the biggest mistake is the misapplication of Ellen "Row Ark." Although I hate Sandra Bullock, she's right for the role, but how her character is set up is all wrong and she even makes her first appearance too early. Adding insult to my intelligence is she breaking and entering Dr. Rodeheaver's office when her specialty was research, something she did well in the book which aided the defense's case. On the other hand, I'm disappointed to see a minimized role for Charles S. Dutton as Sheriff Ozzie Walls because he played an important part in the book. And don't get me started with the sweaty Ashley Judd who's so awful and annoying that she should've stayed put in Wilmington, North Carolina, the rest of the time. Ditto for Brenda Fricker who has more screen time than necessary.

I'll say the movie captures approximately 70% of the book which isn't bad. There are slight differences here and there, but most of them aren't glaring to get worked over although the word "nigger" was freely used by almost everybody (I suppose that's how it was in the South back then?). Also, it's not emotional enough, especially through Samuel L. Jackson. What's hard to go past is the inclusion of Kiefer Sutherland whose character played no role in the book. I can obviously tell the relation to his father Donald by looks, so you've got Donald playing Lucien on one side and Kiefer as Billy Ray's brother on the other; this style of redneck breeding has to be incredible, isn't it? How about the idiot kid coming out of the courthouse to announce: "He's innocent"? Yeah, sure...then, it automatically means somebody else shot and killed the two rednecks. Now, I wonder who that was.

As for the case, how would I have decided? Well, if the story took place during the same time as In the Heat of the Night, okay...I can see how this will make sense, and therefore, the title should be A Right to Kill. But it's the 90's and that kind of thing was over by then. So, I can't sympathize although I understand where the father is coming from. Now, I want you to close your eyes and think back to how the whole thing started. Then, I'm going to change one tiny variable: what if the rapists were black? Do you care like before? Of course not. In fact, the movie would've never been made in the first place because the narrative isn't as interesting.

All in all, A Time to Kill may have a great all-star cast and a compelling story, but let's face it: Carl Lee Hailey wasn't insane because he knew what he was doing and only got off the hook by jury nullification.