Runaway Jury (2003) - Movie Details
NA
| Release Date: | October 17, 2003 |
| On DVD: | February 17, 2004 |
| Genre: | Crime, Drama, Suspense |
| Director: | Gary Fleder |
| Writer: | David Levien, Brian Koppelman |
| Cast: | Rusty Schwimmer, Nestor Serrano, Nick Searcy, Marguerite Moreau, Melora Walters, Bruce McGill, Jennifer Beals, Rachel Weisz, Dustin Hoffman, Gene Hackman, John Cusack |
| Studio: | 20th Century Fox |
| Official site: | runawayjurymovie.com |
| Running Time: | 127 minutes |
| MPAA Rating: | Rated PG-13 for violence, language and thematic elements. |
New Orleans. A mysterious man named Nick Easter is placed on a jury to determine a verdict for or against a major gun company that is being sued by the widow of a man killed in an office shooting. Easter tries to persuade the other jury members into his line of thinking while his girlfriend Marlee attempts to fool the attorneys involved. This is based on the John Grisham novel, though that book was about...
Full synopsis »
Movie Review
Book adaptations are always a scary thing. After all, how can a movie do a book justice? It doesn't happen often, and Runaway Jury is no exception, though it is entertaining enough to suffice. Full movie review »
Comments
No HTML. Be kind - your mom might read what you say.
Home |
Movies |
Movie Reviews |
Blog |
Media |
DVD |
Contests |
Links |
About Us |
Contact Us  Movie reviews © 2003-2010 Erik Samdahl. All other content © of its respected owner. Read our Privacy Policy |
Anonymous says:
January 11, 2004This movie was so obviously biased toward anti-gun Hollywood and left wing liberal thinking that for me it was nothing more than an exercise in "knowing thine enemy".The whole premise of the movie and the ridiculous ending should leave the whole cast,crew and producers ashamed.Sorry, John Grisham,what did they tell you?
Anonymous says:
January 11, 2004Hitler once said words to the effect of, Whoever controls the images [the media] will control the people. Well, in the case of Runaway Jury, Hitler would be proud. What a propaganda piece. As a customer, why pay money to watch a movie that is such a propaganda hit piece that it is disgusting. Why can't Hollywood leave their political messages out of their movies so the rest of us can simply get what we paid for. As for your review, would you suggest that the purpose of all the amendments are to protect the government--of course not.
Anonymous says:
December 27, 2003i'm disappointed in dustin hoffman for his uninformed biased politically correct stance on such an important issue.if he would read a little about how guns save lives and how our founding fathers understood the importance of this right in the hands of the common man, he would see that he is manipulated by the media and the gun control crowd. this movie was a flop. it probably lost money. well deserved. i was a big dustin fan. but not any more. i will never pay to see a movie with him in it again.regards, Bob Orlinski
Anonymous says:
December 21, 2003Hollywood and actors have been selling out to the blood money of the tobacco criminals for years, but John Grisham? Why didn't he say NO! If going after the tobacco people's and their genocide was good enough for his book, why not for the movie? (And when was the last time Grisham changed the subject of one his books so completely?) Sure, I agree that that guns are deadly and have to go, but let's stick to the DRUG that is addictive, defective and lethal, when used as intended! After this debacle, I will stay away from any more of Grisham's books and movies.
Anonymous says:
November 5, 2003Wow! When will Hollywood start entertaining us and stop trying to brainwash us. The only thing this movie had going for it is the acting. I walk away with the feeling, once again, it wasn't about my entertainment, but Hollywood using their (BIG) money to push their agenda about guns and BIG business. Excuse me, but I think they fit right into that BIG business category. Why don't we stop blaming the guns and let the individual take responsibility for their poor choices. The Green River serial killer didn't have to use anything but his hands to murder 48 helpless women. He would have killed with or without a gun. The gun is not the issue, it is the heart of the individual. Are you going to take everyones steak knives away? Sometimes our level of intelligence is definitely misguided. Kay Thomas