<% ImgSrc = "/images/header_tv_part.GIF" %>

"THE CHAMBER"
112 minutes, Rated M
Available on videocassette


What’s it about?

Have you seen the previous John Grisham film adaptation, "A Time To Kill"? If not, be warned – you might want to read our review of that movie before you make it your all-important Sunday night video. Like that movie, "The Chamber" takes us through the heartland of American racism, where nothing is forgiven and evil lurks around every corner.

Adam Hall is a young Chicago lawyer who ventures down South to represent a Death Row inmate. In a flashback we see the horrendous race crime that put his client there – of course, there’s more here than initially meets the eye. The convict, one Sam Cayhall, is the young lawyer’s long lamented grandfather.

Cayhall was a member in good standing of the Ku Klux Klan when he committed the crime, the bombing of the office of a Jewish civil rights lawyer. Unfortunately for everyone, including Cayhall, the lawyer’s children were in the building at the time of the explosion. Was that a deliberate part of the scheme, or did the timer attached to the bomb malfunction? To make it worse, the lawyer later committed suicide.

The execution is imminent, and Hall is there to take us through the final appeal processes. This being America, there are scenes of nutty protestors outside the prison, waving American flags in praise of a judicial system that will send a man to the gas chamber (hence the film’s title). Along the way we learn a lot, in fact too much, about the gruesome history of Cayhall’s family. The biggest skeleton in a very large closet is revealed by his Aunt Lee.

Adam Hall is a young lawyer who wants to break the bonds of racism that have infected his family like a genetic disease. He uses terms like "African American", much to his grandfather’s chagrin and sometimes disdainful amusement. So there’s the "good-guy/bad guy routine", the liberal versus the racist, and the young whippersnapper at the heels of the vulgar old patriarch. Not to mention the completely unprepared lawyer at odds with the finest minds of American jurisprudence as he wends his way through the maze of the appeals process.

The pluses

Gene Hackman, as always. And Faye Dunaway’s impressive Southern accent.

The scene of the explosion is well staged and believable. The mother’s anguish is dignified and real, and the death of her innocent children stays with us as a voice of conscience, just in case we’re swayed by Cayhall’s sly rhetoric.

The minuses

Some of the racist rantings are a bit hard to take. Yes, there’s a point of sorts to be made, and we are presented with a moral dilemma as to the character of Sam Cayhall, but there is not enough meat in this plot to justify the obnoxious content. Are we meant to feel sorry for Sam as he makes his way to that great Klan meeting in the sky? This reviewer, for one, found it difficult to erase the soundtrack of hate that poured from Cayhall’s mouth for much of the movie.

There is too much made of the family’s history, and not enough of the legal process that will decide Sam’s fate. No, we’re not saying this because we’re lawyers. In the book, Grisham is able to develop the thrilling race against the clock as appeals are rejected and the execution nears. There is no time for this in the film, and instead we are left with the tawdry history of the Cayhall’s in all its gory detail.

Not nearly enough to keep us guessing.

The legal point

Unfortunately we don’t learn too much about the appeals process for prisoners awaiting execution. The novel by John Grisham is a lot more helpful in this fascinating area.

Here in Australia we imagine an execution would be big news, but in the U.S. it’s almost commonplace (in the wider scheme of things). This year they can expect at least 75 executions.

However, there have been hiccups on the way to the gallows (electric chair etc) for proponents of the death penalty. In 1972 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty was "cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the 8th and 14th Amendments". States rewrote their statutes to get around the "cruel" aspect of the death penalty by giving more guidance and standards to juries before they sentenced a person to death. In 1976 the Supreme Court ruled in favour of a number of rewritten statutes, and since then more than 300 prisoners have been executed.

The manner of execution differs between states. Mostly it is now accomplished by lethal injection, but electrocution and hanging remain in operation in a few states.

There usually needs to be an element of aggravation to invite a death sentence (usually murder) – for instance, brutality or the number of victims. The capital murder trial has two stages – in the first stage there is a trial of the facts (did the defendant do it?); in the second stage, having been found guilty, the sentence is decided. The jury has to decide whether the defendant should be executed or jailed for life. At this stage the jury will learn about the defendant’s past, previous criminal record etc.

It is then we move into the "appeal" phase. After the sentence of death, there are appeals through at least four jurisdictions, where judges look at the transcripts of the original trial to decide whether a mistake was made by the first trial judge. Finally the prisoner can appeal to the Governor of the state – this is what happens in "The Chamber" (we’re not revealing the outcome here).

In Australia there is no longer a death penalty in any state. This is the result of a 1973 Act of Parliament known as the Death Penalty Abolition Act. It states that a person is not liable to be punished by death for any offence.

Who put it together?

Screenwriter, William Goldman has a pedigree that would make most movie writers give the game away: "Butch Cassidy", "All The President’s Men", "Princess Bride", "Marathon Man", "Maverick", "Misery" (amongst others).

Director, James Foley has a number of good projects behind him, including the star studded "Glengarry Glen Ross" (well worth a look on video if you like tense character-driven drama), "Reckless", "Who’s That Girl" and "Fear".

Who’s who?

Chris O’Donnell is wholesomeness personified. He got a big break at the age of 17 opposite the wonderful Jessica Lange in an otherwise forgotten film "Men Don’t Leave". You first got to know him as the kid daunted by his association with Al Pacino (who won an Oscar) in "Scent of a Woman". Then yet another remake of "The Three Musketeers", merely a prelude to his ongoing role as Robin in the "Batman" franchise. He has now formed his own production company.

Gene Hackman has played more roles than...well, just about anyone! He is a brilliantly versatile actor with a tendency to do his fair share of schlock, perhaps because he seems obsessed with working all the time. After joining the Marines at 16, he started with Dustin Hoffman at the Pasadena Playhouse in California (it may be an apocryphal story that had them voted the least likely to succeed!) and became famous in "Bonnie and Clyde" (which also starred Dunaway) for which he received his first Oscar nomination; the first time he won an Oscar was for his 1971 role as detective Popeye Doyle in "The French Connection" – he did it again in Clint Eastwood’s brilliant Western "Unforgiven". After more than 60 films, he continues to act constantly, notorious for his intensity and dedication to his craft.

Faye Dunaway was well known off-Broadway before she burst onto the movie scene in the memorable 1967 "Bonnie and Clyde", her high cheekbones and blonde bombshell looks stole the movie and garnered an Academy Award nomination. She followed with a swag of movies, but it took Roman Polanski’s classic "Chinatown" to bring out the best again – another nomination, and then the jackpot when she won an Oscar for "Network".

The performances

Chris O’Donnell is cute and cuddly, and any moment you expect him to don his Robin cape and soar into the Supreme Court. But really, guys, isn’t he a bit young for these legal gymnastics (likewise Keannau Reeve in "The Devil’s Advocate")? And it is never entirely clear why he has descended into this snakepit of racism. We guess he wants to learn more about his family history, but he would have achieved that quicker by simply asking his grandfather to let him in on the Big Secret. There isn’t much for O’Donnell to do here, a few sullen looks, an "angry" scene and a hotchpotch of serious expressions meant to convey lawyerly contemplation. It’s not his fault, in previous efforts he’s had better scripts to work from.

Sam Cayhall, as played by Gene Hackman, skirts a thin line between misplaced sentimentality and "sly old dog". Give credit to Hackman – he walks that line, and if he’s not altogether successful, the blame should be laid at the operating table of the script doctors. Hackman is a brilliant actor, but with his prolific presence in American movies it’s understandable that roles cannot always match his talent. He certainly looks the part, all grizzled and moth-eaten. The beanie is a nice touch, and Hackman has written the book on the resourceful use of minor props like clothes and headgear.

Faye Dunaway takes a turn as Hackman’s daughter, Lee. Is this reviewer the only person to wonder at the casting of 55 year old Dunaway as Hackman’s daughter? What about "Bonnie and Clyde", where they were meant to be about the same age?

Our verdict

This is another, in what is almost becoming a "series" formula. John Grisham should be commended for not writing a "series" character, remarkable given the fact that he seems to annually churn out novels. But his free-flowing pen has its consequence – this reviewer has seen more than a few Grisham adaptations, and they are starting to meld into a miscellany of confused images. It’s not quite formula, but the movie adaptations are hampered by their medium. Without the luxury of book – length narratives – the scripts highlight only the primary recurrent issues (racists in bed sheets, crooked lawyers and corrupt systems, young ambitious attorneys in great moral turmoil, the tragic crime that sets the ball rolling etc).

Remarkably, the movie has almost nothing to say about the death penalty. This is annoying, because it clearly sets itself up as a story wrapped around an issue of great substance. In the end we’re left with another Southern family saga, "The Prince of Tides" goes to the gas chamber – what we should have received was an entertaining journey through the maze of capital punishment appeals, which is essentially what the novel attempts.

The main problem with this movie is the lack of tension. Was Sam alone when he committed the crime? Were the children meant to die? Will the young lawyer beat the clock (28 days!!) to save his grandfather from the chair? Oh dear, it’s all pretty tame, and when we hear the lawyer plead that his grandfather is just a product of a racist upbringing...well, we know this is the time to get up and make a cup of tea.

 

Want us to tell you when we review another movie ?

Read this: The legal information contained above is intended to be general information about the law. It is not a substitute for legal and other professional advice. Lawscape Communications P/L does not accept responsibility for loss to any person, who either acts or does not act because of this information.