SYNOPSICS
The Client (1994) is a English movie. Joel Schumacher has directed this movie. Susan Sarandon,Tommy Lee Jones,Brad Renfro,Mary-Louise Parker are the starring of this movie. It was released in 1994. The Client (1994) is considered one of the best Crime,Drama,Mystery,Thriller movie in India and around the world.
Mark Sway is an 11 year old boy who lives with his mother and brother in a trailer. One day he and his brother are hanging out when a car pulls over beside them. The driver then sticks a hose in his exhaust and puts the other end into the car. Mark pulls it out. But the man sees him and grabs him and takes inside the car. The man talks to Mark then later shoots himself. The shock sends Mark's brother into a catatonic state. .And one of his clients is a member of a mob family who is suspected of killing a Senator who was trying to take down his family. But because the Senator's body is missing, they can't prosecute him. Reggie thinks Foltrigg thinks the lawyer told Mark where the body is which is why he wants to speak to him. Mark goes to meet Roy and when he threatens him, Mark steps out then Reggie comes in with a recording of his conversation with Mark telling him that made several violations. In the meantime, the mobster is told by the head of the family to take care of Mark. So he...
More
The Client (1994) Reviews
Flawed but Gripping
'The Client' is perhaps one of the many films that won't be enjoyed as much after one has read the book. I, having not read John Grisham's novel, quite enjoyed it. Sure the movie has its flaws in the form of plot holes, caricatures, obvious clichés etc, but it essentially manages to keep the viewer engaged. 'The Client' is further backed up by strong performances. Susan Sarandon makes full use of her powerful screen presence and easily stands out. No wonder she's an exceptional actress. Reggie Love is one of her most memorable performances (among the so many she's already given). The late Brad Renfro, as the young Sway, is very competent and does impress in several scenes. Tommy Lee Jones is funny (both intentionally and unintentionally). From the supporting cast, Mary-Louise Parker leaves a mark. William H. Macy barely has more than a few lines but has a dignified presence. The villains both look and act like caricatures. In a nutshell, it's an interesting film with a flawed but gripping plot and marvelous performances.
Dark and gripping
Susan Sarandon should stick with the tough minded lawyer more often. Perfectly cast in the role of Reggie Love, she brings a certain charm to a role which could have lacked in that department. And to make matters even tougher on her, she was almost outshined by Brad Renfro, who made quite an impression in a film such as this. While the film was put together in a rather conventional way, with Tommy Lee Jones playing an over clichéd character, the film is still rather gripping. A decent film to have in your collection, and one of the better John Grisham book-turned-movie adaptations.
Above Average Legal Tale.
Wow, what a cast! And they all deliver the goods too. Susan Sarandon is an exceptional actress. Watch the scene in "Dead Man Walking" when she visits the family of one of the victims. She doesn't just sit quietly. She actively "listens" to them. And Tommy Lee Jones uncovers the comic side of his dashing political lawyer. Even the eleven-year-old kid gives a spot on performance, anything but cute, which is a relief. The smaller roles are equally well done although there is less to be done well. J. T. Walsh is always good. Mary-Louise Parker never makes a wrong move as the stressed-out mother. Ossie Davis is a monumental presence as the judge. Bill Macy is given only a few lines. The script isn't bad either, especially in the first half of the film, in which the characters are being established. There are, alas, three clichés. The bad guys LOOK like move bad guys usually look. They dress in black, have long greasy hair, are engraved with threatening jailhouse tattoos of barbed wire and things, and they never seem to enjoy themselves. There are also two stereotypical scenes which really should have been avoided. In the first, the boy, Renfro, is trying to sneak out of a hospital. He pokes his face through a door into the reception room, where he sees his mother and two cops walking around. In the shadows he also spots the man he knows is trying to murder him. So what does he do? Does he run to his Mom and the police for protection? Certainly not. He does what aay potential murder victim would do. He dashes away from safety, down several flights of an empty stairway, followed closely by the squinter with a knife. The scene that follows is lifted straight out of "Coma," with the killer being locked in a refrigerator. The other stereotyped situation is towards the end, when (just by the most improbable of coincidences) Sarandon and Renfro reach an empty boat house at the same time as three of the heavies. The two innocents try to avoid being discovered. There is a lot of tiptoeing around on creaky boards, a foot chase through some bushes, one of those scenes in which one person holds a gun on a second, and the second smiles and says, "You don't have the guts to pull the trigger," and walks up closer to the muzzle. I've pointed out these weaknesses not because this is a bad movie. It's really pretty good. But the cast is so outstanding that any weakness in the story is the more highly illuminated. See it, if only to see the range of facial expressions into which Jones is able to fashion his face.
Pure Hollywood cliche - with a lame plot, to boot.
***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** This movie is completely formulaic, melodramatic, and contrived. Everyone but William H. Macy overacts to the point of charicature, which is appropriate, since the film is a charicature of its genre. To be specific, I think the movie fails on 3 fronts: 1) The plot is rife with logical nonsequiturs. At the very core, the entire basis for the movie falls apart with any scrutiny. The kid is only a threat to the mob if he DOESN'T talk - once he talks, the damage is done, and he's of no interest to the mob (I don't think the mob kills kids for telling the cops what they know!). So, to protect himself, the first thing he would do is squeal. Even ignoring the big plot lapse, there are several aspects that leave you scratching your head, like why is it that the DA, who's trying to convict the mob assassin, is the BAD GUY in this? Why is the kid so mad at his lawyer? Why did the kid break out of jail - it was the only place he was safe! These nagging questions just go on and on as you watch this movie. 2) The actors overact. In the case of Tommy Lee Jones,he does a great job in creating a slick, manipulative DA (see above), but it is so cliche, as to be cartoonish. Susan Sarandon does a good job, also, but it's not really a role that should have been oscar-nomination material - aside from her past life troubles, there's not much there for her character. My complaint with her is that her character is, again, cliche. The most egregious bit of overacting belongs to Brad Renfroe, though I blame the director. As opposed to sympathizing with him, his yelling and cursing tantrums made me want to slap him. He was way over the top. 3) The movie was sheer formula; predictable, familiar. Little kid takes on the evil and/or incompetent adults - and, of course, wins. Throw in the rediculously cliche mob wiseguy, the slick media-savvy DA, the good-hearted, smart-as-a-whip, beautiful female attorney, the wise, self-confident unflappable southern judge (black, for good measure), and the secretly menacing cop, and voila! It's basically a 60's Disney movie on steroids. The cute, snappy repartee between the lawyer and the DA, wherein the (female, of course) 2-years-out-of-law-school domestic relations lawyer goes toe-to-toe and holds her own with the powerful, iron-fisted DA, typifies this movie. Judging by the vast majority of other comments, I can see that most people weren't as put off by this rather typical John Grisham-Hollywood concoction as I, so it must be entertaining to a large audience, but please don't confuse it with good cinema.
Stupid premise for a plot
I want to address some of the major holes in the plot, so if you haven't seen the movie yet you may want to skip this review. Why would the mob assume that this lawyer, who was about to commit suicide, would be telling the kid anything regarding the dead body? That's a pretty big assumption to make. OK, so assuming that they did guess right, i.e. the kid now knows everything, why do they think scaring him will keep him from talking? Wouldn't it be more final just to bump him off in the elevator when they have the perfect opportunity? But no, let's threaten him only, still giving him the chance to spill his guts to the authorities. But the little jerk can't just tell what he knows, and let the authorities sort it out. He and his stupid lawyer decide that they must go and see the body for themselves, to be sure that the suicide committing lawyer wasn't lying in the first place. Yeah, right. That makes perfect sense. Let's break into the dead lawyers boathouse, and see if the rotting corpse is there, then maybe he'll testify.