Product Description

From master storyteller John Grisham and the director of Don't Say A Word comes a taut suspense-thriller that "grabs hold of you and never lets go" (Philadelphia Metro). In their first film together, screen legends Gene Hackman and Dustin Hoffman face off in this electrifying nail-biter about a ruthless jury consultant who'll do anything to win. With lives and millions of dollars at stake, the fixer plays a deadly cat-and-mouse game with a jury member (John Cusack) and a mysterious woman (Rachel Weisz) who offer to "deliver" the verdict to the highest bidder. Packed with danger, intrigue and pulse-pounding twists and turns, Runaway Jury rules!

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #7844 in DVD
• Released on: 2004-02-17
• Rating: PG-13 (Parental Guidance Suggested)
• Aspect ratio: 2.35:1
• Formats: Anamorphic, Color, Dolby, Dubbed, DVD-Video, Subtitled, Widescreen, NTSC
• Original language: English, French, Spanish
• Subtitled in: English, Spanish
• Dubbed in: French
• Number of discs: 1
• Running time: 127 minutes

Amazon.com
Based on the bestseller by John Grisham, Runaway Jury is a slick thriller that's exciting enough to overcome the gaps in its plot. The ultimate target has been changed: Grisham's legal assault on the tobacco industry was switched to the hot-button issue of gun control (no doubt to avoid comparison to The Insider) in a riveting exposé of jury-tampering. Gene Hackman plays the ultra-cynical, utterly unscrupulous pawn of the gun-makers, using an expert staff and advanced electronics to hand-pick a New Orleans jury that will return a favorable verdict; Dustin Hoffman (making his first screen appearance with real-life former roommate Hackman) defends the grieving widow of a gun-shooting victim with idealistic zeal, while maverick juror John Cusack and accomplice Rachel Weisz play both ends against the middle in a personal quest to hold gun-makers accountable. It's riveting stuff, even when it's obvious that Grisham and director Gary Fleder have glossed over any details that would unravel the plot's intricate design. --Jeff Shannon

From The New Yorker
Though this legal thriller has been billed as Hoffman v. Hackman, the two screen legends have only one scene together, when they square off for a crisp back-and-forth in the men's room. What a letdown-as is the rest of this convoluted adaptation of yet another John Grisham novel. The courtroom should have been the center of the action. But, while Hoffman is cast as the principled attorney putting the gun companies on trial, Hackman remains off-site as a high-tech jury consultant who watches the proceedings through hidden cameras. It's left to John Cusack and Rachel Weisz, who play a mysterious team also bent on manipulating the jury, to confront Hackman. Not exactly a title bout. Gary Fleder directed, with a heavy hand. New Orleans provides the murkiness. -Michael Agger
Copyright © 2006 The New Yorker

Customer Reviews

Run Away from this Dismal Movie
This film squanders the considerable talents of several A-list actors with an unbelievable plot and a predictable and moralizing ending.

It's not that I disagree with the theme - I'm no fan of guns - but the concept of the film is simply ludicrous. I won't give away any details, but suffice it to say that this film thinks that conspiracy - no matter how silly, and twists - no matter how nonsensical, will somehow add up to an engaging court drama.

The original script must have been pretty good for these distinguished actors to sign on to the project. I guess someone ran away with that version, because the final product is terrible.

Runaway Performances
I have no idea whether juries in the real world can be corrupted as this jury in the reel world is, but "Runaway Jury" is a riveting thriller that ought to capture the interest of the viewer from beginning to end, whether one buys into all the plot points or not.

Its success as a genre-film derives from the superlative cast, which is headed by Dustin Hoffman in the role of the honest but savvily down-to-earth attorney (with shabby suit and a carefully planted mustard dab on his tie) who is suing the big gun companies on behalf of the wife of a victim of a mass murder; and Gene Hackman as the ruthless (and expensively dressed) jury consultant, who does not give a fig for the victims, but merely wants to win big on behalf of his even bigger clients, no matter how low he has to stoop to do it. Hoffman and Hackman are supported ably by John Cusack and Rachel Weisz, both of whose characters have hidden agendas.

Although the film is worth watching for its suspense-factor alone, the performances of Hoffman and Hackman, who confront each other in the old-fashioned wood-paneled men's washroom of the court, lift "Runaway Jury" from the level of a conventional court-room thriller. This scene, which lasts several minutes, allows these two cinematic masters to pull out all the stops, as it were, of their craft. It is so rare nowadays to get a full-blown scene--more reminiscent of one in a stage play--between two actors of their calibre.

The settings of pre-Katrina New Orleans--the French Quarter and the Garden District--also contribute to the film's ambience.

Every once and a while, I sit down and watch the DVD of a film that I missed in the theatre the first time around. Many, I pass on to my friends; "Runaway Jury," I did not.

Hackman is scum. Cusak and Weisz, the latent heroes.
Because of the fact that Dustin Hoffman plays the attorney for the Plaintiff in a wrongful death lawsuit (her husband, an attorney; Dylan McDermot - short cameo at beginning of movie) against a gun manufacturer; he does [mostly] everything by the book. So it's easy to somehow gloss over his character, since he comes across as the knight in shining armor for all the people who's loved ones have died due to handgun violence.

Gene Hackman on the other hand, is the scheming, conniving, cold and calculating Rankin Fitch; the jury consultant for the gun manufacturer attorneys. It's easy for his character to be more dominating in the film, as he weaves some pretty evil, unscrupulous, coercive manipulations and intimidation of jury-influencing and tampering. And he has at his command, a plethora of seemingly callous "technicians" (automatons) to assist him. With one of his techs, a real scumbag, "get-it-done no matter what" type (i.e. via physical violence, if need be). Oh, he gets his just desserts from Wiesz (so I spoiled some of it - so what).

All the while John Cusak as Juror #9; Nick Easter and his cohort in "jury-tampering" Rachel Wiesz; Marlee, worked their side in the manipulation (a.k.a Blackmail) of both the Plaintiff and Defendant attorneys to swing the verdict in one or the others favor (for money, of course). Cusak seemingly manipulates part of the jury, but in the end he knows that they'll decide on their on account. Nick, being on the inside, with the Jury. Marlee, on the outside working the attorneys.

A surprise ending (though not really unpredictable), in which Hackman really gets it "stuck to him". He never knew what hit him. The real surprise is how Nick (Cusak) and Marlee (Weisz) screw Hackman (Fitch) while they come out smelling like roses (a little richer, and a little worse for wear) for their efforts; although still legally immoral. But not to them. They've played this game before.