Movie Review

Some of the most dangerous words in the English language are: “I didn’t really understand it until I saw the movie.”  Movies are not facts!

In 1996, John Grisham wrote a book called Runaway Jury which was about attempts to stack / bribe / threaten a jury in a lawsuit against tobacco manufacturers.

In 2003, a movie of the same title was made about the book with several name celebrities in major roles - but the ‘bad guys’ in the movie were changed to gun manufacturers. 

Rotten Tomatoes’ Critics’ Consensus called it: “An implausible but entertaining legal thriller.”  It was indeed entertaining, highly implausible and, in addition, a propaganda piece for the gun control lobby.

The movie follows a lawsuit where the widow of a man shot and killed by his former co-worker sues the gun manufacturer because the manufacturer made it too easy for a disturbed person to buy a gun. To make that point, a Federal Firearms Licensee (portrayed as a sleaze) is condemned because he lets a ‘straw purchaser’ buy 25 guns a month, month-after-month, and never does anything.  (Apparently, the ATF and the NICS check people were too busy to notice, since none of that is mentioned.) 

Apparently, the murderer walked into an office building in downtown New Orleans with an AR 15 rifle and no one noticed until he started shooting. He must not have taken the bus.  If he drove, was he lucky enough to get a parking space directly in front of the building he shot up?

The heroes and villains are defined unambiguously, with the ‘bad guys’ (gun manufacturers and their lawyer) being unattractive, one-dimensional characters, who all lose their cool, at some point in the film, and blurt out what really despicable people they are.  

And the gun manufacturers contribute millions to the defense team in a scene where they sit around casually drinking whiskey and smoking cigars.  But it’s never revealed who funded the gun control legal team.

On the other hand, home movies are shown of the victim at his child’s birthday party.

The term “Assault weapon” is used often to describe the murder weapon and the gun manufacturer advertises weapons as being ‘fingerprint proof.’  (Can you imagine a real gun manufacturer describing his gun as fingerprint proof?)   

The bad guys are revealed as horrible persons for doing everything they can to subvert the jury and the good guys win - by doing everything they can to subvert the jury. Essentially, the ends justify the means.  Don’t worry about those archaic American principles about right-and-wrong.

Oh wait.  The gun control lawyer believed in right-and-wrong because he chose not to take up the offer to bribe the jury.  But he never bothered to report the bribe to anyone!  That would have been a career threatening legal issue for the lawyer, but if he had reported it the movie would have made even less sense.

And the jury overcomes their initial concerns about the law because they sympathize with the widow, after manipulation by one of the ‘good guys.’

All of the main characters in the film break the law, except for the gun control lawyer and he joins the other main characters in being unethical.  The movies’ “good guys” (gun control enthusiasts) win while breaking the law, but none of those who broke the law are punished. In fact, two of them are made to look like heroes and walk away $15 million richer.  Crime does pay!

So, why this review about a 20 years old movie?

First, the movie just popped up on Netflix, presumably taking advantage of one of its stars, Gene Hackman, just dying.  It will probably be seen by thousands of people.

It is a great example of how the Left sneakily implants their propaganda in the movies and other entertainment forms.

While SCOPE members and just about anyone familiar with the laws surrounding firearm purchases would pick up on the misrepresentations in the movie, people not familiar with the purchase of firearms may swallow this whole.  Fingerprint proof guns being sold?  Sure!  FFL’s selling guns by the dozens to straw purchasers?  Happens all the time!  

At least the murderer didn’t use a “silencer” that went poof! 

Implausible it may be but this is just one of many movies the Hollywood Left uses to push their political agenda.  And the scary thing is that many people will accept it as fact.