The Verdict (1982) Synopsis

"I came here to take your money. I brought snapshots to show you so I could get your money. I can't do it; I can't take it. 'Cause if I take the money I'm lost. I'll just be a... rich ambulance chaser. I can't do it. I can't take it."

                                               -Paul Newman as Frank Galvin 

I really enjoyed this flick.  Courtroom dramas seem to always run a similar route, but this movie went a different way.  Paul Newman must have been an alcoholic malpractice lawyer in a previous life because he was very convincing in this role.  Here are a few things that stood out to me:

• The beginning was pretty morbid.  I mean you have to be a certain type of character to approach strangers at a funeral and give them your business card.  I'm not sure what being a malpractice lawyer entails on a daily basis, but trying to sales pitch a family at a funeral might be the lowest of the low.  Just watching that one guys reaction honestly made me dislike Galvin at first.

•  The relationship between the woman and Galvin was really intriguing.  One awesome thing I noticed was the first time they met each other.  He told her randomly that he had a good day, and then when she started to leave the bar she stopped and said, "I'm glad you had a good day."  The thing that I noticed was Galvin and his friends reactions.  This is a great example of why I love movies.  Their reaction was spot on.  It reminded me of something a group of guys would do when a girl shows someone some direct attention. 

• When Galvin first goes to the hospital and takes pictures of the woman in the coma, I felt the first real development of Galvin's character.  The director created an awesome sequence where the camera stayed on the photograph until it fully developed.  I thought that was symbolic and parallel to how Galvin felt.  He went to that hospital with money on his mind, and then he realized that this was his chance to actually do something good.  No more going to funerals and trying to sales pitch to grieving families.  With this woman, he could maybe make a difference.

•  This plot was shaped like other courtroom dramas, but it had a different flow.  Instead of finding pieces of evidence as the movie/trial progressed, Galvin had all the evidence he thought he needed at the beginning, and then as the movie progressed he steadily lost most of that evidence.  I really liked this flow.  It had me leaning toward predicting that he would lose the case, but then the break comes when the nurse testifies that the doctor told her to change the preliminary form.  Another twist follows when the defense uses legal jargon to get the nurses testimony withdrawn, but the jury does the right thing in the end.  I also loved that he didn't answer the girls phone call at the end.  And that might have been the hardest bitch slap I've ever seen LOL.  I think I said "DAYUMMM" in my Next Friday voice when I saw that.

• The black doctor (Joe Seneca) was one of my favorite characters.  He was also in Crossroads and A Time to Kill.  I think that he was an important character, because he was portrayed as just a generally good guy.  He seemed like a character that could determine what is right and what is wrong, and his decision to testify for Galvin reassured me that representing this woman was the right thing to do. 
• One major theme was the "you guys are all the same" rhetoric.  This was said about lawyers and doctors.  I think that is still true today.  Many people view lawyers or doctors as only out for the money instead of helping people (which is a major part of their job description).  Galvin represents that stereotype early in the film, but that is the major evolution that his character undergoes.  He changes from money hungry to capturing the human element of the movie.

 Well, I think this movie was a great first pick.  But this discussion is nothing without your inputs.  I can't wait to see what each person thought about the different aspects of this film.  So...  Let the games begin!