movie review the verdict

Cinephilia & Beyond - Films and Filmmaking

‘The Verdict’: Sidney Lumet and David Mamet’s Masterpiece as a Blend of a Courtroom Drama and a Personal Redemption Story

By Sven Mikulec

Frank Galvin is an empty, whisky-drenched shell of a man. Once a successful lawyer at a prestigious law firm, a dedicated professional whose life was turned upside down by an incident he might have been framed for by a competitive colleague, he now spends his days playing pinball, drinking beer and only occasionally stopping by his office. His whole legal practice is reduced to stalking funeral parlors for clients, like a desperate vulture, searching for cases that would help him acquire more money to spend on booze and pinball. Galvin is a man who has practically given up, on the verge of squandering all of his once great potential, a man with a horrendous reputation, no ambition outside of the local bar, and only one ally in the whole world—an old mentor and former teacher Mickey, who still sends simple cases his way, perhaps to help him cope with his miserable life, perhaps to try to snap him out of his alcoholic stupor. When Mickey sets him up with a clear-and-shut case of medical malpractice, where a young woman was condemned to a vegetative state by doctors of a renowned hospital run by the Archdiocese of Boston, Galvin approaches the precipice: the Church is eager to settle out of court for a respectable sum to keep its reputation intact, and Galvin would have to be crazy to turn down a fee that would enable him to drink himself to death. However, a brief visit to the hospital complicates the situation for him, as the sight of a girl whose life is over forces him to become reborn as the man who he’d long forgotten to be.

My short synopsis most likely doesn’t do justice to The Verdict , the great Sidney Lumet’s film often hailed as one of the best courtroom dramas ever made, but the very fact I chose to concentrate more on the protagonist than the legal case that may or may not turn his life around testifies to what kind of a film this really is. The filmmaker who made 12 Angry Men sure knows how to create a courtroom masterpiece; The Verdict , on the other hand, is much more a film in the vein of a character study, where the court serves as the arena for the transformation of a ruined individual, or, if you prefer clumsy metaphors, a delivery room for the main hero’s rebirth.

Based on American trial lawyer and bestselling author Barry Reed’s 1980s novel of the same name, allegedly inspired by real-life events he witnessed to during his career of a legal practitioner, The Verdict was written by David Mamet , the masterful playwright and screenwriter who gave us such classics as The Postman Always Rings Twice , The Untouchables and Glengarry Glen Ross , and after a period of try-outs landed in the hands of Lumet, one of the most prolific and versatile directors that ever toiled around Hollywood. The rights to the book were purchased by producers David Brown and Richard Zanuck, who soon hired Arthur Hiller ( The Americanization of Emily , The Hospital , The In-Laws ) to direct. A script was commissioned from Mamet, but since both the producing team and Hiller disliked it, the director quit and Jay Presson Allen was given a chance to write a new one. This was a very hot project among Hollywood acting superstars, as it required a strong male lead. The likes of Roy Scheider, William Holden, Frank Sinatra, Cary Grant and Dustin Hoffman all allegedly expressed their interest, but the role was initially offered to Robert Redford, who lost it after going rogue and meeting with Sydney Pollack. The producers then approached Lumet to direct, and out of all the versions he read, he opted for Mamet’s original one. Paul Newman, the new star of the project, agreed this was the best way to go. The Verdict premiered in early December 1982, and the outstandingly warm welcome from the critics cleared its way to five Academy Award nominations, as well as very solid box office results. The ultimate value of the movie, however, can be found in the fact that it looms large in the professional biographies of each and every one of the people involved in making it.

Shot by the excellent Polish cinematographer Andrzej Bartkowiak ( Prince of the City , Terms of Endearment , Prizzi’s Honor ), displaying a unique color palette with ostensibly toned down colors adding up to a gloomy visual style, with the great Johnny Mandel’s ( Point Blank , M*A*S*H) musical score, sparsely used, restrained and unobtrusive, The Verdict is stock full of superb actors and actresses. Paul Newman, who carries the film on his back in one of the best roles he ever performed, is helped by a gallery of talented and experienced masters of their trade: Jack Warden as his mentor, James Mason as the high-classed attorney Newman’s Galvin has to battle in court, Charlotte Rampling as Galvin’s love interest who gets heavily involved in his battle for redemption. You can even spot Bruce Willis as an extra in the background at one point, in one of his first film appearances. Most of all, The Verdict deserves to be called a masterpiece because of Sidney Lumet’s precise, inspired and occasionally hazardous direction, as the filmmaker proves once again there are only a handful of people who can call themselves his peers when it comes to the art of visual storytelling.

David Mamet wrote a script first deemed too dark, too moody and lacking a traditional ending that the producers perceived the audience would expect from a film such as this. Luckily enough, Lumet and Newman seem to have been very well aware of its value. With several instances of outstandingly good dialogue, Mamet’s work is a master class in storytelling, without a single superfluous sentence, without any exhausting exposition and with just the right amount of care and details for every character to be more than a carved out cardboard piece designed to keep Paul Newman’s protagonist company. By centering an interesting and provocative legal case around a lost soul, a man standing firm against the overpowering system, Mamet and Lumet’s story gained something of a mythical quality. It’s wonderful to see a piece of filmmaking designed in an intellectual way with no intention of insulting the audience. The decision to produce a curious blend of a courtroom drama and a personal story of salvation was a very clever move, as the film played just the right chords in the audience and gave an entirely different meaning, and far more power, to the film’s title, only seemingly referring exclusively to the court proceedings. The Verdict is a touching, captivating, virtually spotless masterpiece, and its general quality can be efficiently summed up in the hospital scene, where the main character experiences a catharsis when faced with the comatose victim. This scene alone is a testament to The Verdict ’s supreme direction, acting, screenplay and editing, as it celebrates the old “show, don’t tell” fundamental principle of filmmaking.

A monumentally important screenplay. Screenwriter must-read: David Mamet’s screenplay for The Verdict [ PDF ]. (NOTE: For educational and research purposes only ). The DVD/Blu-ray of the film is available at Amazon and other online retailers. Absolutely our highest recommendation.

“HOW MANY PASSES DOES IT TAKE TO CREATE PERFECT DIALOGUE?”

The Dramatist Poet: A David Mamet Interview by Fred Topel (interview first appeared in Screenwriter’s Monthly ).

One of the most prolific and influential playwrights of the late-20th century, David Mamet’s work is famous for its lean, gritty and often profane language possessed of such a singular rhythm that his dialogue has been dubbed ‘Mamet speak.’ Known for his robust male characters, Mamet’s facility for creating highly-charged verbal encounters in a masculine environment repeatedly made his work the subject for discussion and controversy. Emerging from the Chicago theater scene, Mamet came to prominence with American Buffalo (1975) and A Life in the Theatre (1977) before making the transition to Hollywood with the scripts for The Postman Always Rings Twice (1981) and Verdict (1982). Following awards for the powerful stage plays Edmund (1982) and Glengarry Glenn Ross (1984)—the latter of which was turned into a notable 1992 film directed by James Foley—Mamet made his directorial debut with the thriller House of Games (1987). Also that year, he wrote one of his most memorable screenplays, The Untouchables (1987), for director Brian De Palma, while penning his satirical denunciation of the movie business with the play Speed-the-Plow (1988). Mamet tackled sexual politics with the theatrical piece Oleanna (1992), while continuing to make his mark on film with Homicide (1991) and Wag the Dog (1998) before going on to direct The Spanish Prisoner (1998) State and Main (2000) and Heist (2001) to considerable critical acclaim. Do actors usually get your dialogue or do you have to coach them? No, they get it. I write it to be spoken, and I think that almost all actors appreciate that. How many passes does it take to create perfect dialogue? That’s a really good question. I’m not sure I know the answer. I do it fairly spontaneously, and then sometimes, for various reasons, it has to be recrafted. I used to be really good at that, but it gets more difficult as I get older just because my brain is failing. I have less brain cells because long before any of you guys were born, there was something called the ‘60s. That’s where the brain cells were. What’s your writing regimen? I think I’m going to just start writing and keep writing until they throw me in jail. Other than that, I set aside all day every day for writing and break it up with going home to see my family or having lunch or getting a haircut… Is writing a screenplay or stage play easier? It would seem that you could do almost anything on film, but that’s part of the wonderful fascination of filmmaking. You say, well, okay, you can do anything you want. Now, what are you going to do? So that’s the wonderful challenge of film. Theoretically, I can do anything I want, limited only by my ability to express it in terms of the shot list. So that’s a fascinating challenge. So I don’t find it any more freeing or any more constrictive than writing plays. They each have their own strictures. The wisdom of how to understand those strictures fascinates me. What are the strictures of playwriting? Aristotle said it’s got to be about one thing. It’ll be one character doing one thing in the space of three days in one place, such that every aspect of the play is a journey of the character toward recognition of the situation. And at the end of recognizing the situation, he or she recognizes the situation, undergoes a transformation, the high becomes low, or in comedy, sometimes the low becomes high. That’s the stricture of playwriting. How do you make a genre film your own? Well, you can’t help but make a distinct movie. If you give yourself up to the form, it’s going to be distinctively your own because the form’s going to tell you what’s needed. That’s one of the great things I find about working in drama is you’re always learning from the form. You’re always getting humbled by it. It’s exactly like analyzing a dream. You’re trying to analyze your dreams. You say, ‘I know what that means; I know exactly what that means; why am I still unsettled?’ You say, ‘Let me look a little harder at this little thing over here. But that’s not important; that’s not important; that’s not important. The part where I kill the monster—that’s the important part, and I know that means my father this and da da da da da. But what about this little part over here about the bunny rabbit? Why is the bunny rabbit hopping across the thing? Oh, that’s not important; that’s not important.’ Making up a drama is almost exactly analogous to analyzing your dreams. That understanding that you cleanse just like the heroes cleanse not from your ability to manipulate the material but from your ability to understand the material. It’s really humbling, just like when you finally have to look at what that little bunny means. There’s a reason why your mind didn’t want to see that. There’s a reason why you say, ‘Oh, that’s just interstitial material. Fuck that. That’s nothing, right?’ Because that’s always where the truth lies, it’s going to tell you how to reformulate the puzzle. setREVStartSize({c: 'rev_slider_184_3',rl:[1240,1024,768,480],el:[],gw:[1240],gh:[868],type:'standard',justify:'',layout:'fullscreen',offsetContainer:'',offset:'',mh:"0"});if (window.RS_MODULES!==undefined && window.RS_MODULES.modules!==undefined && window.RS_MODULES.modules["revslider1843"]!==undefined) {window.RS_MODULES.modules["revslider1843"].once = false;window.revapi184 = undefined;if (window.RS_MODULES.checkMinimal!==undefined) window.RS_MODULES.checkMinimal()} How did you keep the exposition to a minimum? That’s the fun of it. Anybody can write a script that has ‘Jim, how were things since you were elected governor of Minnesota? How’s your albino daughter?’ ‘As of course you know, Mr. Smith, your son has myopia. It’s amazing that, having that myopia, he was winning the national spelling bee.’ That’s easy; that’s not challenging. The trick is to take a story that might be complex and make it simple enough that people will want to catch up with it rather than stopping them and explaining to them why they should be interested because then they might understand, but they won’t care. What makes them interested is to make them catch up. What’s happening here? Who is this guy? What crime was committed? Who was taken? Why is she important? Why are all these government people running around? And how is he going to get her back? They want to see what he’s going to do next. That’s all that moviemaking comes down to—what happens next? How do you not become lost in power? That’s a very good question. I think the answer is that you have to have the specter in front of you all the time. You have to be able to learn, and I think I’m capable of doing this to a certain extent, and I would like to be able to do it to a greater extent, to say that you have to be able to take pride in mastering your own impulses, take pleasure in gratifying them. There are a lot of really great models, and the military is one of them. I think this is a very pro-military movie in many ways. It’s saying, Here are people who are capable of subordinating their financial needs and their physical needs to an extraordinary regiment, mental and physical regiment, in the cause of service. The question of the movie is, ‘To what extent is that person capable of abiding by precepts which he’s teaching other students, which he’s explained to others?’ Have you ever deviated from your own script? I haven’t deviated from it. I’ve certainly changed it. In what circumstances? Well, if something’s not working, a lot of the times you say, ‘Well, let’s try something else.’ I mean, I’ve always got a typewriter in the trailer. Say, ‘You know, that scene isn’t working right. Give me a moment, I’ll write a new scene.’ You get inspired too. Oftentimes, you just get inspired. Stuff’s happening on the set. You say, ‘Oh my God, let’s do some more of that,’ or, ‘Now I understand what happens in scene 47. One of my favorite moments was doing State and Main with Alec Baldwin and Julia Stiles. They’re both drunk out of their minds, and he crashes the car. The car is upside down; they’re both drunk, and he crawls out of the car and looks around. He says, ‘Well, that happened.’ It was like an inspiration at four o’clock in the morning. He said something else, and I said, ‘Well, wait a second, say this.’ I was looking at what was happening on the set and said, ‘Wouldn’t that be funnier?’ Has an actor ever invented a brilliant line that you took credit for? No, I would never take credit for something somebody else said. But in a play, you wouldn’t change what’s written. Well, of course, when it’s written. I mean, I just opened a play in San Francisco on Saturday, and I’m changing the play up until opening night, and that’s the first production. I’ll probably change some things as I work on the manuscript before it gets published. At a certain point you’ve got to stop. setREVStartSize({c: 'rev_slider_187_4',rl:[1240,1024,768,480],el:[],gw:[1240],gh:[868],type:'standard',justify:'',layout:'fullscreen',offsetContainer:'',offset:'',mh:"0"});if (window.RS_MODULES!==undefined && window.RS_MODULES.modules!==undefined && window.RS_MODULES.modules["revslider1874"]!==undefined) {window.RS_MODULES.modules["revslider1874"].once = false;window.revapi187 = undefined;if (window.RS_MODULES.checkMinimal!==undefined) window.RS_MODULES.checkMinimal()} What have been the greatest frustrations of letting other people direct your scripts? Well, the greatest frustrations have been having the scripts directed other than the ways in which I thought they would have gone. But when I did a script for someone else to direct, I got paid for it. I mean, that’s one of the things you get paid for. When do you make yourself stop writing? I’m pretty good. At a certain point you want to do something else. Past a certain point, you say it could be perhaps a little bit better with a lot more time, but I try to get it as perfect as I can given the fallibility of the fact I’m not going to live forever. How do you approach something that’s your own as opposed to a for hire project? I don’t think I approach them any differently. I put my name on it. That’s the best I know at this time. Do you see a career plan? I don’t know. I just make them up as I go along. Whatever anybody says, you’re always making it up as you go along. It’s like when you have babies; nobody gives you a how to book; nobody gives you a manual. It’s like any of the important things in life. Whether it’s your career, whether it’s marriage, whether it’s child rearing, you’re making it up as you go along. And you try to have certain precepts, and sometimes they even change. Has directing become as natural as writing? Well, I enjoy it. There are certain things I can do naturally, but the people a lot of us admire—I’m sure a lot of athletes that people admire—they’re working on their weaknesses all the time. That’s what I’m doing at least some of the time. So do you enjoy doing the thing that goes easy? Yeah, sure. But there’s also great enjoyment in doing the thing that comes with difficulty. Directing is more of a challenge? Well, certain aspects of the writing are easy. I write dialogue fairly easily. Plot is a big pain in the ass. I work very, very hard on that, but I enjoy working on it because it has great rewards. And I love directing. When you sit with your plot, do you start with character, theme or story elements? I think when you’re working on the plot, you’re talking about what does the character want? All the plot is is the structure of the main character towards the achievement of one goal. setREVStartSize({c: 'rev_slider_186_5',rl:[1240,1024,768,480],el:[],gw:[1240],gh:[868],type:'standard',justify:'',layout:'fullscreen',offsetContainer:'',offset:'',mh:"0"});if (window.RS_MODULES!==undefined && window.RS_MODULES.modules!==undefined && window.RS_MODULES.modules["revslider1865"]!==undefined) {window.RS_MODULES.modules["revslider1865"].once = false;window.revapi186 = undefined;if (window.RS_MODULES.checkMinimal!==undefined) window.RS_MODULES.checkMinimal()}

Sidney Lumet talks about directing, working with Paul Newman, and making movies in New York. Charlie Rose’s interviews with the leading faces of Hollywood are a complete pleasure to become engulfed by. His work has been known to pop up occasionally on YouTube, only to disappear a couple of weeks later, but we’re incredibly excited to bring your attention to the redesigned Charlie Rose website that has been available to the public, with all the treasures of Rose’s career finally at the palm of our hands.

MAKING MOVIES BY SIDNEY LUMET

Sidney Lumet shares his book, ‘Making Movies,’ about the technique and job of filmmaking.

Sometimes the relationship between actors and writers gets very testy indeed. As the director, I have to be very careful here. I need them both. Most writers hate actors. And yet stars are the keys to getting a picture approved by a studio. Some directors have enormous power, but nobody has the power of one of the top stars. If the star demands it, any studio will drop the writer in less than thirty seconds—and the director too, for that matter. Most of the time, I’ve done enough work ahead of time so that this sort of crisis never arises. I’ll come to an agreement with the writer before an actor has been approached, and I’ll usually have a thorough discussion with the star about the script before we decide to go ahead. These experiences vary. Most actors, despite Hitchcock’s pronouncement, are very bright. Some are superb on script. Sean Connery, Dustin Hoffman, Jane Fonda, Paul Newman are wonderfully helpful. One can gain a lot by listening to them. Pacino isn’t terrifically articulate, but he’s got a built-in sense of the truth. If a scene or a line bothers him, I pay attention. He’s probably right.

But stars can also destroy a script. David Mamet did the first adaptation of The Verdict . A major star became interested in doing the movie, but he felt that his character had to be fleshed out more. That sometimes means explaining what should be left unsaid, a version of the rubber ducky. The performance should flesh out the character. Mamet always leaves a great deal unsaid. He wants the actor to flesh it out. So he refused to do it. Another writer was brought in. The writer was very bright, and she simply filled in what had been unspoken in Mamet’s script and picked up a fat fee. The script collapsed. The star then asked if he could work on it with a third writer. They did five additional rewrites. By now there was a million dollars in script charges on the picture. The scripts kept getting worse. The star was slowly shifting the emphasis on the character. Mamet had written a drunk hustling his way from one seedy case to another until one day he sees a chance for salvation and, filled with fear, takes it.

The star kept eliminating the unpleasant side of the character, trying to make him more lovable so that the audience would “identify” with him. That’s another misdirected cliche of movie writing. Chayefsky used to say, “There are two kinds of scenes: the Pet the Dog scene and the Kick the Dog scene. The studio always wants a Pet the Dog scene so everybody can tell who the hero is.” Bette Davis made a great career kicking the dog, as did Bogart, as did Cagney (how about White Heat —is that a great performance or not?). I’m sure the audience identified with Anthony Hopkins in The Silence of the Lambs as much as with Jodie Foster. Otherwise there wouldn’t have been the roar of laughter that greeted the wonderful line “I’m having an old friend for dinner.”

When I received yet another script of The Verdict , I reread Mamet’s version, which he’d given me months earlier. I said I would do it if we went back to that script. We did. Paul Newman read it, and we were off and running. Sometimes it’s the writer who turns out to be a complete whore. I was doing a movie that needed an articulate, crisp, cerebral delivery to make the dialogue of the leading character work. Another very big star had gotten hold of the script and wanted to do it. I said to the writer that though the actor was terrific, I wasn’t sure he could handle this kind of dialogue. The writer blanched when I said that I was going to ask the actor to read (i.e., audition) for me. I called the actor, told him that for both our sakes I thought it best if we read the script aloud. We set a date.

As I hung up the phone, the writer—who was also the producer on the picture—approached me with a mixture of awe and menace. The menace won out. In a voice that would’ve made a Mafia don seem like an angel, the writer-producer said, “You know, if you turn him down, the studio just might want to get rid of you!” The writer-producer (we call it a hyphenate) was going to get that picture made, even at the cost of ruining what had been written. The actor read, agreed the part was wrong for him, and left with no hard feelings at all. In fact, we did another picture together some years later. But I never worked with the writer again. — Making Movies by Sidney Lumet

David Mamet interviewed by Jeff Goldsmith, Creative Screenwriting .

Mamet’s theatrical roots

“You gotta put your ass on the line and use the audience. Period. The reason that theatre evolved that way was because the progress of the theatre on the stage aped and recapitulated the mechanism of human understanding, which is: thesis, antithesis and synthesis. And one learns to lead the audience ahead by giving them just enough information to make them interested, but not enough information so that they warrant surprise and punchline. Which is the way a joke is structured.”

Mamet on directing

“Your chances of making a living or making a better living are increased by writing something that you would want to write badly enough that you would actually go out and raise the money to direct it. You’re much better to do that because otherwise you’re just going to waste twenty years waiting for the good will of your inferiors. If you really, really want to make a film—go film it for God’s sake, go steal a camera and get it done rather than trying to interest some second-class mind to help make your script a little bit worse.”

Mamet on exposition

“The trick is—never write exposition. That’s absolutely the trick. Never write it. The audience needs to understand what the story is, and if the hero understands what he or she is after then the audience will follow it. The ancient joke about exposition used to be in radio writing when they’d say, ‘Come and sit down in that blue chair.’ So, that to me is the paradigm of why it’s an error to write exposition. Then exposition came out of television, ‘I’m good, Jim, I’m good. There’s no wonder why they call me the best orthopedic surgeon in town.’ Right? And now the exposition has migrated or metastasized into the fucking stage direction. ‘He comes into the room and you can just see he’s the kind of guy who fought in the Vietnam War.’ So the error of writing exposition exists absent even the most miniscule understanding of the dramatic process. You gotta take out the exposition. The audience doesn’t care. How do we know they don’t care? Anybody ever come into the living room and see a television drama that was halfway through? Did you have any difficulty understanding what was going on? No. The trick is to leave the exposition out and to always leave out the ‘obligatory scene.’ The obligatory scene is always the audition scene, so when you see the movie, not only is it the worst scene in the movie—it’s also the worst acted scene in the movie. Because the star has to do their worst, most expository acting to get the job. Leave out the exposition; we want to know what’s happening next. All our little friends…will say to you at one point, ‘You know, we want to know more about her.’ And that’s when you say, ‘Well, that’s what you paid me for—so that you would want to know more about her.’”

Mamet on con-artist tales

“In every generation the cunning rediscover that they can manipulate the trustful and they count this as the great, great wisdom of all time.”

Professor Mamet’s reading assignment

“I suggest that everyone get Francis Ferguson’s edition of Aristotle’s Poetics . Read it once—it’ll make the point—and then retire to your typewriters. [Screenwriting’s] all about working on it and working on it until it comes out even. There’s really no magic to it. There really isn’t. They say that Bach could improvise a toccata and I’m sure he could, but I don’t think anybody can improvise a screenplay. Joseph Campbell’s Hero of a Thousand Faces is another great book where he goes through the “Hero’s Journey” and explains that all Heroes Journeys are alike whether it’s Jesus or Moses or Ghandi or Martin Luther King, Jr. or Dumbo. Every Hero’s Journey is exactly alike because that’s the way that we understand our own Hero’s Journey—which is the story of our own life. We’re given a problem, we disregard the problem, it’s given to us again, and finally we’re called to an adventure and we find ourselves unprepared and we find ourselves in the belly of the beast like Jonah, who’s eventually spewed onto a foreign land in the second act and little friends come and help. It’s true. Whether it’s Mickey the Mouse or whether it’s John the Baptist or whether its Joshua—it’s the same thing according to Joseph Campbell. The little friends come and eventually the problems of the second act rectify themselves so that the third act is a reiteration of the first problem in a new form. Not how do I live with the fact that the taskmaster is killing the Jew, but how do I bring the Torah to the Jewish people? So the third act becomes the quest for the goal and eventually the hero achieves his or her goal and that’s the end of the movie that started since frame one.”

DIRECTOR’S COMMENTARY WITH SIDNEY LUMET

128 minutes of BTS and insight from the legendary director, courtesy of Vashi Nedomansky.

“On the commentary to the DVD for The Verdict , director Sidney Lumet relates how he and the cinematographer studied the paintings of Caravaggio as a visual reference and color scheme for filming The Verdict . It is evidenced in almost every frame of this dark, quiet, beautiful movie. Weighted with browns and reds, heavy with shadow, the film is an Old Master painting in motion. The classic look of the film dovetails perfectly with its subject matter, which as treated with economy and intelligence (and, yes, even some pomposity) by David Mamet in his screenplay, approaches an affinity with the best tragedies.” — Mark Hoobler

Listen to THE VERDICT – Sidney Lumet commentary by solomojo on hearthis.at

Sidney Lumet talks about The Verdict during an interview for AFI’s 10 Top 10. Two of Lumet’s films, 12 Angry Men and The Verdict made the Top 10 Best Courtroom Dramas on the list.

The featurette contains interviews with Newman, Mason, Reed, and the producers.

This is a compilation of interviews conducted with Sidney Lumet throughout his carrer, where he talks about the art of directing, his beginnings and films.

Here are several photos taken behind-the-scenes during production of Sidney Lumet’s The Verdict . Photographed by Louis Goldman © Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation (Fox-Zanuck/Brown Productions), Silver Screen Collection/Getty Images. Please visit the website and support: The Society of Motion Picture Still Photographers . Intended for editorial use only. All material for educational and noncommercial purposes only.

If you find Cinephilia & Beyond useful and inspiring, please consider making a small donation. Your generosity preserves film knowledge for future generations. To donate, please visit our donation page , or donate directly below:

‘The Hill’: Sean Connery’s Sisyphean Bond Break-Out

Play for Play: How The Color of Money’s ‘One For Them’ Assignment Reignited Martin Scorsese’s Hunger for the Work

Gang Wars, the Prohibition Menace: Brian De Palma’s ‘The Untouchables’

‘Network’: Sidney Lumet and Paddy Chayefsky’s Gruesome Prophecy Turned Reality

Reclaiming the Lost Art of Melodrama in Sidney Lumet’s Unsung Masterpiece: ‘Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead’

‘12 Angry Men’: The Everlasting Testament to Sidney Lumet and Reginald Rose’s Filmmaking Prowess

Sidney Lumet and Paddy Chayevsky’s ‘Network’: The Grim Prophecy that Was Once Just Brilliant Satire

Sidney Lumet’s ‘Serpico’: One Honest Man’s Struggle Against the System

‘Homicide’: David Mamet’s Soul-Searching Thriller as a Modern-Day Classic

Movie Reviews

Tv/streaming, collections, great movies, chaz's journal, contributors, the most memorable verdict.

Even when comparing it to other greats such as his own " 12 Angry Men " or " To Kill a Mockingbird ", "The Verdict" stands in my opinion as the one with the most memorable, well, verdict, one which I believe to be as fresh, as satisfying and as powerful in your first viewing as it is in your twentieth.

I also believe it makes those on other pictures from the same genre such as " The Rainmaker ", " Philadelphia " " A Time To Kill " or " The Accused " feel simply like happy endings pasted at the end of a movie. In other words, this verdict was so powerful, it ruined for me just about every court room drama that followed.

I am aware the Academy Awards are simply a subjective way of distinguishing one artist by his peers during a certain period but it's also hard to understand how in 1982 the very nice but one noted performance from Ben Kingsley in " Gandhi ", could compare favorably to the great complexities Newman faced in "The Verdict": drunken irresponsibility, anxiety, betrayal, naive ness, the downright horror of realizing the mess he's created in what surely is his very last chance for redemption.

"The Verdict" may be a dialogue laden film but it's also one in which doesn't shy from using plain silence to move the story along, solely with expressions and with its sheer narrative. There is one scene in it unlike anything I remember having seen before or after in movies: the Jack Warden character flies to New York to warn Newman about a treacherous associate and there's a shot about 20 seconds long in which they are both shown having a whole conversation from afar with no dialogue whatsoever; no need for it really, we actually feel we know what is being said word for word.

Also consider the reaction from the defendants and their lawyers when the presence of an unexpected witness is announced, not a word is uttered but few times in history can I remember a series of silent expressions sending such a shock through any movie audience.

Also impressive is the fantastic scene of Newman's summation, but not only for its writing and acting. The camera shot that initially shows the complete courtroom and ends on a close-up of Newman has got to be one of the slowest-moving ones you'll ever see, barely perceptive, one moment you are here, the next you are there.

It is also interesting how Lumet has the 30 or so extras avoid just about any kind of movement during the 3-4 minute scene so that the audience's eyes will never stop focusing on Newman, that is with the exception of a yet unknown extra named Bruce Willis who does scratch his chin at some point.

Why another Paul Newman film review? Simple, because whenever anybody asks me to recommend a great movie, not too well known to today's audiences, "The Hustler" and "The Verdict" are always at the top of my list and it is never easy to point out which one is better.

My only quibble about "The Verdict" is actually a recommendation to any law firm that should ever decide to outsource a contractor to do their dirty infiltrating work: it may be a better idea to pay cash.

Gerardo Valero

Gerardo Valero is lives in Mexico City with his wife Monica. Since 2011 he's been writing a daily blog about film clichés and flubs (in Spanish) on Mexico's Cine-Premiere Magazine . His contributions to "Ebert's Little Movie Glossary" were included in the last twelve editions of "Roger Ebert's Movie Yearbook."

Latest blog posts

Cannes 2024: Megalopolis

Cannes 2024: Kinds of Kindness; Oh, Canada; Scénarios

Book Excerpt: Hollywood Pride by Alonso Duralde

Cannes 2024: Megalopolis, Bird, The Damned, Meeting with Pol Pot

Latest reviews.

Back to Black

Peyton robinson.

The Strangers: Chapter 1

Brian tallerico.

The Big Cigar

Robert daniels.

You Can't Run Forever

Glenn Kenny

The Verdict Review

01 Jan 1982

129 minutes

Verdict, The

The one everyone thought would finally win Paul Newman an Oscar (he had to wait another four years to receive one for The Color Of Money), Newman plays washed-up, ambulance chasing lawyer Frank Galvin given a final chance to prove himself in a medical malpractice suit.

With precise direction from Lumet, a hard-hitting screenplay by David Mamet, tremendous courtroom scenes and of course a powerhouse performance from Newman himself its no surprise this was a critical success. A shame really that he missed out.

Movies | 25 08 2016

Critic Reviews
User Reviews
Cast & Crew

Common Sense Media

Movie & TV reviews for parents

For Parents
For Educators
Our Work and Impact

Or browse by category:

Get the app
Movie Reviews
Best Movie Lists
Best Movies on Netflix, Disney+, and More

Common Sense Selections for Movies

50 Modern Movies All Kids Should Watch Before They're 12

Best TV Lists
Best TV Shows on Netflix, Disney+, and More
Common Sense Selections for TV
Video Reviews of TV Shows

Best Kids' Shows on Disney+

Best Kids' TV Shows on Netflix

Book Reviews
Best Book Lists
Common Sense Selections for Books

8 Tips for Getting Kids Hooked on Books

50 Books All Kids Should Read Before They're 12

Game Reviews
Best Game Lists

Common Sense Selections for Games

Video Reviews of Games

Nintendo Switch Games for Family Fun

Podcast Reviews
Best Podcast Lists

Common Sense Selections for Podcasts

Parents' Guide to Podcasts

App Reviews
Best App Lists

Social Networking for Teens

Gun-Free Action Game Apps

Reviews for AI Apps and Tools

YouTube Channel Reviews
YouTube Kids Channels by Topic

Parents' Ultimate Guide to YouTube Kids

Explaining the News to Our Kids

Family Tech Planners
Digital Skills
All Articles
Latino Culture
Black Voices
Asian Stories
Native Narratives
LGBTQ+ Pride
Best of Diverse Representation List

Celebrating Black History Month

Movies and TV Shows with Arab Leads

Celebrate Hip-Hop's 50th Anniversary

The verdict, common sense media reviewers.

'80s legal drama has alcoholism, smoking, and language.

A Lot or a Little?

What you will—and won't—find in this movie.

Standing up for the underdog. Holding those in pos

Frank is driven to unprofessional methods on accou

The main characters are predominantly White and ma

Woman punched and floored by a man. Minor bloody i

Kissing, sex implied. Character shown in underwear

Language used includes "f--k," "f---ing," "goddamn

A character buys a box of expensive cigars.

A character with an alcohol use disorder is shown

Positive Messages

Standing up for the underdog. Holding those in positions of power accountable for their actions. Discussions of bribery and corruption by institutions such as the church.

Positive Role Models

Frank is driven to unprofessional methods on account of his drinking and his career as a lawyer going badly. He resorts to underhand methods such as bribery to drum up work. There is an implied link between this and a previous allegation of professional misconduct. However, he is talented and hardworking when the situation demands it. He is conscientious -- he turns down a large, out-of-court settlement in the best interests of his clients -- but also takes matters into his own hands to achieve his goals. Frank's friend, Mickey, is brash and blunt, but does his best to help Frank's professional rehabilitation.

Diverse Representations

The main characters are predominantly White and male. There are a couple of female characters who influence the plot, but they are largely passive. Some ethnic diversity among minor characters. Racial profiling discussed by the defense lawyers as a tactic to strengthen their appearance in court, which plays on stereotypes of Black and Jewish people.

Did we miss something on diversity? Suggest an update.

Violence & Scariness

Woman punched and floored by a man. Minor bloody injury. Another character is punched in the face. Shoving and scuffles.

Did you know you can flag iffy content? Adjust limits for Violence & Scariness in your kid's entertainment guide.

Sex, Romance & Nudity

Kissing, sex implied. Character shown in underwear when getting changed. Mild references to having sex.

Did you know you can flag iffy content? Adjust limits for Sex, Romance & Nudity in your kid's entertainment guide.

Language used includes "f--k," "f---ing," "goddamn," "s--t," "Christ," "ass," "damn," "hell," and "whores."

Did you know you can flag iffy content? Adjust limits for Language in your kid's entertainment guide.

Products & Purchases

Drinking, drugs & smoking.

A character with an alcohol use disorder is shown drinking to excess and inebriated, which impacts his working and professional life. Other characters are seen drinking alcohol socially, as well as smoking cigars and cigarettes.

Did you know you can flag iffy content? Adjust limits for Drinking, Drugs & Smoking in your kid's entertainment guide.

Parents Need to Know

Parents need to know that The Verdict is a legal drama about a disgraced lawyer living with alcohol addiction, who has a chance at redemption when he takes on a medical malpractice case. Despite his addiction, lawyer Frank Galvin ( Paul Newman ) makes an effort to act in the best interests of his client. However, in one scene, he is shown to be incapacitated due to his drinking, and he also hits love interest, Laura ( Charlotte Rampling ), to the floor. Sex is suggestive rather than shown with kissing and some non-sexual nudity featuring, alongside occasional references to intercourse. Swearing is also occasional -- mainly in the context of characters showing their upset and indignation at the prospect of justice not being served -- but does include variants of "f--k." There is very little diversity, and defense attorneys make cynical comments about Black and Jewish characters that play on stereotypes. As well as drinking, characters are also frequently shown smoking cigarettes and cigars. The movie is based on a novel by Barry Reed. To stay in the loop on more movies like this, you can sign up for weekly Family Movie Night emails .

Where to Watch

Videos and photos.

Community Reviews

Parents say

There aren't any parent reviews yet. Be the first to review this title.

What's the Story?

THE VERDICT follows disgraced lawyer Frank Galvin ( Paul Newman ) as he takes on a medical malpractice case that he hopes will salvage his reputation.

Is It Any Good?

Dated by the slew of movies and TV series that have followed, this 1982 courtroom drama, while solid enough, suffers from not delving enough into its main character. In The Verdict, Newman brings enough gravitas to the role of Galvin. But his fall from grace as a once-promising attorney is never fully explored, nor are there enough twists and turns to keep us fully engaged.

Thankfully, the movie picks up during its final act, as Galvin is pitched into the thick of a courtroom battle. Director Sidney Lumet slickly delivers this David Mamet script, but The Verdict still feels like a forced effort from all concerned. Newman has legendary form when it comes to playing antiheroes ( Cool Hand Luke , Hud, and The Hustler , to name but three). It would have been interesting to see what he could've done with a bolder version of this story.

Talk to Your Kids About ...

Families can talk about how The Verdict depicted drinking . Why does Galvin drink so much? What were the results of his drinking? What consequences did he face? Did they seem realistic?

Talk about how the movie presented smoking . How have attitudes toward smoking changed today compared to when the movie was set? Why is that?

Discuss the strong language used. Did it seem necessary or excessive? What did it contribute to the movie?

How did this courtroom drama compare to more modern movies and TV shows? What are the main differences?

Movie Details

In theaters : December 17, 1982
On DVD or streaming : June 4, 2002
Cast : Paul Newman , Charlotte Rampling , Jack Warden
Director : Sidney Lumet
Studio : Twentieth Century Fox
Genre : Drama
Topics : Book Characters
Run time : 129 minutes
MPAA rating : R
Last updated : January 2, 2023

Did we miss something on diversity?

Research shows a connection between kids' healthy self-esteem and positive portrayals in media. That's why we've added a new "Diverse Representations" section to our reviews that will be rolling out on an ongoing basis. You can help us help kids by suggesting a diversity update.

Suggest an Update

Our editors recommend.

12 Angry Men

Want personalized picks for your kids' age and interests?

Philadelphia

Erin Brockovich

Courtroom dramas, political movies, related topics.

Book Characters

Want suggestions based on your streaming services? Get personalized recommendations

Common Sense Media's unbiased ratings are created by expert reviewers and aren't influenced by the product's creators or by any of our funders, affiliates, or partners.

Cast & crew
User reviews

The Verdict

An outcast, alcoholic Boston lawyer sees the chance to salvage his career and self-respect by taking a medical malpractice case to trial rather than settling.
Frank Galvin was once a promising Boston lawyer with a bright future ahead. An incident early in his career in which he was trying to do the right thing led to him being fired from the prestigious law firm with which he was working, almost being disbarred, and his wife leaving him. Continually drowning his sorrows in booze, he is now an ambulance-chasing lawyer, preying on the weak and vulnerable, and bending the truth whenever necessary to make what few dollars he has, as he has only had a few cases in the last few years, losing the last four. His only friend in the profession is his now retired ex-partner, Mickey Morrissey, who gets Frank a case, his fee solely a percentage of what his clients are awarded. The case should net Frank tens of thousands of dollars by settling out of court, that money which would at least get him back on his feet. It is a negligence suit brought on behalf of Deborah Ann Kaye by her sister and brother-in-law, Sally and Kevin Doneghy, against St. Catherine Labouré Hospital, operated by the Archdiocese of Boston, and Drs. Towler and Marks. Kaye was admitted to the hospital for what should have been a routine delivery, but something that happened while Kaye was on the operating room table led to her brain being deprived of oxygen, resulting in permanent brain damage, and Kaye now being in a totally vegetative state requiring hospitalization for the rest of her life. Frank eventually learns that the cause seems to be that Dr. Towler, the anesthesiologist and an expert in the field, used the incorrect anesthetic for the situation. However, all but one person that was in the operating room that day has provided depositions that nothing improper occurred in the operating room. The one holdout is the operating room head nurse, Maureen Rooney, who is not talking, period, to Frank or the other side. Upon seeing the state Kaye is in, Frank unilaterally decides to do what he believes is the right thing by declining the lucrative out-of-court settlement offered by the Archdiocese and take the case to court. In doing so, he hopes the truth that the hospital and the doctors truly were negligent comes to light. Feeling that this case may be a turning point in his life, Frank has a new spring in his step, enough that he attracts the attention of Laura Fischer, the two who begin a relationship. Despite having whatever the truth is on his side, that truth which he does not know, and having an expert witness of his own, Frank has an uphill battle in that the Archdiocese has retained the services of Ed Concannon, a high-priced lawyer who has a large team of associates whose task is to help Concannon and the Archdiocese win at any cost. Concannon's task seems even easier as Judge Hoyle, the presiding judge, is already biased against Frank for taking the case to court. — Huggo
Frank Galvin is a down-on-his luck lawyer, reduced to drinking and ambulance chasing. Former associate Mickey Morrissey reminds him of his obligations in a medical malpractice suit that he himself served to Galvin on a silver platter: all parties willing to settle out of court. Blundering his way through the preliminaries, he suddenly realizes that perhaps after all the case should go to court: to punish the guilty, to get a decent settlement for his clients, and to restore his standing as a lawyer. — Murray Chapman <[email protected]>
Frank Galvin (Newman) is a down-on-his luck lawyer, reduced to drinking and ambulance chasing. Former associate Mickey Morrissey (Jack Warden) reminds him of his obligations in a medical malpractice suit that he himself served to Galvin on a silver platter: all parties willing to settle out of court. Blundering his way through the preliminaries, listening to his own enthusiastic expert witness, and visiting the paralyzed woman, Deborah Ann Kaye (Susan Benenson) in a vegetative state in the aftercare home, Frank suddenly realizes that perhaps the case should go to court: to punish the guilty, to get a decent settlement for his clients, and to restore his standing as a lawyer. To the astonishment of Mickey, Frank refuses a $210,000 settlement offer from the Arch Dioceses, and the hospital to settle the case. In his enthusiasm over his expert witness and his new found sense of purpose, Frank enters the bar where he usually hangs out and offers to buy everyone a drink. He notices a young woman, sitting at the end of the bar where he usually hangs out but she turns down his offer. The next night, after preparing for the case with Mickey, they see her at the bar again, and Frank decides that he is going to get laid. Laura Fischer (Charlotte Rampling) does agree to have dinner with him and ends up at Frank's apartment for the night. Later while Frank is trying to line up his witnesses, Mickey gives Laura Frank's background, almost being disbarred when he was going to report the jury tampering that the senior partner of his law firm was doing. The senior partners turned the tables, and Frank ended up getting arrested for jury tampering, then released when he agreed to not persist. But Frank lost his partnership as well as his wife who was the daughter of the other senior partner. Judge Hoyle (Milo O'Shea) calls Frank Galvin and the lead defense attorney, Ed Concannon (James Mason), into his chambers to get a settlement, but Frank refuses, so they set the trial for the next week. Upon learning of the settlement, Sally Doneghy (Roxanne Hart) the sister of Deborah Ann and Sally's husband, Kevin Doneghy (James Handy), who wants to get this over with so they can move to Phoenix and have $50,000 left for the lifetime care of Deborah Ann in Massachusetts confront Frank. But he tells them that the offer had been withdrawn in the Judge's chambers. When he tries to contact his own expert witness, Frank finds that Dr. Gruber (Lewis Stadlen) has left town for a several week vacation in the Caribbean, and cannot be reached. Frank first tries to get a postponement, then tries to get the settlement that had been withdrawn by Concannon, but both efforts fail. In a hurry, Mickey and Frank contact Dr. Thompson, as a substitute expert witness. But when Frank picks him up at South Station, he sees that Thompson is in his 70's and black. He puts him in a cab for Frank's own apartment, so the defense cannot get to him. Then Frank tracks down Maureen Rooney (Julie Bovasso) the only operating room nurse who is not testifying for the defense, who shuts the door in his face. When Mickey's mock cross examination of Dr. Thompson is going badly, Frank is ready to give up, but Laura Fischer who has been in those sessions at Frank's apartment convinces him to keep fighting. It gradually becomes clear to the viewer, but not to Frank that the defense firm knows Frank's every move, with someone tailing him to Maureen's house and the team doing background research on Thompson, even getting a black attorney to sit with the defense team. When the trial starts, Frank has a rough opening and the testimony of Dr. Thompson is shredded by Concannon, with the help of Judge Hoyle. Later, Frank realizes that Maureen Rooney is protecting someone, and also realizes that the admitting room nurse is not a witness for the defendants. Frank tracks Maureen to her church, and through a ruse gets her to tell him where Kaitlin Costello (Lindsay Crouse) is after telling her that he had talked with Kaitlin earlier that day. Meanwhile, Laura is given an envelope with a check by Ed Concannon, for her help in spying on the plaintiff team. Then, with Laura in the room, Mickey and Frank spend all of Friday night trying to track down a Kaitlin Costello somewhere in New York. On Saturday morning Frank notices his phone bill in the mail in the office. He goes again to Maureen Rooney's house and finds her phone bill in her mailbox. Then he tracks the phone calls to New York, and calls the number. Pretending to be from a nursing magazine, he learns that Kaitlin Costello has married, and now is Kaitlin Costello Price. He also learns where she is working on the weekend, and he catches an Eastern Shuttle to New York. After booking the Shuttle, he calls Mickey and Laura to let them know that he has found Kaitlin. Laura answers and insists that she meet Frank in New York. But while she is on the phone with Frank, Mickey looks in her bag for cigarettes, and finds the Check from Ed Concannon instead. Mickey quietly puts it away and laves to get a pack of cigarettes. Finding Kaitlin with kids in a playground, Frank tries to establish a false identity and makes small talk, but Kaitlin notices the Eastern airline boarding ticket in his coat, and Frank asks her for her help. Mickey finds Frank in New York outside of his hotel, just before Frank hooks up with Laura in the Sheraton Bar. Upon meeting Frank slaps Laura hard enough to draw blood and knock her down. When she tells everyone to let him go, Frank leaves without another word. At the trial on Monday, Frank finishes his examination of Dr. Robert Towler (Wesley Addy) the anesthesiologist who gave the general anesthesia to Deborah Ann Kaye that caused her to vomit into her mask. Towler states that anyone who would have given general anesthesia to someone who had eaten a full meal only an hour earlier was criminally negligent, but he pointed out that the admitting record had stated that Deborah Ann had last eaten nine hours before the operation. Then Frank calls his new witness, Kaitlin Costello Price, who testifies that she had admitted Deborah Ann Kaye and noted that she had eaten only one hour before the operation on the admitting record. Under heavy cross examination by Ed Concannon, she testifies that she has a photocopy of the record that proves that she had put one hour on the form, but that it had been altered by Dr. Towler who claimed that he had been too busy that day to read the record before he went into the operating room. Concannon is able to cite a precedent to Judge Hoyle to have the photocopy suppressed, and then after the testimony is complete, he asks Judge Hoyle to instruct the jury to disregard all of Kaitlin's testimony. However, after a subdued summation by Frank, the jury brings in a verdict of guilty, and asks if they can increase the amount awarded to the plaintiffs. On the way out of the courtroom, Frank and Mickey are being congratulated, and see Laura standing across the vestibule. When they turn back after turning away, she is gone. Later Laura calls Frank's office, and lets the phone ring for a long while. He is still looking at the receiver while it rings as the film closes.

Contribute to this page

See more gaps
Learn more about contributing

More from this title

More to explore.

Log in or sign up for Rotten Tomatoes

Trouble logging in?

By continuing, you agree to the Privacy Policy and the Terms and Policies , and to receive email from the Fandango Media Brands .

By creating an account, you agree to the Privacy Policy and the Terms and Policies , and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and to receive email from the Fandango Media Brands .

By creating an account, you agree to the Privacy Policy and the Terms and Policies , and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes.

Email not verified

Let's keep in touch.

Sign up for the Rotten Tomatoes newsletter to get weekly updates on:

Upcoming Movies and TV shows
Trivia & Rotten Tomatoes Podcast
Media News + More

By clicking "Sign Me Up," you are agreeing to receive occasional emails and communications from Fandango Media (Fandango, Vudu, and Rotten Tomatoes) and consenting to Fandango's Privacy Policy and Terms and Policies . Please allow 10 business days for your account to reflect your preferences.

OK, got it!

Movies / TV

No results found.

What's the Tomatometer®?
Login/signup

Movies in theaters

Opening this week
Top box office
Coming soon to theaters
Certified fresh movies

Movies at home

Fandango at Home
Netflix streaming
Prime Video
Most popular streaming movies
What to Watch New

Certified fresh picks

Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga Link to Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga
Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes Link to Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes
The Last Stop in Yuma County Link to The Last Stop in Yuma County

New TV Tonight

Evil: Season 4
Trying: Season 4
Tires: Season 1
Fairly OddParents: A New Wish: Season 1
Stax: Soulsville, U.S.A.: Season 1
Lolla: The Story of Lollapalooza: Season 1
Jurassic World: Chaos Theory: Season 1
Mulligan: Season 2
The 1% Club: Season 1

The Verdict Reviews

The portentousness is often a disservice to the actors, embedded in dead air with roles too feebly written to get the ventilation going.

Full Review | Mar 1, 2024

It's Newman's performance itself that really makes this film work and helps it truly get close to Lumet's own '12 Angry Men'.

Full Review | Original Score: 4/5 | Mar 1, 2024

It is difficult to remember a courtroom drama of such efficiency as The Verdict, nor better performances from Newman.

Full Review | Mar 24, 2023

…still works, largely due to Newman’s untypical performance that drives the narrative beyond character study to high drama…

Full Review | Original Score: 4/5 | Jul 22, 2022

Dated by the slew of movies and TV series that have followed, this 1982 courtroom drama, while solid enough, suffers from not delving enough into its main character.

Full Review | Original Score: 3/5 | Dec 8, 2021

Not only is it the top-shelf courtroom drama it is renowned to be thirty years later, the film is an outstanding character piece and a little bit of a lawyer's equivalent to a "one last score" job.

Full Review | Original Score: 5/5 | Apr 12, 2021

Reform and redemption in an anti-hero are always rewarding transformations to watch.

Full Review | Original Score: 8/10 | Sep 8, 2020

The Verdict, starring Paul Newman, is stronger on local atmosphere than plot plausibility.

Full Review | Feb 26, 2020

The actors mechanically repeat a script that wasn't written with originality. [Full Review in Spanish]

Full Review | Aug 28, 2019

Lumet was convinced that Paul Newman was the perfect actor for the film; and he was completely right. [Full Review in Spanish]

Full Review | Aug 27, 2019

The acting is good, and it maintains your interest. But when it comes to the same old negative portrayal of women, The Verdict is guilty.

Full Review | Aug 20, 2019

Paul Newman has the role of his later career. He uses none of his blue-eyed charm, and scarcely ever smiles except while telling bar jokes. He IS the bruised Frank Galvin, and you feel for him with every shot of Irish whiskey and every legal defeat.

Full Review | Nov 12, 2018

This is realistic American film acting at its veristic/imaginative best.

Full Review | Jan 8, 2018

Count me among those who think the Best Actor Oscar that Paul Newman won for "The Color of Money" was a make-up call. The groundwork was laid right here in "The Verdict," and with the equally accomplished "Absence of Malice" a year earlier.

Full Review | Original Score: 8/10 | May 15, 2013

This is as good a role as Mr. Newman has ever had, and as shrewd and substantial a performance as he has ever given, although it may not be his most entirely credible.

Full Review | Jul 6, 2010

When a movie contains names as Paul Newman, David Mamet and Sidney Lumet, it is hard not to have high hopes. Yet The Verdict meets these aspirations, and in the process presents some of the best work by these three revered figures of American cinema.

Full Review | Original Score: 4/5 | Jul 6, 2010

Sidney Lumet directs effectively, keeping the tension strong, and unfolding David Mamet's intelligent screenplay slowly but with maximum impact.

Full Review | Original Score: 4/4 | Jun 30, 2008

There are many fine performances and sensitive moral issues contained in The Verdict but somehow that isn't enough to make it the compelling film it should be.

Full Review | Jun 30, 2008

Paul Newman goes into court a drunken bum and comes out a better man in this superb legal drama about a man finding redemption.

Full Review | Original Score: 3.5/5 | Jun 30, 2008

Sidney Lumet's direction, like David Mamet's patchy script, may not be quite good enough to justify the Rembrandt-like cinematography of Edward Pisoni and the brooding mood of self-importance, but it's good direction nonetheless.

MPAA Rating

Produced by, the verdict (1982), directed by sidney lumet / lars kraume.

AllMovie Rating 8
User Ratings ( 0 )
Your Rating
Overview ↓
AllMovie Review Review ↓
User Reviews ↓
Cast & Crew ↓
Awards ↓
Releases ↓
Related ↓

Synopsis by Linda Rasmussen

Characteristics, related movies.

Share full article

Supported by

PAUL NEWMAN STARS IN 'THE VERDICT'

By Janet Maslin

Dec. 8, 1982

A solidly old-fashioned courtroom drama such as ''The Verdict'' could have gotten by with a serious, measured performance from its leading man, or it could have worked well with a dazzling movie-star turn. The fact that Paul Newman delivers both makes a clever, suspenseful, entertaining movie even better.

This is as good a role as Mr. Newman has ever had, and as shrewd and substantial a performance as he has ever given, although it may not be his most entirely credible. Mr. Newman begins the story as a lonely, washed-up, pathetic has-been lawyer. Not exactly typecasting, and not the sort of thing he does terribly convincingly. Of course, his luck is about to change. Mr. Newman plays Frank Galvin, first seen drinking, playing pinball in the daytime and bribing funeral-home operators to let him pass his business cards to the bereaved. Sidney Lumet's ''The Verdict,'' which opens today at the Gotham, Criterion Center and other theaters, watches him rise to an important challenge, shake off the cobwebs, resuscitate his law practice and fight furiously to help good triumph over evil. As nearmiraculous transformations go, this one's not bad at all, considering the fact that it's accomplished in only slightly over two hours' screen time.

Frank's big case is a malpractice suit against a Roman Catholic hospital in Boston, and it has been his big case - his only case - for months before he remembers to get around to it. Suddenly, the court date is imminent, and it's time for Frank to meet his client, the sister of a now-comatose victim injured during childbirth. Frank tidies up his grimy-looking office, which has a semicircular window suggesting a setting sun. He locks it up, and leaves a note from his nonexistent secretary about a nonexistent lunch date with a judge. When he rushes back to greet the client, he does his best to look as if he has been busy. The client looks understandably doubtful.

What changes Frank? A look at the victim - Mr. Lumet has Frank take some bedside Polaroids and then lingers on Frank's feeling of slow realization as the pictures develop - and an offer from the church's prestigious law firm of a large out-of-court settlement. ''If I take the money I'm lost,'' Frank says, suddenly realizing that he is not willing to be bought off. All we hear of his earlier record is that he has lost his handful of trial cases and was married to and was divorced by his boss's daughter. Arguing this case will be his chance of a lifetime to do something worthwhile.

David Mamet's terse screenplay for ''The Verdict'' is that of a David and Goliath story, as might be expected -why would anyone want to watch a loser risk everything for one more crushing defeat? But it's nonetheless full of surprises. Structurally, ''The Verdict'' is virtually a maze of a movie, because the audience can see at the outset where Frank Galvin ought to wind up but has no hint of how he might get there. Along the way, Mr. Mamet has supplied twists and obstacles of all sorts, and Mr. Lumet has provided a gallery of beautifully cast performers in supporting roles. Jack Warden is, as ever, dependably gruff, funny and big-hearted as the former mentor who drops everything to help out Frank just one more time. James Mason does a wonderful job as the sleek, sarcastic mastermind behind the archdiocese's defense. And Milo O'Shea plays an obviously biased judge whose fondest wish is that Frank Galvin stop wasting everyone's time. The judge's hostility is only one of the numerous monkeywrenches that Mr. Mamet throws in Frank's path.

The movie provides him with a love interest, too, a stony young woman named Laura (Charlotte Rampling) who somehow seduces Frank by treating him as coldly as she possibly can. Although the extreme restraint of Miss Rampling's performance makes a bit more sense on second viewing than it does on first, both the character and the performance slow the movie down for no vital purpose. Even Mr. Lumet is uncharacteristically awkward in manipulating this part of the story, shooting the characters at a strangely long distance when they meet in a hotel room, or ending the film on an ambiguous note much like that on which Mr. Newman's performance in ''Absence of Malice'' also ended.

Mr. Lumet's best direction here is utterly unobtrusive, speeding the film along suspensefully and shading it in rich, dark tones. He falters so infrequently here that the rough spots are attentiongetting, such as on the few occasions when the tale takes a melodramatic or preachy turn. Most of the film is swift and exciting, told in a style so measured that even the relatively farfetched moments take on an air of plausibility.

When Mr. Newman delivers his climactic courtroom speech, Mr. Lumet begins with a shot of the entire room in late afternoon, with Mr. Newman only one of many figures in the tableau. This isn't the star treatment that other directors might have brought to the actor's big moment; it's not a particularly flattering shot, but it's one that keeps the star firmly and unswervingly in the service of the story. Should anyone in the audience drop a pin during these crucial, superbly staged moments, the rest of the audience is sure to hear.

From Has-Been to ...

THE VERDICT, directed by Sidney Lumet; screenplay by David Mamet, based on the novel by Barry Reed; director of photography, Andrzej Bartkowiak; film editor, Peter Frank; music by Johnny Mandel; produced by Richard D. Zanuck and David Brown; released by Columbia Pictures. At the Criterion, 45th Street and Broadway; Gotham, Third Avenue and 58th Street; 34th Street Showplace, near Second Avenue. Running time: 129 minutes. This film is rated R.

Frank Galvin . . . . . Paul Newman

Laura Fischer . . . . . Charlotte Rampling

Mickey Morrissey . . . . . Jack Warden

Ed Concannon . . . . . James Mason

Judge Hoyle . . . . . Milo O'Shea

Bishop Brophy . . . . . Edward Binns

Maureen Rooney . . . . . Julie Bovasso

Kaitlin Costello Price . . . . . Lindsay Crouse

Sally Doneghy . . . . . Roxanne Hart

Dick Doneghy . . . . . James Handy

Dr. Towler . . . . . Wesley Addy

Dr. Gruber . . . . . Lewis Stadlen

Joseph Alito . . . . . Kent Broadhurst

Billy . . . . . Colin Stinton

Jimmy . . . . . Burtt Harris

Join or Sign In

By joining TV Guide, you agree to our Terms of Use and acknowledge the data practices in our Privacy Policy .

TV Listings
Cast & Crew

The Verdict Reviews

77 Metascore
2 hr 9 mins
Watchlist Where to Watch

An alcoholic lawyer thinks he can make some quick cash getting a settlement for the family of a woman who is in a coma after being operated on at a Catholic hospital. However, he becomes emotionally involved in the case, turns down the offer, and takes the powerful institution to court.

This powerful study of a man's fight to regain his dignity features a fine performance from Paul Newman as failed attorney Frank Galvin. He takes on a seemingly open-and-shut case of malpractice, in which a woman lapsed into a coma while having a baby, the apparent victim of a mistake by an anesthesiologist at a prominent Catholic hospital in Boston. At first willing to take a settlement for the victim's family, Galvin realizes after visiting the comatose woman that he should put up a fight on her behalf. Up against the powerful Catholic establishment of Boston, he works to build a case, and, with it, renewed self-respect. He is also battling his dependence on alcohol, another reason behind his downfall. Newman's portrayal of his character is a sympathetic and totally candid performance. Every wart shows, from his alcoholism to the ill-prepared opening statement he delivers in a nervous stammer to the packed courtroom. Small moments come across as something special, and the actor received a well-deserved Oscar nomination for his performance. Sidney Lumet directs effectively, keeping the tension strong, and unfolding David Mamet's intelligent screenplay slowly but with maximum impact.

Lolo Loves Films

Sunday, february 10, 2019, movie review: "the verdict" (1982), 2 comments:.

I don't agree with premises that that it is not true to real procedure, regardless of what platitudes the Bar would like to impose. Perry (the) Mason is much more fictional but it runs twice daily, in largest part to brainwash Americans to think that the types portrayed by the Verdict are not true to life, as if Masons are tru prototypes.

Terrific Review. I have know idea what Miss Anonymous above is speaking on. Power, and corporate greed in big business and in big law firms don't exist. She's clearly insane and prolly works for Gilead. Anyway, excellent review, JackWarden seems to always have the burden-some task/role to give all the major plot points expedition. He's a true blue Actor as Artist just like this entire ensemble-especially. Mr.Newman.

an image, when javascript is unavailable

The Definitive Voice of Entertainment News

Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter

site categories

‘verdict’: film review | venice 2019.

'Verdict,' the feature debut from Brillante Mendoza protege Raymund Ribay Gutierrez, premiered in Venice in the Horizons section.

By Boyd van Hoeij

Boyd van Hoeij

Share this article on Facebook
Share this article on Twitter
Share this article on Flipboard
Share this article on Email
Show additional share options
Share this article on Linkedin
Share this article on Pinit
Share this article on Reddit
Share this article on Tumblr
Share this article on Whatsapp
Share this article on Print
Share this article on Comment

A woman from the Philippines takes her husband to court after a night of drunken abuse in Verdict , the feature debut from Raymund Ribay Gutierrez. This first film was clearly long awaited, with the director’s two most recent shorts, Judgement and Imago , selected to compete for the Palme d’Or in Cannes. But even though the subject matter is urgent as well as important, this two-hour drama feels too much like an ersatz Brillante Mendoza joint, with the Cannes best director winner (for 2009’s Kinatay ) perhaps not coincidentally the executive producer as well as a “creative consultant” here.

While Mendoza’s smudgy, shaky-cam aesthetic, familiar from films like Ma’ Rosa , is quite faithfully replicated and Gutierrez’s film is set in Mandaluyong, Manila, and checks in at its Police HQ, much like a part of Ma’ Rosa , what is almost entirely missing is any sense of urgency or character. Verdict , as its generic, article-less title already seems to foreshadow, is finally more interesting for Filipino legal-system aficionados than for fans of rewarding drama.

The Bottom Line A dry court procedural.

The ironically named Joy (Max Eigenmann, restrained but determined) is the mother of a cute girl, appropriately named Angel (Jorden Suan). At night, Joy’s husband, a low-level crook with the hell-invoking name of Dante (Mendoza’s late muse Kristoffer King, overacting), stumbles into their meager dwelling drunk and starts shouting abuse at her before getting his hands on her. Joy tries to defend herself with a kitchen knife, hurting her husband on his arm. Angel is also hurt in the struggle, while Joy receives several severe blows to her face. When mother and daughter finally manage to escape, they literally run to the police to file a complaint against Dante and have him arrested.

These early establishing scenes are the feature’s best as the viewer is thrown straight into the thick of things, with the restless camera struggling to keep up with the fight. Cinematographer Joshua A. Reyles — who also shot Mendoza’s recent Alpha: The Right to Kill as well as Gutierrez’s shorts — is frequently just a beat too late with his movements and with the digital image’s focus, which adds to the sense of things spiraling out of control. Further aiding this sensation is the frenetic cutting by editor Diego Marx Dobles, another Mendoza alumnus.

But an early, visceral sensation of things going haywire, as a domestic spat turns into physical abuse due to alcohol and ill will, isn’t enough to carry an entire feature. And while Dante has problems containing his anger even at Police HQ and in court, most of what follows is actually a dreary succession of court dates. They are each a few weeks apart, as different elements of the case are discussed in front of a stone-faced (male) judge (Pakingan Rene Durian) by Joy’s world-weary public prosecutor (Lourdes Javelosa-Indunan) and the fancy-schmancy lawyer (Vincent Aureus) that Dante’s mother (Dolly De Leon) hires even though she can’t really afford him.

THR Newsletters

More from The Hollywood Reporter

‘blue sun palace’ review: an intimate, affecting and dogma-free portrait of chinese immigrants in working-class new york, ‘eephus’ review: an existential baseball comedy that’s less about the game than a dying pastime, saudi arabia’s film alula is “moving full steam ahead”, cannes legend jia zhangke on his “very emotional” new film ‘caught by the tides’, jeff daniels feared ‘dumb and dumber’ toilet scene would “end” his acting career, cannes unsold gems: the best films yet to land u.s. distribution.

site categories

Naomie harris & lashana lynch back campaign to improve hair & makeup experience for black actors, ‘furiosa: a mad max saga’: what the critics are saying.

By Max Goldbart , Andreas Wiseman

Anya Taylor-Joy in Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga movie

The first reviews are in for George Miller ‘s anticipated Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga and the notices are largely positive so far.

Deadline’s Pete Hammond said Miller had “perhaps given birth to the greatest Max yet, a wheels-up, rock-and-rolling epic.” Pete was one of many to praise the cast, production design and visuals. “Shout-out to action designer Guy Norris and his team, who show the need for a stunts Oscar.” You can check out his review here .

‘Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga’ Cannes Film Festival Premiere Photos: Anya Taylor-Joy, Chris Hemsworth, George Miller & More

Anya Taylor-Joy, Tom Burke and Chris Hemsworth in Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga movie

‘Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga’ Review: Chris Hemsworth And Anya Taylor-Joy Take Dystopian Franchise To New Levels – Cannes Film Festival

Reviewing for The Guardian , Peter Bradshaw gave the movie four stars, and he was one of many to heap praise on leads Anya Taylor-Joy and Chris Hemsworth . He called Taylor-Joy an “overwhelmingly convincing action hero” who “sells this sequel.”

RELATED: Cannes Film Festival Photos

The Au Review in Australia said Furiosa is “an exhilarating actioner from one of the greatest blockbuster filmmakers of our time…In so many ways the odds were stacked against Fury Road, and yet genius and grit persevered, resulting in a bombastic, exaggerated, emotional action extravaganza that spoke to the unmatched creativity of its director,” wrote Peter Gray.

The South China Morning Post described the action film as being as “bombastic” as 2015’s Fury Road but Hemsworth provides an “added bonus.” “It is the little moments that really sell the film,” said the review. “A lizard pops out of a skull before it is crushed to death by a monster vehicle; a hairpiece falls onto a branch, which grows and sprouts leaves, shown using time-lapse photography to mark Furiosa’s transition from youngster to young warrior.”

RELATED: Cannes Film Festival 2024: All Of Deadline’s Movie Reviews

IGN Africa praised the “immaculate crafting” of the pic. “Weaving together top-notch worldbuilding, an emotionally resonant directorial eye, searing performances, sharp cinematography, and a hell-raising score, this is a remarkable hero’s journey punctuated by incredible action scenes,” it added.

Must Read Stories

‘emilia pérez’ red carpet, review, ovation; latest festival reviews.

Season Finale With Gyllenhaal; Trump VP Cold Open; What’s In Store For Season 50?

Somali director mo harawe talks his history-making cannes movie, ‘if’ lighter at $30 million+, ‘strangers’ lift, ‘back to black’ belly-up.

Subscribe to Deadline Breaking News Alerts and keep your inbox happy.

The Morning After: Our verdict on the new iPad Pro

A feat of engineering, for a price..

Apple’s new iPad Pro is one of the most divisive (and thinnest) devices the company has made in years. Sure, it’s an undeniable feat of engineering and thinner than an iPod nano. Apple squeezed a new M4 chip and “tandem” OLED panel into its latest flagship tablet.

The new OLED enables more brightness and improved HDR performance compared to the old iPad Pro—standard screen brightness is up to 1,000 nits, compared to 600 nits for the last model. It’s so powerful and so beautiful. But this cutting-edge tech makes it more expensive than ever, putting it out of reach of most and pitting it against flagship laptops, price-wise.

As Nathan Ingraham explains in his review, the iPad Pro lineup has always been about showing off just how good an Apple tablet can be, but this one truly is without compromise. For the rest of us, there's the new iPad Air.

Later today, Google I/O’s big keynote will reveal the company’s latest AI ambitions. We’ll be reporting live, later today.

— Mat Smith

The biggest stories you might have missed

What to expect at Google I/O 2024: Gemini, Android 15, WearOS and more details

Meta’s next hardware project might be AI-infused headphones with cameras

iOS 17.5 has support for web-based app downloads in the EU

iPad Air (2024) review: This is the iPad to get

You can get these reports delivered daily direct to your inbox. Subscribe right here!

OpenAI’s free GPT-4o model can talk, laugh, sing and see more like a human

And it looks like a big ole black hole..

OpenAI on Monday announced GPT-4o, a brand-new AI model the company says is one step closer to “much more natural human–computer interaction.” The new model accepts any combination of text, audio and images as input and can generate output in all three formats. It also sounds a lot more like digital assistant Samantha from the movie Her . During the presentation, OpenAI showed GPT-4o translating live between English and Italian, helping a researcher solve a linear equation in real time on paper and providing guidance on deep breathing. OpenAI’s demonstrator even used the smartphone’s camera to show how GPT-4o would describe the room they were in. It could infer they were in a studio, filming video or possibly a livestream. OpenAI is making the new model available to everyone, including free ChatGPT users, over the next few weeks.

Google teases new camera-powered AI feature a day ahead of I/O

The feature looks like an ai-infused version of google lens..

Not to be outdone, ahead of Google I/O (kicks off later today — stay tuned for all the news right here ), Google teased its own incoming AI camera features. It’s not exactly clear what the feature is , but it bears some similarities to Google Lens, the company’s camera-powered search feature. What’s shown in the teaser video, however, appears to be working in real-time and responding to voice commands.

Dyson’s first dedicated hard-floor cleaner doesn’t suck

The wash g1 is your upgrade from the humble mop..

It’s a new direction for Dyson: a floor cleaner without mention of suction, cyclone technology or any of its usual vacuum vocabulary. The Wash G1 is the company’s debut hard-floor cleaner, and it swaps suction for high-speed rollers, water and nylon bristles. It’ll go on sale later this year for $700 — we got to test it at Dyson HQ, ahead of launch.

Latest Stories

Apple will reportedly offer higher trade-in credit for old iphones for the next two weeks.

According to Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman, Apple will be offering a little more than usual for some trade-ins starting next week in the US and Canada. That's as long as you're getting one of the iPhone 15 models.

Yuck: Slack has been scanning your messages to train its AI models

Slack trains machine-learning models on user messages, files and other content without explicit permission. The training is opt-out, meaning your private data will be leeched by default.

New trailer for Dead Cells: Immortalis gives us a first real look at the animated series

A full trailer just dropped for the upcoming animated show based on the popular game Dead Cells, and it looks like the creators have made a few unexpected choices. Along with the trailer, the series now has a release date: June 19.

Beats headphones and earbuds with AppleCare+ are on sale at Amazon

Several models of Beats headphones and earbuds are deeply discounted right now in a deal from Amazon, including the noise canceling Studio Buds, which are nearly half off. The limited time deal also includes the option for two years of AppleCare+ coverage.

X-Men ‘97 didn’t have to go that hard

I wasn’t sure Marvel, under the auspices of Disney, could deliver on the flavor of the X-Men cartoon, while also making a modern show that older fans, now adults in their 30s and 40s, could enjoy. But X-Men 97 does just that.

Adobe threatens to sue Nintendo emulator Delta for its look-alike logo

Delta, an emulator that can play Nintendo games, had to change its logo after Adobe threatened legal action.

How to watch the Microsoft Build 2024 keynote live on May 21

Microsoft is streaming its Build 2024 keynote on Tuesday. Here's how to watch -- and what to know about the lower-profile event the day before.

Doctor Who: Boom review: All hail the conquering hero

It's the first classic of the Disney+ era.

Motorola’s 2024 Razr lineup may include a bigger cover screen for the budget model

We may have a good look at Motorola’s next foldable phones. A pair of leaks show the entry-level and high-end models in various colors from all sorts of angles.

The OpenAI team tasked with protecting humanity is no more

In the summer of 2023, OpenAI created a “Superalignment” team whose goal was to steer and control future AI systems that could be so powerful they could lead to human extinction. Less than a year later, that team is dead.

The best sous vide machines for 2024

For newbies interested in buying their first sous vide machine or experienced cooks simply looking for an upgrade, here's a list of the best sous vide machines on the market right now.

Valve’s next game appears to be Deadlock, a MOBA hero shooter

According to a pair of content creators, the wait for a new Valve game is almost over: A third-person hero shooter is imminent, and it’s called Deadlock.

Apple is said to be working on a 'significantly thinner' iPhone

The iPhone could be going the way of the iPad Pro by becoming much thinner next year. However, you'll may have to pay quite a lot for this rumored slender model, which may replace the Plus in the annual iPhone lineup.

Surface Pro 10 for Business review: A safe upgrade for IT workers

The Surface Pro 10 for Business is basically just a chip upgrade over the previous model, but it’s still a thin, light and well-designed Windows tablet.

A Fallout crossover is coming to Fortnite

A Fallout crossover is coming to Fortnite, likely when the battle royale's new season starts on May 24.

Amazon's Kindle Scribe dips back to an all-time low, plus the rest of this week's best tech deals

This week's deals in tech include sale prices on gear from Apple, Kindle, Beats, Roku, Anker and more.

This Anker Nano 10K power bank is on sale for just $32

This Anker Nano 10K power bank is on sale for $32 via Amazon. That’s a discount of 20 percent on one of our most recommended power banks.

The next Call of Duty will reportedly hit Game Pass on its release day

It seems that Microsoft has decided to bring the next Call of Duty game to Game Pass on day one. Executives had reportedly been debating for some time how to handle the upcoming release.

How to shop for a smart grill

Here's everything you need to know about buying a smart grill, plus some of the best ones you can get right now, as chosen by Engadget editors.

Twitter has officially moved to X.com

Twitter officially went through a rebranding almost a year ago, but most of its pages still used Twitter in their URL until now.

Election 2024
Entertainment
Newsletters
Photography
Personal Finance
AP Investigations
AP Buyline Personal Finance
AP Buyline Shopping
Press Releases
Israel-Hamas War
Russia-Ukraine War
Global elections
Asia Pacific
Latin America
Middle East
Election Results
Delegate Tracker
AP & Elections
Auto Racing
2024 Paris Olympic Games
Movie reviews
Book reviews
Personal finance
Financial Markets
Business Highlights
Financial wellness
Artificial Intelligence
Social Media

A French court clears director Polanski of defaming a British actor who accused him of rape

A French court acquitted filmmaker Roman Polanski on Tuesday of defaming a British actor whom he described as a liar after she accused him of sexual assault. The case stems from a 2019 interview with Paris Match magazine, where Polanski allegedly called Charlotte Lewis a liar following her accusations. (AP video/Oleg Cetinic)

British actor Charlotte Lewis reacts after the verdict against filmmaker Roman Polanski Tuesday, May 14, 2024 in Paris. Roman Polanski was acquitted of defaming the actor whom he described as a liar after she accused the director of sexual assault. (AP Photo/Thibault Camus)

Copy Link copied

British actor Charlotte Lewis leaves the courtroom after the verdict against filmmaker Roman Polanski Tuesday, May 14, 2024 in Paris. Roman Polanski was acquitted of defaming the actor whom he described as a liar after she accused the director of sexual assault. (AP Photo/Thibault Camus)

British actor Charlotte Lewis arrives with her lawyer Benjamin Chouai before the verdict against filmmaker Roman Polanski Tuesday, May 14, 2024 in Paris. Roman Polanski was acquitted of defaming the actor whom he described as a liar after she accused the director of sexual assault. (AP Photo/Thibault Camus)

Roman Polanski’s lawyer Delphine Millet answers reporters after the verdict Tuesday, May 14, 2024 in Paris. Roman Polanski was acquitted of defaming actor Charlotte Lewis whom he described as a liar after she accused the director of sexual assault. (AP Photo/Thibault Camus)

PARIS (AP) — A French court acquitted filmmaker Roman Polanski on Tuesday of defaming a British actor whom he accused of lying after she alleged that he sexually assaulted her as a teenager.

The case stems from a 2019 interview with Paris Match magazine where Polanski accused Charlotte Lewis of “a heinous lie” for alleging that he raped her in the 1980s when she was 16.

The Paris court’s ruling did not address the truth of the rape allegation but focused solely on whether the 90-year-old Polanski’s comments in the interview constituted defamation against Lewis. Polanski denied the charges.

Lewis said she felt let down by the verdict and would appeal.

“I feel sad,” she said. “For us, it’s not over.”

Polanski was not in court. His lawyer Delphine Meillet phoned him from the courtroom to announce the news, saying: “We won, Roman.”

Speaking afterward to reporters, she said the court recognized his right to challenge people who make accusations against him. She noted that the verdict came on the opening day of the Cannes Film Festival, calling it “a symbolic day.”

“The question that the court answered was whether you could defend yourself publicly when you are accused publicly. The answer is yes. You can challenge accusations, you can cast doubt on accusations,” the lawyer said. “It’s a victory for the rights of the defense.”

RCMP Superintendent serious crimes branch David Hall speaks about Alberta RCMP linking four historical homicides to deceased serial killer Gary Allen Srery during a press conference in Edmonton, Friday, May 17, 2024. (Jason Franson/The Canadian Press via AP)

Polanski, known for classics such as “Rosemary’s Baby,” “Chinatown” and “The Pianist,” had also suggested to Paris Match that Lewis was a poor liar and may have falsely accused him out of “frustration.”

Lewis first made public her accusations against Polanski in 2010, alleging that “he sexually abused me in the worst possible way when I was just 16 years old,” referring to a 1983 incident in Paris during a casting session for his film “Pirates.”

When her defamation suit was heard in Paris in March, Lewis testified that she didn’t file suit for rape against Polanski in 2010 because too much time had passed for her allegations to be heard, the court noted Tuesday in a summary of its ruling.

The filmmaker has faced several other accusations of sexual assault that allegedly occurred over several decades, including a notable case from 1977 where he was charged with the rape of a 13-year-old in the United States. He pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor but fled to Europe in 1978 before sentencing could take place.

Associated Press journalists Thomas Adamson and Nicolas Garriga contributed.

IMAGES

The Verdict
The Verdict movie review & film summary (1982)
The Verdict Movie Review & Film Summary (1982)
Movie Review: The Verdict (1982)
Movie Review: The Verdict (1982) [HD]
Watch The Verdict

COMMENTS

The Verdict movie review & film summary (1982)
The Verdict. There is a moment in "The Verdict" when Paul Newman walks into a room and shuts the door and trembles with anxiety and with the inner scream that people should get off his back. No one who has ever been seriously hung over or needed a drink will fail to recognize the moment. It is the key to his character in "The Verdict," a movie ...
Revisiting Sidney Lumet's The Verdict
A movie like "The Verdict" would be the crowning achievement by any actor if not because Paul Newman had already done "The Hustler" early in his career. These two entries, the very best in magnificent Newman's career, would seem on the surface to be completely different until you realize that down deep, they have the same core subject.
The Verdict
The Verdict (1982) The Verdict (1982) The Verdict (1982) View more photos Movie Info Synopsis A boozing lawyer (Paul Newman) takes on a law-firm dean (James Mason), the Archdiocese of Boston and ...
The Verdict (1982)
The Verdict: Directed by Sidney Lumet. With Paul Newman, Charlotte Rampling, Jack Warden, James Mason. An outcast, alcoholic Boston lawyer sees the chance to salvage his career and self-respect by taking a medical malpractice case to trial rather than settling.
The Verdict
The Verdict is a 1982 American legal drama film directed by Sidney Lumet and written by David Mamet, adapted from Barry Reed's 1980 novel of the same name. The film stars Paul Newman as a down-on-his-luck alcoholic lawyer who accepts a medical malpractice case to improve his own situation, but discovers along the way that he is doing the right thing. ...
The Verdict (1982)
The Verdict (1982) Top 3 - 1982 The Verdict, another excellent achievement for the magnificent Sidney Lumet (12 Angry Men) is the kind of film that shakes the insides, makes you think and consider things such as truth, morality, redemption and justice. Lumet does the same thing he does with 12 Angry Men in this film, he simply, without any ...
'The Verdict': Sidney Lumet and David Mamet's Masterpiece as a Blend of
The Verdict premiered in early December 1982, and the outstandingly warm welcome from the critics cleared its way to five Academy Award nominations, as well as very solid box office results. The ultimate value of the movie, however, can be found in the fact that it looms large in the professional biographies of each and every one of the people ...
The Verdict
1982. R. Twentieth Century Fox. 2 h 9 m. Summary An attorney (Paul Newman) recognizes the opportunity to salvage his career and self-respect by taking a medical malpractice case to trial rather than settling. Drama. Directed By: Sidney Lumet. Written By: Barry Reed, David Mamet, Jay Presson Allen.
'The Verdict'
A. O. Scott reviews Sidney Lumet's film about an alcoholic trial lawyer on a medical malpractice case.Related Article: http://bit.ly/40QJ6wSubscribe to the T...
The most memorable verdict
The most memorable verdict. Gerardo Valero April 08, 2010. Tweet. May contain spoilers. Courtroom dramas count for some of Hollywood's best movies and, among their finest stands Sidney Lumet's " The Verdict ." Even when comparing it to other greats such as his own "12 Angry Men" or "To Kill a Mockingbird", "The Verdict" stands in my opinion as ...
'The Verdict' (1982) a masterwork of the courtroom drama form
"The Verdict" (1982) is most known for the engrossing turn by Paul Newman as a down-and-out lawyer who gets obsessed with one case, but it's also the pinnacle of the courtroom drama form under the eye of legendary director Sidney Lumet ("12 Angry Men") and an early example of David Mamet's chug-along writing. While the film - rightly nominated for a Best Picture Oscar - is more ...
The Verdict Review
31 Dec 1981. Running Time: 129 minutes. Certificate: 15. Original Title: Verdict, The. The one everyone thought would finally win Paul Newman an Oscar (he had to wait another four years to receive ...
The Verdict critic reviews
A solidly old-fashioned courtroom drama such as The Verdict could have gotten by with a serious, measured performance from its leading man, or it could have worked well with a dazzling movie-star turn. The fact that Paul Newman delivers both makes a clever, suspenseful, entertaining movie even better. Read More. By Janet Maslin FULL REVIEW.
The Verdict Movie Review
Our review: Parents say: Not yet rated Rate movie. Kids say: Not yet rated Rate movie. Dated by the slew of movies and TV series that have followed, this 1982 courtroom drama, while solid enough, suffers from not delving enough into its main character. In The Verdict, Newman brings enough gravitas to the role of Galvin.
The Verdict (1982)
Judge Hoyle (Milo O'Shea) calls Frank Galvin and the lead defense attorney, Ed Concannon (James Mason), into his chambers to get a settlement, but Frank refuses, so they set the trial for the next week. Upon learning of the settlement, Sally Doneghy (Roxanne Hart) the sister of Deborah Ann and Sally's husband, Kevin Doneghy (James Handy), who ...
The Verdict
Full Review | Original Score: 8/10 | Sep 8, 2020. Molly Haskell Vogue. The Verdict, starring Paul Newman, is stronger on local atmosphere than plot plausibility. Full Review | Feb 26, 2020. Diego ...
Movie Review: The Verdict (1982)
The Verdict is a really great legal drama. The case isn't as interesting as a lot of other movies in this genre, but Paul Newman's performance and the writing by David Mamet really stand out.
The Verdict (1982)
Find trailers, reviews, synopsis, awards and cast information for The Verdict (1982) - Sidney Lumet, Lars Kraume on AllMovie - In Sidney Lumet's powerful courtroom drama The…
Movie Review: The Verdict (1982)
Please visit my website for more reviews: www.thecineviewer.com. Questions? Tips? Comments? Like me! Subscribe!
PAUL NEWMAN STARS IN 'THE VERDICT'
Newman plays Frank Galvin, first seen drinking, playing pinball in the daytime and bribing funeral-home operators to let him pass his business cards to the bereaved. Sidney Lumet's ''The Verdict ...
The Verdict
The Verdict Reviews. 77 Metascore. 1982. 2 hr 9 mins. Drama. R. Watchlist. Where to Watch. An alcoholic lawyer thinks he can make some quick cash getting a settlement for the family of a woman who ...
Movie Review: "The Verdict" (1982)
The Verdict movie review. Lolo Loves Films Sunday, February 10, 2019. Movie Review: "The Verdict" (1982) Image Source: Movie: "The Verdict" Director: Sidney Lumet Year: 1982 Rating: R Running Time: 2 hours, 9 minutes. A disgraced alcoholic lawyer takes up a case of criminal negligence against some respected doctors at a hospital owned by the ...
'Verdict': Film Review
A woman from the Philippines takes her husband to court after a night of drunken abuse in Verdict, the feature debut from Raymund Ribay Gutierrez. This first film was clearly long awaited, with ...
The Verdict (1946 film)
The Verdict is a 1946 American film noir mystery drama film directed by Don Siegel and written by Peter Milne, loosely based on Israel Zangwill's 1892 novel The Big Bow Mystery.It stars Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre in one of their nine film pairings, as well as Joan Lorring and George Coulouris. The Verdict was Siegel's first full-length feature film.
'Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga': What The Critics Are Saying
The movie currently has an 87% rating from 45 reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. Below are a spread we've collated from across the globe. Reviewing for The Guardian, Peter Bradshaw gave the movie four ...
E. Jean Carroll seeks to expedite Trump's appeal of verdict ...
Lawyers for E. Jean Carroll have asked a federal appeals court to expedite Donald Trump's appeal of the verdict in their first trial in which a jury awarded Carroll $5 million in damages after ...
Judge quickly denies request to discard $38 million verdict in New
May 16, 2024 | 8:08 AM. CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — The judge who oversaw a landmark trial about New Hampshire's youth detention center has refused to discard the $38 million verdict, saying the ...
The Morning After: Our verdict on the new iPad Pro
The new OLED enables more brightness and improved HDR performance compared to the old iPad Pro—standard screen brightness is up to 1,000 nits, compared to 600 nits for the last model. It's so ...
A French court clears director Polanski of defaming a British actor who
1 of 7 | . British actor Charlotte Lewis reacts after the verdict against filmmaker Roman Polanski Tuesday, May 14, 2024 in Paris. Roman Polanski was acquitted of defaming the actor whom he described as a liar after she accused the director of sexual assault.