Diagonaldi
Very well executed
Doomtomylo
a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.
Christophe
Excellent characters with emotional depth. My wife, daughter and granddaughter all enjoyed it...and me, too! Very good movie! You won't be disappointed.
Edwin
The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.
inspectors71
It's the power of Henry Fonda's performance that turns Gideon's Trumpet, the true story of how the right to counsel for all criminal suspects was guaranteed by the United States Supreme Court, into something a bit more than a cheapjack made-for-TV movie. Fonda has enough sense to make Clarence Gideon something less than a hero. Gideon is an intelligent ne'er-do-well, and the viewer grows to dislike him despite his importance in our judicial history. We want him to win, but we certainly don't want him in our house.I don't know if columnist Anthony Lewis' book of the same name has Gideon as, well, as ucky as in the movie, but Fonda, toward the end of his life, seemed unhappy and defeated, and it made his portrayal of Clarence Earl Gideon totally acceptable and believable.The rest of Gideon's Trumpet is ordinary for TV, thrown-together and dumbed-down. John Houseman's misplaced weight behind the production--and his awful miscasting of himself as Earl Warren-- leave the movie feeling washed out and ready for a high school civics class.Except for Fonda, and Mel Ferrer's portrayal as Abe Fortas, we never really buy into the movie. Like the justices themselves, we are nothing much more than intellectual observers.A shame.
sfdphd
I consider myself well-educated but had never heard of this story until now. I had no idea that the right to have an attorney even if you cannot afford one was established so recently in 1963. I had heard of the attorney Abe Fortas, but didn't know his role in this story. The name that should be more well-known is Clarence Gideon, the man to thank for pursuing his right to a court-appointed attorney. The film simplifies the events that took place over more than two years, but it really holds your attention and shows the injustice of trials where the defendant could not afford an attorney and was often convicted without proper pursuit of the truth.
bkoganbing
The story of Clarence Earl Gideon illustrates the fact that even the humblest and least noble of people in the right circumstances can influence things far beyond their grasp. Gideon was certainly in humble circumstances and was not a noble character by any means.But what he was entitled to is to be represented by counsel when he was arrested for a robbery of a pool hall in a small town in Florida. Gideon was no stranger to the criminal justice system, he'd served time for numerous minor offenses before. But his efforts to defend himself without an attorney resulted in his conviction.What Gideon did was appeal directly to the US Supreme Court and they took his case and Gideon won the right to be retried with a court appointed lawyer. It was also a 9-0 decision, not something arrived at every day in important cases.Henry Fonda plays Gideon and the Seventies were not a good decade for him on screen. He sold the value of his box office name for the money and appeared in a lot of junk quite frankly. Until his final Oscar on the big screen for On Golden Pond, this Hallmark Hall of Fame television drama was probably Fonda's best work in the Seventies and might have been his epitaph, but for that. You can see this man clearly as someone who forty years earlier might well have been Tom Joad.Abe Fortas who represented Fonda at the Supreme Court is played by Jose Ferrer and Ferrer even looks like Fortas who was the consummate Washington insider. His later downfall doesn't change the fact that his was one of the most brilliant legal minds of the last century. On the local level Fonda as Gideon is represented finally in court by Lane Smith who plays his attorney in the folksy Ben Matlock style popularized by Andy Griffith.The Supreme Court who is nameless has such folks as Sam Jaffe and Dean Jagger on the bench and the Chief Justice is John Houseman. Of course the Chief Justice was Earl Warren and Houseman plays it more like his law professor Kingsley in The Paper Chase. Earl Warren was a far more down to earth individual than Houseman ever was on screen and in real life. Making her farewell appearance as Fonda's landlady is Fay Wray, she of the big ape. She gives testimony at his new trial she wasn't allowed to give at the first travesty. The right to counsel is a sacred one and the Supreme Court has made it so by the humble pleadings of one of the Creator/Deity's lesser creations in Clarence Earl Gideon. Greatness can and does exist in some strange places.
andy-227
I wouldn't define this movie as being great. It was good, but not great. It was interesting though. I had to watch this for my criminal justice class, and I was riveted to it. I learned a lot about how our courts worked and how reforms in them were made so people who couldn't afford an attorney still had the right to have one. Based on a true story, Clarence Gideon was convicted of a crime he did not commit. But the movie centers around how he was deprived of his right to an attorney, and how he fought in prison to make clear that he did not have a fair trial. I thought it was well done, and Henry Fonda was very good in the role of Clarence Gideon. Only drawback, this should have been released in theaters. The camerawork of the courtroom and the long shots of Clarence Gideon confessing his history are great. The opening shot is the best scene of the film, which is seen in it's entireity later. Henry Fonda looks right into the camera, right at you, and as Clarence Gideon, he gives you his background. Ingenious. I wish there could be more movies with scenes as subtle and as profound as this. The other scene I liked was when Gideon is retried with an experienced lawyer, and when the first witness falsely claims Clarence Gideon is the culprit, the lawyer cuts him down with words and facts. This movie is good, but it's not a monumental achievement. I would highly recommend it to you though. It's got the qualities a good film should have: a good story and good acting. And lawyers or people involved in law alike will find it very interesting.