Just Cause (1995) Poster

(1995)

User Reviews

Review this title
111 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
111 Everglades
jotix10031 March 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Never having seen this movie, based on the entertaining novel by Nicholas Katzenbach, and taking into consideration the first rate cast assembled for the production, we decided to take a look. "Just Cause", while not a horrible film, takes too many liberties with the original material that Jeb Stuart didn't quite succeed in his treatment. Arne Glimcher directed.

The first thing we think when a young black man is hauled to the local precinct for interrogation is police brutality. After all, sheriff Tanny Brown, and police officer Wilcox, show no mercy in beating Bobby Earl, who is accused of killing a young white girl. We feel horrified by what the officers do to the prisoner.

Then, the scene changes. Evangeline, Bobby Earl's grandmother is sent north to ask a distinguished Harvard professor, a retired lawyer, the young man wants Paul Armstrong to defend him. She old woman is convincing enough for Armstrong to take a look at the case. He is also convinced of the young man's innocence.

Things are not exactly what we thought they were. When Blair Sullivan, a man who is serving time in the same facility as Bobby Earl, comes forward to tell about how he is connected to the young girl's murder, and changes the dynamics of the case. The way it plays in the movie, it serves to confuse the viewer and distract Armstrong from arriving at the truth.

This thriller is made enjoyable by Sean Connery, who plays Armstrong. Laurence Fishburne, an intense actor, makes a fine impression as the Sheriff who, as far as we can see, is guilty of abusing his prisoner. Ed Harris has a wonderful opportunity to show why he is one of our best actors. Blair Underwood, Kate Capshaw, Ruby Dee and the young Scarlett Johansson are seen in supporting roles.

The film, even with its faults, will not disappoint.
36 out of 43 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Surprise, surprise
rmax30482319 August 2003
Warning: Spoilers
SPOILERS.

There's just something about Sean Connery. He's a neat guy, and he's grown neater over the past forty years. He's bald and doesn't care. His hair is gray, except that his eyebrows are black. His face is lined but handsome. He moves with force and grace. He's the kind of older guy that every man ought to hope he grows into. And he doesn't take himself or his talent too seriously either, a saving feature. And he has a sense of humor. He tells the story of location shooting during "The Man Who Would be King." Every day the cast and crew drove many miles from town up into the Atlas mountains. And every morning Connery's car passed an old man walking in the same direction with a huge load of firewood on his back. And every afternoon they would pass the same old man walking back home without the load. One morning Connery finally asked his driver to stop and offer the old guy a ride up into the mountains. The old guy thought for a while and refused the ride. Why? Because if he accepted the ride he would arrive back home too early and wouldn't know what to do with the extra time. That's the Morrocan version of the Protestant Ethic.

He's good in this movie too, as a Harvard law professor who comes to a dumpy small Florida town at the request of a death-row inmate. The inmate is handsome, black, and educated. He tells a horrifying story of having been made to confess to the murder of an eleven-year-old white girl. Now he's doomed. You've seen it before, I'm sure. Another redneck jury railroads an innocent minority-group member into the slams on what Lawrence Fishburn, the detective on the case, describes as pretty flimsy evidence, just barely good enough to convict. White guy then saves black guy from Old Sparky and the inmate embraces the loving family that has been waiting for his exoneration.

Not this time, though. The clean-cut black convict is guilty of the crime. He cuts a deal with another depraves maniac on death row, Ed Harris, than whom no one can act more depraved. Bobby Earl, the educated black murderer, will be released when Harris confesses to the murder of the eleven-year-old girl. In return, Bobby Earl will slaughter the parents that Harris loathes and will, as a kind of lagniappe, have a chance to destroy Connery's family too for a previous misencounter.

The finale loses it. It's been an engaging plot so far, although there is no believable exploration in character or anything. What I mean is that it is nothing more than a typical legal/moral drama with a surprising narrative, not a surprising execution. But the end is a typical shootout in an isolated gator-shack in the Everglades. People are stabbed, shot, kicked, pounded to a pulp, threatened with knives, and eaten by alligators. (Fat chance.) And all of this is preceded by a standard-typical car chase through the city streets and over half-open draw bridges. The climax degrades what would otherwise have been an effective legal thriller.

It is kind of interesting, though, to see the way the plot twists are carried out. And the cast is for the most part quite good, except that Bobby Earl is a bit bland. That blandness is okay when he's supposed to be innocent but it doesn't fit his true maniacal serial-killer child-molesting persona. The shooting is atmospheric, inviting and ominous at the same time. The score is generic. But except for the ending it's kind of enjoyable.

Of course, if you think about the movie, there's another whole perspective on it. It's a polemic against white Northern liberals who oppose capital punishment and are smitten with white guilt. It supports beating hell out of suspects and endorses a justice system based less on evidence than on intuition. And there is no racism at all in the South. Fishburn's daughter is like a sister to the little white victim; they are best friends and sleep over each others' houses. Why don't those Harvard egg heads just leave us alone here in Gatorville. We were all right until they started interfering.
25 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A Conservative Is A Liberal Who's Been Mugged
bkoganbing2 April 2007
Just Cause takes some of the best parts of three films, Cape Fear, A Touch of Evil and Silence of the Lambs and mixes it together to come up with a good thriller of a film.

Sean Connery is a liberal law professor, married to a former Assistant District Attorney, Kate Capshaw and he's a crusader against capital punishment. Blair Underwood's grandmother Ruby Dee buttonholes Connery at a conference and persuades him to handle her grandson's appeal. He's sitting on death row for the murder of a young girl.

When Connery arrives in this rural Florida county he's up against a tough sheriff played by Laurence Fishburne who's about as ruthless in his crime solving as Orson Welles was in Touch of Evil.

Later on after Connery gets the verdict set aside with evidence he's uncovered, he's feeling pretty good about himself. At that point the film takes a decided turn from Touch of Evil to Cape Fear.

To say that all is not what it seems is to put it mildly. The cast uniformly turns in some good performances. Special mention must be made of Ed Harris who plays a Hannibal Lecter like serial killer on death row with Underwood. He will make your skin crawl and he starts making Connery rethink some of those comfortable liberal premises he's been basing his convictions on. Many a confirmed liberal I've known has come out thinking quite differently once they've become a crime victim.

Of course the reverse is equally true. Many a law and order conservative if they ever get involved on the wrong end of the criminal justice system wants to make real sure all his rights are indeed guaranteed.

Criminal justice is not an end, but a process and a never ending one at that for all society. I guess if Just Cause has a moral that would probably be it.
61 out of 79 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Solid thriller who delivers the goods
emmet-29 February 2002
"Just Cause" is a psychological thriller about the American justice system in general, and capital punishment in particular. Sean Connery plays Paul Armstrong, a law professor who strongly opposes capital punishment. Responding to a plea, Armstrong comes out of semi-retirement and travels to Florida to help the young, black death row prisoner Bobby Earl Ferguson, who claims he has been falsely convicted of murder. Upon investigating Bobby Earl's case, Armstrong soon discovers several grave discrepancies, to the dismay of the local police officer, Tanny Brown (played by Laurence Fishburne). Racism and blind hatred, rather than actual proof, seems to have convicted Bobby Earl; and Armstrong sets out to clear the young man's reputation. In order to succeed, he needs to find out exactly how much Bobby Earl's cell-mate, the psychotic Blair Sullivan, knows about the murder.

In a movie like this, things aren't always what they seem. There are several plot twists which surprise the audience (one of them includes Armstrong's young wife and her past), and towards the end of the film, the action really starts to set in, and Armstrong's own convictions are tested as he finds his family in the hands of a mad killer. The movie depends on atmosphere and suspense until the last twenty minutes, when all hell breaks loose. It is nicely photographed, with several scenes from the damp, alligator-filled swamps surrounding the little Florida town.

Sean Connery is reliable as the stout, solid professor Armstrong, and as the centerpiece of the movie, he is totally convincing. But as the dubious police officer Tanny Brown, it is Laurence Fishburne who truly excels. He seems to own every scene he's in, and he fills his part to perfection. Kate Capshaw as Mrs. Armstrong and Blair Underwood as Bobby Earl also delivers strong performances. Several supporting actors, like Ned Beatty and Lynne Thigpen, adds to the quality of the film. The only real drawback among the actors is Ed Harris, whose portrayal of the psycho Sullivan is embarrassingly over-the-top. Harris sputters and screams, and fails to deliver anything remotely scary (as he obviously is supposed to). Compared to another movie psycho, the deliciously evil Hannibal Lecter, Harris' Sullivan is simply annoying.

"Just Cause" doesn't offer anything radically new in this movie genre, but it is a solid, mostly well-acted film who should deliver enough thrills and excitement to satisfy most viewers. Rating on a dice, I'll give it a 4 out of 6.
41 out of 51 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Too little too late
raulfaust26 December 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Whenever you see a movie involving someone that states to be unfairly arrested and definitely innocent in the death row, you expect it to end up as the lawyer proving the client was indeed innocent and the whole American system of Justice is corrupt. However, "Just Cause" does practically the opposite, which makes this movie to be extremely surprising. You know, after seeing that Bobby's trial was solved in a matter of seconds, I kinda realized he was, in fact, the murderer, but that's what happens when you see a bunch of movies in your life-- you can predict almost everything. Another good point in this film is the way the suspense is built; in the first conversation between Armstrong and Sullivan, I almost had a heart attack when Sullivan yelled all of a sudden. Director proves, in that scene and in some others, he's capable of scare the spectator whenever he wants to. Furthermore, "Just Cause" is probably inspired in some others pictures of 1990's, such as "The Silence of the Lambs" and "Cape Fear"-- this one mainly in the river scene-, which doesn't mean it doesn't have an original story, because it surely does have. Also, the whole cast is professional, with big congratulations for Ed Harris, for portraying very good the character he's given. Great independent movie!
11 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Slick thriller with some good twists and turns in which nothing is what it seems but it's all made with little style. Still the movie is saved by the cast.
Boba_Fett11389 April 2006
This movie really is a mixed bag. On the one hand, the story and concept of the movie are really good, tense and have some nice plot twists in it. But than again on the other hand, it all is told very slow, without style and uninvolved. Still I regard "Just Cause" as an above average thriller simply because of the fine cast.

Maybe Sean Connery was miscast in his role. I mean, he isn't really that believable as a the main 'hero' and father of a young daughter (played by a still very young Scarlett Johansson by the way) and husband of Kate Capshaw. I feel that he simply was too old for the role to be really credible in it. However Sean Connerey is of course a great actor and that is the only reason why he is still able to carry the movie as good as he does. But he of course is helped by a very solid supporting cast that consists out of actors like Laurence Fishburne, Blair Underwood, Ned Beatty, Hope Lange, Lynne Thigpen and Ed Harris. All actors are really good but some of them are highly underused at the same time, which is a real shame, as well as a missed opportunity. Especially Ed Harris is just totally great in his role as a psychopathic serial killer. He's truly chilling and acting superbly. Normally he doesn't play this ruthless, chilling sort of roles in movies, so he really surprises with his role in this one. His performance alone is already more than enough reason to watch this movie. However due to the fact that the story is told without much style and too formulaic, none of the characters in the movie really work out well because it feels all too distant.

It really is the way of storytelling that kills all the movie its fine potential. Arne Glimcher directs the movie with little style and keeps the pace too low at times. Because of this, we as viewers, never really get involved with the story or any of it's characters.

It really is too bad, for "Just Cause" had more than enough potential. A fine cast and a slick story with some unexpected twists and turns in it in which nothing is what it seems. The cast and story are the only reason why this movie is still an above average thriller, that will probably still please the fan of the genre. It however is an eternal shame that the movie is lacking in its story telling and style, or else this movie could had been a real classic in its genre.

7/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
28 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Contrived, but somewhat entertaining
Star_Red12 July 2002
Although it borrows heavily from better and better-known films, Just Cause is quite entertaining. Several turns are predictable or hard to believe, but this film also shows some interesting character development with Sean Connery, who seems to be a little too old for this role, but was quite believable as the law teacher, who had to learn some lessons about reality and law as it is practised in reality. Laurence Fishburne and Ed Harris seem to enjoy their performances, which they deliver with much relish, and the atmosphere of the town and the Everglades are also captured nicely. But since the plot, especially the last third or so, is really contrived, and Kate Capshaw is so annoyingly bad and shallow in a key part that usually calls for a more sensitive performance, I can not really recommend this film wholeheartedly without having a guilty conscience. See it only if you have nothing else to watch.
28 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Great Acting/Great Entertainment
whpratt120 January 2007
Always enjoy the great acting of Laurence Fishburne,(Sheriff Tanny Brown) who becomes very upset when a professor visits his town to investigate a sort of Cold Case. This professor is a retired lawyer named Paul Armstrong, (Sean Connery) who has reason to believe that a man on death row is innocent of rape and murder of a very pretty little white girl. Sheriff Tanny does not appreciate Paul Armstrong coming to his town in Florida and starting to open up a can of worms as Tanny is very certain he has arrested the correct man and even has a confession to prove he did this evil deed. The guilt person is Blair Underwood,(Bobby Earl) who is very happy to see Paul Armstrong come to his defense and possibly clear his name and secure his freedom. There are many twists and turns to this story and plenty of action and very creepy areas in the swamps of Florida. This film will keep you glued to your screens if you have not seen this film before. Enjoy
14 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A good thriller, with a great cast playing at the highest level.
filipemanuelneto21 November 2017
The story revolves around a court case in which a black man, sentenced to death for raping and murdering a white little girl, claims to be innocent. Sean Connery plays the role of an idealistic defense lawyer and Lawrence Fishburne is the rude, ill-trained Southern police officer. Both are at opposite poles but both are guided by their sense of justice. Blair Underwood was absolutely brilliant in his character and the way he evolved was enjoyable. The plot has a time when everything suddenly changes, but it's not hard to predict. The plot has a good tension and holds our attention to the end. The actors are strong and they are giving their best. Ed Harris comes in a very interesting role, small but decisive for the course of the plot. The film does also somewhat philosophical considerations about justice and how it should be done.

In summary, this is an excellent thriller where tension follows the entire movie and holds your attention to the end. It's not totally original and it's a little predictable at times but, despite that, it can provide the audience with very good actors capable of great performances. Enjoy.
6 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Just OK
TBJCSKCNRRQTreviews2 February 2004
This movie started out as an apparently good movie, but about halfway through it started to go to hell. The only mildly good thing about the latter half of the movie was Sean Connery, who pretty much shines through the entire movie. His acting was pretty good, and could have been a saving grace, had the movie not been so bad. The end was especially horrible, as it was a nearly total ripoff of Cape Fear(the new version, with Robert De Niro), in fact, several lines were taken directly from that same scene in the movie. The second-to worst thing is the 'twist' in the end, that was so obvious that I could just as well have been sitting there, waiting for it to happen. The worst thing is that the twist ruins everything that has happened up to that point, and makes the whole movie pointless since it directly opposes nearly everything that happened in the movie before that. I wouldn't recommend this to anyone other than huge fans of Sean Connery, or people who love to watch crime mysteries. Other than that, there is no reason to waste time on this movie. 6/10
32 out of 58 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Interesting film with good performances, then it nose dives
mattrochman19 September 2006
I've seen my fair share of badly thought-out endings and final twists to films, but I don't recall any film that committed outright suicide like this one did.

The film makers were clearly hoping that the great twist would 'surprise' us all.... and it did, but perhaps not in the way the directors had hoped. I was left feeling surprised that Connery, Harris, Fishburn and Capshaw had anything to do with this turkey, individually or collectively.

The film up until the final thirty minutes was rather engaging and I like the way the story was unfolding and the nature of the film overall. But once the twist was revealed, the plot holes and inconsistencies were remarkable, the underlying motive for revenge was ill-conceived and the ways things so neatly worked out for Bobby Earl was ridiculously far-fetched. What's worse is that, once the twist was revealed, the remainder of the film became excruciatingly predictable.

Harris gave a terrific performance and Connery is like Morgan Freeman in that he never gives a bad performance, even if the movie ain't that great! So all in all, it starts well and the unfolding keeps the viewer interested. The last 30 minutes is one of the most memorable nose dives in the history of cinema.
57 out of 89 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
An Underrated Thriller
monkeysgalore5 April 2020
Oh, forget the negative reviews. People can't turn their brains off. This 90s legal thriller is a gripping and entertaining experience. Delving more into mystery than courtroom drama, the film held my attention right up until the end.

The movie is greatly helped by strong lead performances from Sean Connery and Laurence Fishburne. Connery, a dependable heavyweight, seems to only get cooler with age, and Fishburne holds his own alongside the old pro. They're very effective together, and really elevate the proceedings. I love both of them a lot, and seeing them together onscreen was really cool. Ed Harris is also here, in a cool supporting role as a psychotic serial killer, and he's very charismatic.

People complain that the movie devolves into a standard thriller by the third act. This is true, it does abandon its psychological end when the required plot twist occurs, but it's a fine twist. I personally liked the overblown climax, which is basically two action sequences. A car chase, and a long climax in a forest culminating in a violent final fight, which were both pretty cool and entertaining.

Yes, the issue of the police racism and brutality was kind of ignored, and not handled very well, but that's my only main complaint. Even if you do see the plot twist coming or guess it immediately, it's still fun to watch the story play out.

I maintain my opinion that this is one of the best thrillers out there, let alone the 90s era. I can't explain my love for it, but I don't have to.
9 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Two psychos for the price of one!
planktonrules3 July 2021
"Just Cause" is one of those movies best seen after you turn off your brain. Now I am not saying it's a stupid or bad film....but it has such a convoluted and difficult to believe plot that it's best enjoyed without thinking through all the details. If you do think about them, you're bound to be disappointed.

The story is about a man on death row (Blair Underwood) whose mother (Roby Dee) is able to convince a Harvard Professor (Sean Connery) to leave academia in order to help him with his appeal. The professor is successful and evidence is uncovered that ends up with the man's release. However, there is MUCH more to the film than this....and the story goes in a completely different direction and leads to many surprises.

I think this is a film where some of the performances (particular Ed Harris) are better than the actual story. The story is just completely unbelievable....but again, if you can put this aside, the film is enjoyable.

By the way, if you care this film was made throughout Florida...Gainesville up north and the Ft. Myers/Miami areas in the south. As a Floridian, I found the local scenes pretty exciting.
7 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
"In the heat of the night"-lite
MOscarbradley5 December 2006
Despite having a first-rate cast and a half-decent story this never builds up the necessary head of steam to keep us fully interested. It's a bit like "In the heat of the night" with the Poitier/Stieger roles reversed. Here it's Connery in the do-gooder Poitier role while the black Fishburne takes the Stieger part.

Bobby Earl is on death row for the rape and murder of a young white girl. He enlists the help of Connery's law professor to take his case on board arguing that serial killer Ed Harris has confessed to the murder while in jail. The plot is fairly predictable but is not unexciting. It's just that once we know who the bad guys are there really isn't very much else left. (The director, Arne Glimcher, never seems to be on top of the material).

Although effectively the stars neither Connery or Fishburne have much to do. Luckily we have the great Ed Harris exuding genuine menace as the incarcerated serial killer, wielding his power, Hannibal Lector style from inside his prison walls, while Blair Underwood as Bobby Earl displays real promise, suave and bland enough to make you wonder if he is guilty or not.
16 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
There is one terrific performance
MrPudge12 June 2004
The film is mediocre, but seeing Ed Harris' performance as a manipulative serial killer (I'm not giving anything away by telling you this) is worth the entire movie. Too often serial killers are played as geniuses--Jack in "The Profiler" or Kevin Spacey's character in "Seven"; Harris creates a malignant redneck monster that really will startle and chill you. No one goes from zero to sixty like Harris since George C. Scott left us; in this film he modulates his voice amazingly, sounding quietly venomous one moment and then thundering like a fire and brimstone Southern minister. In Connery's case, it's just bad casting: he plays an academic consulting lawyer (a la Dershowitz {sp?}) who combats Fishburne's menacing but canny Southern cop. Connery's other roles and the notion of him they have created in us make it impossible for him to play the effete lawyer that the script seems to call for.
12 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Superb Harris
Signet13 February 2005
Ed Harris's work in this film is up to his usual standard of excellence, that is, he steals the screen away from anyone with whom he shares it, and that includes the formidable Sean Connery. The movie, which is more than a bit sanctimonious, comes alive only in the scenes when Harris is interrogated by the attorney for another convict. It is breathtaking, a master class in artistic control.

The other cast members are all adept and Connery is reliable, as is Fishbourne, but the story itself packs no wallop. The plot depends largely on the premise that a black prisoner always will be mistreated and coerced by white law enforcement officers. This is the engine which drives the story, right or wrong, and makes one feel a tad cheated at the end.

Still, worth watching to see Harris in action.
5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Flawed But Decent
ReelCheese5 April 2007
JUST CAUSE is a flawed but decent film held together by strong performances and some creative (though exceedingly predictable) writing. Sean Connery is an anti-death penalty crusader brought in to save a seemingly innocent young black man (Blair Underwood) from the ultimate penalty. To set things right, Connery ventures to the scene of the crime, where he must contend not only with the passage of time, but a meddling sheriff (Laurence Fishbourne). Twists and turns and role reversals abound -- some surprising, some not -- as the aging crusader attempts to unravel the mystery. The climactic ending is a bit ludicrous, but JUST CAUSE is worth a look on a slow night.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Didnt hate it at all
brett-7626015 December 2019
This wont be the best flick you've seen but well worth your time. Just a all around enjoyable movie with a few twist and turns to keep it interesting. If you have a few hours to kill, you might give it a go. Certainly is not the worst choice you could make when it comes to a crime movie... Enjoy a cold one and some skittles while watching...
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Not bad, but loses steam.
VCRanger4 May 1999
Just Cause starts out as a very entertaining movie and it keeps that momentum until 2/3 of the way through. After that, it becomes a very miserable, color-by numbers movie that is just bad. A rating of 6 out of 10 was given for this film.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A Compelling Thriller!!!
littlehammer1678710 December 2005
Warning: Spoilers
A Compelling Thriller!!, 10 December 2005 Author:littlehammer16787 from United States

Just Cause

Starring:Sean Connery,Laurence Fishburne, and Blair Underwood.

A liberal,though good-hearted Harvard law professor Paul Armstrong is convoked to the Flordia Everglades by unjustly convicted black guy Bobby Earl.Confessing that sadistic,cold-hearted cops vilifyied and beat him to a pulp to get the confession of a gruesome murder of an eleven year old girl. As he digs further and further into the mysterious case he realizes that Bobby Earl is a victim of discrimination.That the black police detective Lt.Tanny Brown of the small community is corrupt and villainously mean. When the infamous,psychotic serial killer Blair Sullivan is introduced.He discovers that he knows the location of the murder weapon that butchered the little girl.When Armstrong finds that there are lucid coincidences of Sullivan's road trip through the small town and the letter he personally wrote. Bobby Earl gets a re-trial.Is unfettered from prison and eludes his horrific punishment. All seems swimmingly well until an unexpected phone call from serial killer Sullivan comes into focus.Armstrong discovers a lurid double killing which happens to be Sullivan's parents.Whom he immensely detests.Sullivan divulges to Armstrong the truth of Joanie Shriver's heinous murder and why he was brought here.It turns out that Bobby Earl is a psychopathic murderer and he really did rape and kill Joanie Shriver.He just merely struck a bargain with fiendish psycho Sullivan. To get loose so he could kill again for revenge.Upon Armstrong's beautiful wife and daughter.Now Sullivan is executed to his death. Armstrong and tough good guy Brown chase the malevolent villain to the Everglades in order to thwart him.When they arrive Armstrong learns that the psychotic sicko Bobby Earl plans to kill his wife and daughter for a former rape trial that inevitably made him endure agonizing pain and castration.But good,virtuous cop Brown emerges and thwarts the brutal baddie.Is stabbed and eaten by ruthless,man-eating alligators.Paul Armstrong,Tanny Brown,his wife,and daughter survive and live happily ever after. A good thriller that works.Delivers both mystery and subterfuge.How reluctant blacks are hazed by racist lawmen.Sentenced to unfair penalties.Even though sometimes the wrongfully convicted innocent, friendly black man may in truth be the vicious baddie. Sean Connery is great as the oblivious,holier than thou hero.Laurence Fishburne is watchably amazing as the mean,arrogant,but good guy cop. Underwood and Harris are over the top and invigorating as the malevolent psychos.Capeshaw is okay.Ruby Dee is great as the tenacious grandmother.The rest of the cast is wonderful as well.
14 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Police Brutality Can Be Good Sometimes... Right?
view_and_review24 August 2020
Warning: Spoilers
This was a mystery, crime, drama that was brilliantly done. The entire movie had the viewer headed in one direction only to do a 180 at the end.

Paul Armstrong (Sean Connery) was a retired lawyer who'd been solicited for his help to get a man off of deathrow. Bobby Earl (Blair Underwood) was convicted of killing a little white girl. He totally mutilated the body. Though there wasn't much evidence of his guilt, the good ol' police of Florida beat a confession out of him.

At that point, the cops of Florida looked like nothing more than racist pigs pinning a murder on an innocent Black man. And Detective Tanny Brown (Laurence Fishburne) looked like a tool of that racism.

Once Paul was able to get Bobby Earl freed--with the help of a serial killer named Blair Sullivan (Ed Harris)--we find that Bobby Earl was in fact guilty and he only used Paul to get free and go after his wife, Laurie (Kate Upshaw), who'd attempted to convict him of kidnapping years earlier.

What did this all boil down to? Sometimes police brutality is good and so is the death penalty. As good as the movie was, that was the disagreeable and pervasive message.

Detectives Brown and Wilcox (Christopher Murray) had beaten and threatened to kill Bobby Earl in order to coerce a confession--and they were right. They had a strong feeling that he was guilty even if they didn't have the evidence necessary. If police officers were able to act upon their finely tuned intuition, then we could lock up more bad guys. Just look at this case of Bobby Earl. He was locked up and headed to the electric chair if it weren't for the meddling of a bleeding-heart Yankee professor who was easily tricked. That was the message. And it fit for this movie.

To the credit of "Just Cause" it did juxtapose two different tales with one individual. When Bobby Earl was innocent, he'd been arrested and tortured due to a cop's jealousy. Then, when he was guilty he was also arrested and tortured, but this time due to a cop's desire to see a wicked man locked away. This movie was quite a doozy and I appreciated that.

Still, the stronger theme was: cops put bad guys away while dumb lawyers get them off. The unfortunate thing about movies like this is they help to support a gross notion that most cops have an excellent nose for bad guys and they should be allowed to get the bad guy at all costs. But I would contend that for every one Bobby Earl they net without proper evidence there are probably ten Anthony Ray Hintons (innocent man convicted of murder) who get locked up because of a myriad reasons: convenience, negligence, racism, etc.

"Just Cause" was a good movie, one of the very rare ones that I like even though I disagree with its message.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Well-done formula picture
gridoon20247 January 2017
Warning: Spoilers
"Just Cause" is a well-done thriller: assuredly directed (it was only Arne Glimcher's second film, but you'd never know it), with a strong sense of place (the American South), a top-notch cast (Sean Connery and Laurence Fishburne are as commanding as ever; Ed Harris is perhaps a little over-the-top but genuinely disturbing), and one spectacular car stunt. But it is also predictable (the big twist is not that hard to guess if you have seen more than 5 thrillers of this type in your life), and conventional: it's another one in a long line of thrillers in which the women have no other function except to be imperiled by madmen. ** out of 4.
5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Great Movie!!!
morpheus42113 May 2006
I read some previous comments stating that this movie loses steam towards the end of the movie and also that it has a similar ending to Cape Fear. I completely disagree. I'm going to give a simple review for the normal moviegoers out there. I thought the casting was perfect. I thought this was one of Ed Harris's best performances. What an evil psychopath!!! I have a lot of respect for his acting after viewing his performance in this movie. I was riveted throughout this movie. If you like mystery thrillers then this definitely a movie you want to see. I also noticed a young Scarlett Johannson in this movie. This movie is filled with top stars and I highly recommend it!
17 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Solid, Thought Provoking Thriller.
AaronCapenBanner7 September 2013
Sean Connery plays a Liberal Harvard college professor who is also a staunch anti-capital punishment advocate. Based on his reputation, he is called upon to help a young black man(played by Blair Underwood) who was said to be wrongly convicted of the brutal murder of a young girl. At first, the professor feels pretty self-satisfied of the innocence of Underwood, and gets him released, though the investigating police officers insist he was guilty. Things then take a dark turn as the good professor learns a hard lesson himself...

Solid thriller has good acting by all, and efficient direction, but it is the surprising story turns that really make this stand out, and it is good to see a Hollywood film not take the obvious,(and easy) way out in regards to the controversial subject matter, which lead to an exciting and satisfying end.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
so heavy handed and so slow
SnoopyStyle15 May 2015
In rural Florida 1986, Bobby Earl (Blair Underwood) is arrested for the murder of a young white girl. Sheriff Tanny Brown (Laurence Fishburne) leads a group of brutal cops. Eight years later, Bobby is facing the electric chair. His mother pleads with law professor and anti-death penalty advocate Paul Armstrong (Sean Connery) to help. His wife (Kate Capshaw) pushes him to take on the case. Imprisoned serial killer Blair Sullivan (Ed Harris) claims to have committed the crime.

The acting is way too broad especially Fishburne. Sean Connery is possibly the most subtle of the lot which says everything. The movie is so heavy-handed. It pushes so hard that it's obvious something is wrong with the narrative. The twists are not obvious but expected. The movie moves too slowly wading through the case like a swamp. I don't know why the cops tell Armstrong so many incriminating statements. The Sullivan confession has an explanation which makes a new trial unlikely. The movie just doesn't have any tension with so much overacting. This is also notable that a young Scarlett Johansson has a minor role.
6 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed