Written by Randolph Scott
Given the nature of courtrooms as places of conflict, emotion, a search for truth, a forum for persuasion, adjudication and, at its best, a place of reason and fairness, it is no surprise that Hollywood has long looked to the halls of justice for inspiration in its storytelling.
As a human creation, courtrooms exist as places where aspirations of fairness, compassion and justice are sought; at its worst, places where prejudice, bias, hatred and political prosecution are exercised by the powerful against the weak. The “show trials” of authoritarian governments, be they the Nazi courts of the 1930s or the courts of the American south in the Jim Crow era are evidence that the law and the courtroom are often no better than the societies in which they exist.
Given the human stories found in the courtroom, screen writers and film makers have often turned to this forum to explore many issues: human rights (Judgment at Nuremburg, Philadelphia), bigotry and prejudice (To Kill a Mockingbird), power over the powerless (The Verdict), free thought versus dogma (Inherit the Wind) and the human condition (12 Angry Men).
Hollywood has used courtrooms to examine the best and the worst that exist in us: to look at both the light and the darkness within nations, cities, towns, businesses or individuals and to look into the values and motivations of the human heart both in its depths and its highest ideals.
Courtrooms present a cinematic stage where the conflict and the resulting decisions of that arena serve as a mirror of and to society, reflecting its ideals and its too often painful shortcomings. It can be the strong against the weak, the majority against the minority; but it can also be where the hopeless can become the hopeful, where the David, against all odds, takes on the Goliath, where a solitary voice can be heard against the roar of the majority.
Of course, while making for engaging and thoughtful drama, courtroom dramas are exactly that: a cinematic creation where a skillful writer explores issues ranging from corruption and bigotry to renewal and redemption. The writer often takes considerable liberties in utilizing the courtroom as a means to examine a theme or issue -- consequently, considerable liberties are often taken regarding hearsay testimony, leading questioning, objections and the presentation and admission of evidence. Nonetheless, a “courtroom drama” makes for memorable storytelling. Below are some of the better known courtroom films, in no particular order:
The Verdict (1982)
Paul Newman stars as a once well-known litigator now a shattered alcoholic in a low rent office, taking on low end personal injury cases. He meets with relatives of a woman who died while in surgery and, knowing he’s up against the powerful medical profession and its high priced legal attorneys, finds evidence of medical malpractice and the ensuing steps to cover it up. Nominated for 5 Oscars, including Best Picture and Best Actor.
Judgment at Nuremburg (1961)
In this Best Picture nominee, the legal profession itself is on trial: 4 judges from Nazi Germany are on trial as accomplices within that murderous regime. The trial, while fictional, is based on the Nuremburg war crimes trials following World War 2, where crimes against humanity were prosecuted against government ministers, generals, judges, guards and soldiers who participated and enabled the Nazi regime’s murderous agenda. This film explores the participation of those who were just “following orders” or willingly acted as agents in Hitler’s “Final Solution”. Nominated for 10 Academy Awards.
To Kill a Mockingbird (1962)
This movie, based on Harper Lee’s Pulitzer Prize winning novel, explores growing up in a small town in Depression Era Alabama. As seen through the eyes of two children of lawyer Atticus Finch (played by Best Actor winner Gregory Peck), To Kill a Mockingbird explores the innocence of childhood, bigotry and racial hatred and the principled stand of the good against the worst impulses of the mob. The children, who sneak in to watch their father defend a wrongly accused black man of raping a while woman, don’t quite understand that the verdict is a foregone conclusion in the deeply racist South of the 1930s. As Atticus leaves the courtroom alone after the guilty verdict is rendered, the black community, watching from the segregated balcony in the courthouse all rise. “Stand, Jean Louise”, a voice urges, “your father is passing by.” Nominated for 8 Academy Awards.
Inherit the Wind
Nominated for 4 Academy Awards, Inherit the Wind is based upon the 1925 Scopes Monkey trial where an Alabama school teacher was prosecuted for teaching evolution to his students. The film takes considerable liberties in courtroom procedure but shows the rancour that continues to exist in many American states and jurisdictions where science runs up against religious dogma.
Witness for the Prosecution (1957)
This English drama, based on the stage play of the same name, is set in London’s Old Bailey Courthouse. An American (Tyrone Power) is accused of murdering a wealthy widow who has named him as the sole beneficiary to her estate. In his defence, he has his German war bride (Marlene Dietrich) testify. The curmudgeonly but witty barrister (Charles Laughton) ably defends his client only to find, in a series of unexpected twists and turns, that all is not what it appears to be. Nominated for 6 Academy Awards, including Best Picture.
12 Angry Men (1957)
While not taking place in a courtroom, the entire film takes place in a jury room where 12 male jurors are charged with determining the guilt or innocence of a teenager charged with murder. This emotionally charged film features some of the finest character actors of the era which headlines actor Henry Fonda (Jane Fonda’s father) as the only holdout against the 11 originally convinced of the teen’s guilt. This powerful film examines class, bias, the individual against the mob, the forces at play in the human heart and the quest for justice even though that quest is challenging and difficult. Nominated for 3 Academy Awards, including Best Picture. Rotten Tomatoes gives the film a 100 Approval Rating.
Philadelphia (1993)
Tom Hanks plays a Philadelphia attorney who has been diagnosed with AIDS. Upon learning of his disease as well as his homosexuality, his law office fires him citing he was let go for professional incompetence. Hanks’ character, now dying of AIDS, sues his employer for wrongful dismissal. The movie stands out, not only for discussing the ravages of the disease but of also, for its time, its favourable portrayal of homosexuality, a topic long considered too contentious for movie audiences.
My Cousin Vinny (1992)
This hilarious legal comedy makes this list for its focus on courtroom procedure and process. Newly minted Brooklyn, N.Y. lawyer Vincent Gambini (Joe Pesci, fresh from his Oscar win as the short tempered, murderous mobster in Goodfellas) is called to Alabama to represent his cousin who has been charged with murder in a robbery gone terribly wrong. Having never conducted a trial before, “Vinny” Gambini not only finds himself quickly in over his head in a courtroom, there is commensurate culture shock as he stumbles through his first foray into America’s Deep South. Amazingly enough, many American lawyers and judges acknowledge this film for its realism in courtroom procedure, advocacy and trial strategy. Baby Boomers will recognize the less than accommodating trial judge, Fred Gwynne, who played Herman Munster in the 1960s TV series The Munsters.
These are just a few of many films that utilize the courtroom as a means to examine human frailty, power, integrity, bigotry, cowardice and strength. As stated, courts are human creations and even at their best, they can be flawed or shortsighted and very much a reflection of the larger society that itself can be flawed in its outlook and aspirations. Often it is the courts where large issues are placed that inevitably compel societies to examine its premises and its prejudices and, in the end, to move a society to greater fairness and justice for all its citizens.
And it is to this end that Hollywood has utilized the courtroom to tell its many stories and to compel society to look at its failings and shortcomings to work toward a more just, fair, accepting and inclusive nation.