Sometimes generic films are enjoyable, as they tap into characters and stories we have seen before, but also add their own novel characteristics and subtleties. And some stories just feel too cooked to be tasted and enjoyed, like “High Crimes,” directed by Carl Franklin.
Claire Kubick (Ashley Judd, “Double Jeopardy”) is a successful yuppie lawyer in San Francisco, who only worries about when she’s ovulating and winning court cases. She’s married to Tom (Jim Caviezel, “The Thin Red Line”) and they appear to be in love. But all becomes shattered when the military savagely takes them both into custody, revealing Tom’s hidden past.
This past includes a different name, a military career and possibly killing more than seven people in El Salvador. Claire takes on the case, seeking help from Charlie Grimes (Morgan Freeman, “Kiss the Girls”), a “recovering” alcoholic, who is known as “the best” — lawyer, not alcoholic. The suspense builds as Charlie and Claire are assaulted by strangers who want them to stop defending Tom. Claire must deal with her internal conflicts, as she loves Tom, but no longer trusts him because of his chameleon-like past.
The only redeeming quality of this film is Freeman, and he’s not in it nearly enough. Only when he is on-screen giving sophisticated analysis of the court case’s intricacies, riding in a suave leather coat on his motorcycle sporting a cocky smile or stumbling around Claire’s shoulders with a champagne bottle does this movie grasp any depth.
However, the military does take some deserved shots in the film, pointing out some of its eerie practices, such as the ability to create different personas in its cadets so that they can avoid “really” lying during a polygraph test. As one of the military men says through a crooked smile when questioned on it, “I’d only use it when questioned by the enemy.” Right. And who’s the enemy, exactly?
Unfortunately, Judd is working diligently to pigeonhole herself into particular roles. Like Meg Ryan to romantic-comedy, Judd is to naíve-dreamy-life-woman-stilted-by-her-deceitful-husband, who fights back toughly, but also spends a lot of screen time vulnerably crying. However, the emotional binaries of the character feel forced and Judd comes off more like an acting dog who gets thrown a biscuit after successfully crying once more.
What really derails the story is its excessive amount of small, underdeveloped characters — the evasive General, the evil major, the quirky sister, the inexperienced youthful lawyer, the mysterious informant, the traditional judge, etc. These characters remain flat because we find out so little about them.
Also, scenes that could be full of suspense, such as the sinister man following Judd or the bullies hiding in the safety of her domestic sphere, end too quickly and rely on loud metal sounds of surprise rather than the curdling suspense of Hitchcock lore.
These small moments create yelps, but these yelps quickly become snores, and the plot-twist, if it can be called that, makes the viewer wish he had left 10 minutes early.
Grade: C
