The Popkorn Junkie :: High Crimes

"High Crimes" contains some of the usual clichés and plot holes you would expect in a film like this. But it's fast-paced, exciting and never ceases to please. As long as you take it with a grain of salt, you'll have one hell of a time!

Ashley Judd is a top attorney, whose husband Tom Kubik (Jim Caviezel) gets convicted of murdering a slew of civilians in a small El Salvador village, during a raid in 1988 which occurred after three teenage American boys got killed in a bombing while sitting in a cafe. The bombing was supposedly an act of terrorism. Now, Kubik's wife is dedicated to clearing his name with the help of a young lieutenant/rookie lawyer and an alcoholic lawyer (Morgan Freeman) who rides a motorcycle and owns a private firm in the middle of nowhere with his dog and prostitute girlfriend. Of course. If he were a sophisticated, upstanding lawyer, this movie would be no fun, would it?

Freeman is very amusing, and though he's known for his dramatic work and this is a dramatic movie, he provides the comic relief. His role is moderately small but notable. Ashley Judd starred with Freeman in "Kiss the Girls," so the chemistry is still there and she delivers a fine performance. Not to mention she's unbelievably hot! Jim Caviezel has become a rising star with such films as "Frequency," "Angel Eyes" and "The Count of Monte Cristo." He is a talented, underrated actor who knows how to give a powerful performance with great subtlety. He shows off his talent again in yet another great performance. I hope to see Caviezel in more and more upcoming films.

The plot twist is quite conventional and predictable, exposing a few plot holes. Yes, I saw it coming, but I was having so much fun that I was willing to play along. It was cool to hear the audience's reaction to the "big surprise ending." And there are a few conventional scenes that seem almost required a film like this. Yes, there's a scene where Judd encounters a creepy guy late at night, who asks her to get in the car, drives to a secret location and reveals the details necessary to solving the case. OK, so that's pretty laughable. But who cares? I'm having too much fun!

"High Crimes" isn't anything near magnificent, but it's great entertainment. The plot, though not always convincing, is very intriguing and kept my interest. The topnotch performances by Judd, Freeman and Caviezel add spice. And the comic relief by Freeman and Amanda Peet, who plays Judd's chain-smoking sister, keeps the film from taking itself too seriously.

-- Matt ( 3 pops out of 4 pops )

Talk about this film with other Popkorn Junkies

Other Junkie's opinions.....

Billy Ra y ( 0 out of 4 pops )

I really didn't think I was going to go and see this one. I made the mistakes of going to see "Along Came A Spider" and was more than disappointed. I mean--c'mon--Ashley Judd as a bad girl? Anyhoo, I was bored and wanted to go see something and "High Crimes" was the only thing showing that I hadn't already seen. I should have went to see "Wendigo" again. "High Crimes" is about as original as a Puff Daddy (sorry, P. Diddy) song, but longer and more boring. And what the hell is with Morgan Freeman's hair? He looks like he's been electrocuted or something. The only enjoyable aspect of this film was trying to see how similar it was to films like "Along Came A Spider" and "Kiss the Girls". Other than that, it is completely useless. The sad thing is--"High Crimes" will get more attention and make more money than other, better films in theatres, films like "Wendigo" and "Undisputed", which pretty much sank upon arrival. It's a shame that a redundant film without a plot can be more successful than a really good movie with a lot of entertainment. WARNING: DO NOT SEE "HIGH CRIMES" IT IS A COMPLETE AND UTTER WASTE OF BOTH TIME AND MONEY. GO AND BUY A CHICKEN WHOPPER COMBO. USE YOUR MONEY FOR A PRODUCTIVE PURPOSE.

Pappy ( 3 out of 4 pops )

This is a good suspenseful courtroom drama. Because of the many twists and turns I had some difficulty following all of plot points, but that was probably my fault and not the fault of the film. I do not like Morgan Freeman, mainly because I understand he is a bit of an ego manic, but mainly because I think he is so hideous looking. Maybe on the small TV screen I could take him, but on the huge screen of a modern theater, when he has an extreme close up, I honestly have to turn my head away. His performance was fine however. He always gets the job done in his films. As difficult as it is for me to watch Morgan, it is as difficult for me to take my eyes off Naomi Judd. She is very pleasant to look at and has a commanding presence on the screen. I don’t think either characters were all that complex or interesting, but one Naomi scene struck me. She was in an elevator forcefully making her case to a large, powerful, and hostile US Marine General. You could see the fury and intensity in her eyes. She showed that was a strong person in he presence of the soldier, but the moment the general stepped off the elevator you could she all of her frailties in her face and body. It was not an Oscar winning moment or anything, but I thought it was very effective and helped me appreciate the difficult job her character had, and reminded me how many of us put on a façade in our professional lives.