To me, everything in life is a game. You give it all you got and sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, and every once in a while you tie. Some things take skill and others take luck. For example, you may brush your teeth two times everyday and you go to the dentist and find out you have three cavities, so that means you lost and the cavities won. Or let’s say you never brush your teeth, maybe once a week, and you go to the dentist and they tell you that you have perfect teeth, so that means you win, but you won with luck, not skill.
In the movie A Civil Action, it is just like a game for everyone. The families and community lost children that cannot be replaced. Not even a win in the court will bring their game back to a tie. Yet, the prosecutors and defendants are not there to lose or tie, they have to win for the money. But, what really makes me like this movie is when Jan Schlichtmann literally gives up everything in his business and personal life to get these families back in the game. He fights for them, instead of himself. He is no longer by himself, he is on a team. And, there is nothing better to me in the world than giving it all you got and being on a team you can trust and being able to do anything for them to survive the game. A Civil Action is a good movie because it shows how sometimes in life it is not just about winning the game, but it is about how you win it.
There were three characters in the movie that really took part in playing the game; Jan Schlichmann, played by John Travolta, Jerome Facher, played by Robert Duvall, and Judge Skinner, played by John Lithgow. John Travolta did an excellent job on portraying his character. He played the part of a male lawyer, which meant he had a serious character role to take. And so, he looked like a lawyer by the way he dressed and he acted like a lawyer by the way he spoke. The tone in his voice was all we needed from John to connect with him, whether we were against what he was doing or not. Also, Robert Duvall did a great job with becoming his character of Jerome Facher. His actions allowed us to know that he was a very weird man and that money was all he wanted. Lastly, John Lithgow was brilliant with the way he played Judge Skinner. He really showed how he is the most powerful one in the court and that what ever he says goes. But, what I think really helped these characters perform the way they did was the way they dressed. Travolta and Duvall were always wearing suits, which showed that they had a pretty high-class job, and it was important to them. And, of course, Lithgow wore a robe to play the part of a judge. I also think the glasses he wore helped because it made him seem really sophisticated and that he was always right. The way the characters acted and dressed really helped me feel like I was part of the movie and the game they were playing.
Throughout the movie there was a fantastic use of cinematic aspects of film. First at the beginning of the movie when there is blues’ music playing while Jan and his partners go get something to drink, shows that he has a good life and the game is going the way he wants at this point. Another example of cinematic aspects is a long shot where Jan is at the meeting with the people of the community who want him to fight the case. The distance makes it seem like he doesn’t care much about this case. But, what is ironic, through another use of cinematic aspects is when there is an extreme close-up of Jan cutting the chain off the fence from the factory. It shows that he is powerful and is will to do anything to help these families get the water clean. To him, this game wasn’t important; he thought it would do nothing to change him or his company. But, the use of the cinematic aspects really showed how much Jan wanted to win this game, not for the money, but for the families.
So, we read the book All My Sons by Arthur Miller and watched the movie A Civil Action, and they have a similar dilemma but they differ in how it is solved. The dilemma in both the book and the movie is that innocent people are being killed for unnecessary reasons. In the book, Joe Keller sends in bad parts to the army, which causes 21 men to die. And, in the movie, the factory is polluting the water, which is causing people to get sick. Joe decides not to tell anyone what he did until it had to come out and eventually killed himself for embarrassing his family. While Al Love, a man who worked at the factory, decided to speak out and tell the truth with what was going on. The problem for both of them was how do you win a game when you’re already behind? They both knew what they did was wrong; Joe just took it the wrong way and believed he lost and gave up. Where as, Al decided that he needed to not just get himself back in the game, but the families who lost children because of his job. Both the book and movie had a similar dilemma, but they were resolved in completely different ways.
I think this movie was fantastic and I strongly recommend it. The theme that emerges in the movie is to never stop playing the game. Because no matter how far you are behind, it’s never over and anything can happen for you to get right back in it. And, as one small game ends, another one is just beginning; it doesn’t stop until your life does. It can connect to anyone’s life, and I think it is a good moral to keep playing the game until the entire thing is over. This movie taught me a lesson, and I think it could do the same for anyone who sees it.
No comments:
Post a Comment