Avis des utilisateurs

Morgan Freeman and Ashley Judd (`Kiss the Girls') team up again in this courtroom thriller, which is entertaining despite its worn plot and obvious ending. The reason it doesn't descend to a level consistent with the screenplay's unoriginality is the superior acting by the three principal performers.

Claire (Ashley Judd) and Tom (James Caviezel) are living an idyllic and romantic married life, trying hard to have a baby. Everything is going swimmingly until one day Tom is arrested and charged with murder and war crimes dating back to his military service and raid in El Salvatore years earlier. It seems Tom's entire identity is a lie and his name is really Ron Chapman, a former Special Forces commando.

Claire, who is conveniently a prominent defense lawyer, takes up his case determined to prove he is innocent, choosing to believe his denials despite the fact that everything she knows about him is a fabrication. She hires Charlie Grimes (Morgan Freeman) to assist her because until he became a broken down alcoholic, he was once one of the top lawyers in the military.

The film is paced well and balanced between courtroom drama and other related storylines like constant death threats, a dirty general and a mystery man. It is fairly standard fare, but the presentation is engaging.

Morgan Freeman is such a terrific actor, that even a trite script can't keep him down. He is wily and insolent as the washed up lawyer with a few tricks left up his sleeve. Freeman projects an unassuming power in his work, full of dynamism yet highly amiable. His interaction with Judd is wonderful, treating her with avuncular kindness and intellectual respect.

Ashley Judd is a fine dramatic actor, who returns to serious drama after an ill advised detour into romantic comedy (`Someone Like You'). Judd is razor sharp in this film, coming across as bright, energetic and passionate. She is tough as nails and doesn't back down to pompous military officers or thugs trying to intimidate her.

Jim Caviezel rounds out the cast with a strong performance as the accused. This is a tough character because he is so mysterious and duplicitous. Caviezel delivered a strong portrayal of an enigmatic character in `Angel Eyes', so he had some experience with this type of role. He handles the part well, appearing utterly sincere whether his character is telling the truth or not.

Amanda Peet gives her standard performance as Claire's hair brained and sex obsessed sister. Peet is no serious dramatic talent, but she has this character down and comes across as believably ditzy and concerned about her sister despite their obvious sibling rivalry.

This film doesn't fool anyone with its surprise ending, but it does deliver good suspense, a tried and true formula and some excellent performances. I rated it a 7/10. It's worth a look for viewers who like mysteries.

Morgan Freeman and Ashley Judd, after starring in 1997's Kiss the Girls, reunite in this story about powerful attorney Claire Kubik (Judd), who finds her husband Tom Kubik (Jim Caviezel) arrested for the murder of Latin American villagers while he was in the Marines, with the name of Sgt. Ron Chapman. Claire teams up with Charlie Grimes (Freeman) to navigate through the military justice system in attempts to clear Tom, all while dealing with the deaths of key eyewitnesses.

Like Kiss the Girls, this movie is full of mystery and tension that will captivate an audience and keep the movie's pace going strong despite its simple and predictable plot. Freeman is a calm yet dynamic actor, which is perfect in his role as he teams up once again with Judd, who herself gave an energetic and dramatic performance in her attorney role. Jim Caviezel gave a strong and mysterious performance as the accused Tom, whose unknown background will leave the audience guessing.

With some good suspense and tension, it's a worthy courtroom drama for a popcorn movie night.

Grade B-

I show absolutely no hesitation in recommending any movie with Morgan Freeman (Million Dollar baby, The Shawshank Redemption, Se7en), and this is no exception. The fact that I am an Ashley Judd (Double Jeopardy, Kiss the Girls) fan makes this a double pleasure.

Let's just ignore the fact that this film is a cliché, and sit back and enjoy it. It has enough actors that we love that there is something you will enjoy.

Besides Judd and Freeman, it has Jesus (James Caviezel) as the husband who is hiding his past, Amanda Peet (The Whole Nine Yards) as the slutty sister, and it is directed by Carl Franklin (Out of Time, Devil with the Blue Dress).

Anyone who has watched more than a dozen movies can easily predict what comes next as the film unfolds, maybe even the ending, although that is the most illogical part for me, so it's not going to tax your brain. It's just another good opportunity to see Judd and Freeman. That's enough for me.

KISS THE GIRLS stars Ashley Judd and Morgan Freeman reunite in HIGH CRIMES, a movie that turned out to be a lot better than I was expecting. The previews made this movie look like a high powered suspense thriller, but I was weary about the plot and I was suspecting a thousand different plot holes. But, I was wrong. This movie is executed wonderfully. Yes, there are the usual thriller cliches, but once you get past all that, this movie is really entertaining. The acting is not all that bad either. Judd is great and Freeman is perfect as always (the only thing about him is that I am still a little hazy as to the gold earring that he totes on his right ear). The supporting cast includes Jim Caviezel, Adam Scott, the very hott Amanda Peet, Bruce Davison and Tom Bower. All of whom do an exceptional job.

This may look like just another one of those 'trial' movies, but this isn't. It is actually quite good if you just look past the typical plot and watch it. Other recommendations include A FEW GOOD MEN and RULES OF ENGAGEMENT. They are both a little different, but still go along the same lines.

This film is for people who appreciate good, old-fashioned suspense thrillers. These kind of movies are the kind people need to show us that looks can be deceiving and that people are not always what they appear to be.

HIGH CRIMES: 5/5.

Because "High Crimes" sticks Judd in front of the camera in almost every scene as its contrived formula story full of cliche characters wells around her. Fortunately, Judd manages to hold this less than sterling film together as it worms and squirms its way through the story of a happy wife and trial lawyer who finds her husband might not be who she thought he was and has to try to wrest him from the clutches of a military courtmartial, a possible death sentence, and a coverup conspiracy. "High Crimes" is busy enough to hold interest through endless plotholes and implausibilities making for an okay no-brainer couch potato watch. A must see for Judd fans and a so-so watch for all others. (B-)

Claire Kubrik (Ashley Judd) is an attorney whose relationship with her husband Tom (Jim Caviezel) is turned on its head. Tom is arrested for the murder of innocent civilians during a covert army operation 15 years earlier. Claire has been kept in the dark about her husbands past, but despite her doubts she still believes his innocence and takes it upon herself to act as his defence attorney with the help of a disgraced military lawyer (Morgan Freeman)

The film is both suspenseful and intriguing, with very fine performance from all the cast. Most of the film is quite interesting and even compelling at times, as the mystery builds and then as it begins to unravel. The surprise ending however, lets the movie down; when with more attention to detail it could have been quite impressive and really could have made the movie.

By the end you are left feeling a bit unfulfilled, mainly due to all the smoke and mirrors used to make the ending a shock.

6/10 should have been better, but it's watchable

High Crimes is a decent movie with a very well developed storyline and a great cast.I was expecting it to be more of a thriller,which it certainly wasn't,but it was still an enjoyable movie,mainly because of solid performances and very great character development,the movie does drag out a bit however and isn't completely interesting the whole time.Morgan Freeman was certainly the movies highlight,he delivered a brilliant performance like he always does and his character is certainly the most likable,Ashley Judd also did a terrific job,I've complained about her acting before in Kiss the Girls,but she had certainly improved between the gap of these movies and the character was more suited for her.The thing that bothered me the most about this movie is that the "big twist " at the end was really predictable,the writers were clearly expecting it to shock the audience but it was obvious this would happen about a half hour in to the film.Predictable but still enjoyable,High Crimes is a good movie that I would recommend to anyone looking for a good crime film.

A woman must uncover national security secrets to clear her husband,accused of war crimes in El Salvador.

Best Performance: Morgan Freeman Worst Performance: Jim Caviezel

Claire Kubik (Ashley Judd) is happily married to her husband, Tom Kubik (Jim Calviezel). The movie opens with her having sex and becoming pregnant. Then Claire gets a big surprise wher her contractor husband is suddenly arrested by the FBI and sent to a military prison. Turns out Tom, then known as Ron Chapman, was in an elite Marine special unit and is accused of a 1998 civilian massacre in El Salvador. She decides to defend him in military court and find out the truth about what happened. Claire puts her career on hold to defend him against trumped-up charges of orchestrating a civilian massacre while on covert operations .She looks to recovering alcoholic and ex-JAG lawyer Grimes (Morgan Freeman) for assistance but sinister plots are afoot. Tom Kubik claims another member of the platoon named Hernandez shot the civilians in a fit of rage and convinced the rest of the platoon to lie and say he did it. Everything you trust !. Everything you know !. May be a lie...

A thriller with suspense, surprises, violence, twists and turns, being based on the 1998 novel by Joseph Finder. Military coutroom thriller is average but does have Morgan Freeeman, who's always worth watching, that's why he steals the show. He's reteamed with ¨Kiss the girls¨ co-star Ashley Judd who plays spunky California attorney at law who sets out to prove her fella has been made fall-guy for a political cover-up and while James Cazievel is her contractor hubby Tom. Weird though, how the pert, capable but unprepossessing, Ashley Judd has picked up classic actresses' mantle, playing endless variations on a gutsy, determined resourceful woman with dubious taste in men. They're well accompanied by a nice secondary cast with plenty of familar faces, such as: Adam Scott, Amanda Peet, Bruce Davison, Tom Bower, Michael Gaston , Jude Ciccolella, Emilio Rivera, Michael Shannon, John Billingsley, among others. It is a blandly anonymous coutroom potboiler which attempt to squeeze an ounce of credibility from some vaguely liberal sentiments. There's not much here we haven't seen a hundred times before.

Adding a suspenseful, intriguing musical score by composer Graeme Revell. As well as an adequate and atmospheric cinematography by cameraman Theo van de Sande. The film was profesionally made by Carl Franklyn, but nothing special, It's quite watchable, and utterly predictable. Carl is a fine craftsman who made his mark with ¨One false move¨ followed it up with the well reviewed¨ Devil in a blue dress¨ and the underrated weepie ¨One true thing¨; in addition, directing various TV episodes of famous series: ¨Rome, House of Cards, The Pacific, Homeland, Falling Skies, The affair, Ray Donovan, chance, 13 Reasons Why, Leftovers¨. High Crimes (2002) rating: 6/10. The flick will appeal to Morgan Freeman and Ashley Judd fans

.

In High Crimes, director Carl Franklin shows us an ideal life gone wrong. Claire Kubik is one of them. She's happily married to husband Tom (Jim Caviezel). In fact, he's such a great husband that we don't find out his occupation. Claire, who is played actually well by Ashley Judd, couldn't love Tom more. Until he gets arrested for something that he supposedly didn't do. Did he or did he not? An hour and a half is spent contenplating the fact.

The acting is surprisedly well, especially by Caviezel. I didn't understand why he had that "outburst" at the end, but that's a minor detail. Judd is equally good as Claire, except she seemed to be too slow at some parts. So did the pacing. It seemed to drag on a little, and the genre seemed to be more like a courtroom drama instead of a crime thriller.

Morgan Freeman is OK as the lawyer Claire hires. His acting seemed a little forced at times, though. The plot, though nothing new, was one of those that were predictable, but I was enjoying it too much to care. It's very entertaining if you just sit back and watch it instead of scrutinizing every little detail of it.

But, at the end, after the final court scene, it seems to continue on for a little long after spending an hour and a half leading up to that part. The running time was a little long. And the ever-lovable Amanda Peet plays a role where she could have gotten more time and shown off her acting ability. If you sit back for two hours and leave your mind on hold, it's a very entertaining yarn.

My rating: 7/10

Rated PG-13 violence and some language.

Well that was not what I expected but it is okay for an entertaining evening. The story turns unbelievably at the end and I think it is well directed. The movie succeeds to reach an intriguing military court drama with unsolved questions. I am disappointed that at the end some points are very confusing but perhaps I am wrong...??? 6/10.

If you liked this one don`t miss "HART´S WAR", "KISS THE GIRLS" or "RULES OF ENGAGEMENT".

We started off loving this - really had the feel of A Few Good Men about it - JAG courtroom drama - great! And it is - the opening hour is great - the second hour though lets it down by getting very silly indeed.

Good performances but let down by a weak script that is action driven rather than driven by the courtroom and intelligent scripting.

It remains watchable, but honestly when your led to expect a courtroom drama with political overtones this is disappointing at best.

One last thought, the film title is awful "High Crimes" really, no-one could think of anything better - it sounds like a maffiosa drug cartel film....

All in all, not a bad film, just not a good film...

This was an involving story of a military man accused of murdering civilians 15 years earlier and then going A.W.O.L. The whole story revolves around one question: did he do it or is he innocent?

That question keeps the viewer guessing for much of the film and provides some very good suspense. It's another film, however, in which there is a strong anti-U.S. military flavor, so typical in films since the 1960s.

Also, once you know the ending, I doubt if this would be a movie you would watch more than once. However, it's definitely worth a look and will entertain you for about two hours. Ashley Judd, Jim Caviezel and Morgan Freeman are three attractive lead actors, all interesting to watch, as usual.

Generally speaking, lawyer-based movies tend to be a bit formulaic. Military lawyer movies might be less problematic, but they will all be ultimately judged against "A Few Good Man" (no easy flick to live up to). "High Crimes" runs into both issues and does nothing to distinguish itself as original or exciting.

For a basic plot summary, "High Crimes" sees Tom Kubik (Jim Caviezel) and his wife Claire (Ashley Judd), a lawyer, living a happy, married existence while trying to start a family. After a burglary at their home one night, however, Tom is arrested and forced to stand trial in front of a military tribunal. Completely perplexed by this sudden turn of events, Claire decides to be the counsel for her husband, enlisting the help of old military-enflamer Charles W. Grimes (Morgan Freeman). As they pursue the details of the case, Claire & Charles discover a stream of lies and cover-ups, including some information that may make Claire question the man she is married to.

The problem with this movie is very, very easy to articulate: It needed to focus more on Caviezel's Kubik character. His Tom Kubik should have been the focal point of the entire film, but instead he is ignored for large portions as the "lawyer stuff" drags on and on. There needed to be more "did he or didn't he" devoted to Tom Kubik, as that is the real crux of the mystery that keeps viewers from watching (not the legal machinations).

Beyond that, however, the film is also just very bland. None of the cast seem to have great chemistry with each other, while some of the auxiliary cast are on-screen for a great deal of time, yet contribute almost nothing to the plot/story. As such, the movie turns into a run-of-the mill legal picture, with even less excitement than the average flick in that category.

"High Crimes" does try (star name cast, lofty mystery goal), hence not a 1-star debacle, but the end result is close to two hours of bland-ness. There is nothing in the movie that makes it stand out in any way, shape, or form.

The only remarkable thing about this movie is Ashley Judd's new hairstyle which suits her very well and makes her look at least ten years younger.I found myself to be concentrating more on her delightful appearance than on the story itself. Morgan Freeman is Morgan Freeman, as usual, but it must be said that he always succeeds in convincing an audience by his mere charisma alone.The twists and turns of the plot and sub-plot are not really original and from the opening scenes on, the viewer has the impression that there is something very suspicious regarding the so-called victim of military justice.Not a bad movie, just one to watch on TV when there are no other options.

Recently rewatched this thriller. It was good the first time and again on DVD with friends who had never seen it before. It is not the spine tingler that I had expected, however, Morgan Freeman, gives a convincing performance of an alcoholic and portrays the empathy that this role required. No two thumbs up, but a good performance by all.

I'm an action movie guy, so "High Crimes" is right up my alley. And I enjoyed "Kiss the Girls" (although not Nurse Betty).

In fact, I did enjoy High Crimes, which is a standard Hollywood suspense / crime flick. It was only afterwards that I realized that it was all smoke and mirrors. The scary music and choreography succeeded in setting up a suspenseful, moderately engaging film that I would call solid, nothing special.

But after leaving the theater, I was surprised to get caught out. Usually I am quick-witted enough to notice. "High Crimes" contains some throw-away characters, is a little too clever for its own good with the plot twists, and some loose ends dangle at the end, which I did not find satisfying.

The acting is OK and it's hard to make Ashley Judd look bad, even when her on-screen character has some bruises.

Who should see this film:

-- Action / suspense movie buffs who have nothing better to

do on a rainy day, and who aren't expecting the well-plotted

and original Kiss the Girls.

-- I can't think of anyone else.

I'll give High Crimes a 6 out of 10.

The background - "open" civilians rambling into "closed" military circles - has been used in dozens of known movies, and High Crimes did not provide any fresh angle to the approach. The benchmark was clear, events followed had some nice twists and turns, but types of attorneys were trivial in a politically correct manner (although nicely performed, particularly Morgan Freeman), and the middle of the movie or so gave rather plain hints about the solution and the role of the accused. Some thrilling scenes provided no additional value to the movie, or were rather questionable, e.g. why the military had tried to hinder the attorneys in such a way? Or: why the Salvadorian witness did not act earlier vis-a-vis the killer? Thus, the course of action and performances are catchy to follow, but during last 10-15 minutes you just shrug your shoulders and start to "bind the bastings"...

Ashley Judd,(Claire Kubik),"De-Lovely",'04, played a very successful lawyer who had plenty of balls to stand up to any tough situation she faced in court and gave the men in her office a really hard time. Her law firm was ready to make her a partner and she was at the top of her career. However, her husband, James Caviezel,(Tom Kubik),"Rebels",'04 was having a rough time in his profession and all of a sudden, the Military were after Tom Kubik. Whenever you have a court being controlled by Majors, and even a General of the Marine Corps or Dept. of the Navy, you had better have a very good lawyer, and say your prayers, because the Military run their entire rules differently than civilian courts. James was facing problems from his past and could be convicted by a Military Kangaroo Court and also a Civil Court. Very interesting story and great acting by Morgan Freeman, who was a drunken lawyer, Charlie Grimes),"Edison",'05 who really held this picture together and gave an outstanding performance.

Carl Franklin's High Crimes, based upon Joseph Finder's novel of the same name, could just possibly be interesting if it didn't try so hard to do so. Instead of building a complex web of a storyline, the story instead reverts to reaching at the most impossible and improbable to further the intrigue, and thus lessens it instead. The film draws many parallels with Robert Zemeckis's What Lies Beneath, but lacks both the subtle art and spirited nature of that movie.

Claire Kubik (Ashley Judd) is a high-profile lawyer who lives as part of an idyllic marriage. One day her husband Tom Kubik (James Cavizel) is arrested by the FBI for a war crime and a secret past-life of his begins to unravel. Suddenly Claire finds herself defending her husband in a military tribunal that she is not familiar with, along with the help of maverick Marine lawyer Charles Grimes (Morgan Freeman). As expected, everything that could ever possibly go wrong does go wrong, which gives the film an strange pacing in which every time one thinks that the movie is over, it isn't. The story goes to extremes to show how lopsided the odds are by bringing in conspiracies that reach up to Generals, by having the prosecutor be the Marines' top lawyer, by having the defense lawyer be an inexperienced loser, and yada yada.

The characters are all flat stereotypes, and ultimately we don't really care about any of them, from the ugly-as-a-dog mad Marine Major Hernandez (Juan Carlos Hernandez), to the seemingly prepubescent young Marine lawyer Lt. Terrence Embry (Adam Scott) assigned to defend Tom, to Claire herself, a caricature of the cool-headed modern female lawyer who, because of her inner-warmth, desperately wants to have a baby. Near the end the crudely typical vengeful South American character stands valiantly at a doorway, reversing his role from throughout the film, and you almost expect him to say ‘que pasa?'

Dialogue in the movie is unoriginal and contrived, but is not poor enough that it stands out, and overall is utterly unremarkable, Ashley Judd exhibits an excellent performance in playing a confused, loving, strong woman, and in her skill highlights the lack of acting ability in James Cavizel, who is ill-matched with her. Morgan Freeman plays the same lovable outcast character we've often seen from him, and he does it well.

Theo van de Sande's photography, while neither innovative nor artistic, is wonderfully polished and alternately expresses claustrophobic terror through close shots or dizzying confusion through a twirling, dancing lens at the appropriate times. As is seen often in today's films, Sande uses the color blue very heavily, and also employs a shallow depth of focus.

The original score by Graeme Revell is professional enough, but is very generic and boring. In the movie, particularly in the beginning and end, the music awkwardly bounces back and forth between dramatic world music and R&B.

When the movie closes, the viewer has gained nothing, but has also lost nothing to this glossy but formulaic movie. Despite its faults, it is an entertaining ride, and the surprise ending (so necessary to complete the movie that it is half-predictable) will act as redemption in the eyes of those who would otherwise leave with a bad taste in their mouths.

`High Crimes' is rated PG-13. It contains blurry footage of corpses, conspirator's intimidating violence, humorous prostitutes, and adorable grandfatherly drunkenness.

Director Carl Franklin should have stayed away from Joseph Finder's novel that is the basis for the film, or at least, he should have asked for a better adaptation.

There is no originality in what we are watching. The characters come out as one dimensional. Morgan Freeman and Ashley Judd have collaborated before, to better results. In this film the logic of the screen play needed a strong hand, or at least a reality check. We know from the beginning what's going to happen. There is no real suspense in the story and the way it turns out. James Caviezel, as Tom is the only one that has any opportunity to shine.

Better luck next time.

This is the new thriller directed by Carl Franklin (who showed promise in "Devil in a Blue Dress"). This film features Ashley Judd as an ambitious female attorney who suddenly finds out that her husband (a zonned out looking Jim Caviezel) has a secret past and is suddenly on trial in military court for murder. She turns to disgraced former JAG lawyer Morgan Freeman for help. While often employing typical court room thriller twists and turns this film keeps you involved and interested until it throws out all reason and common sense for a series of bizare and just plain wrongheaded twists at the end of the film that really ruins all the good will the film had built up until that point. It's a shame too because the talent involved is top flight and deserved a better vehicle. GRADE: C-