Lovesusti
The Worst Film Ever
FuzzyTagz
If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.
Salubfoto
It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.
moonspinner55
Gene Hackman does everything but shout "I want to live!' in this indictment of the death penalty, of the gas chamber, of hatred and bigotry, of loyalty to disreputable people, of grandstanding politicians and judges, of family shame and secrets...the list goes on and on. Film begins with a 1967 hate-crime down south attributed to a Klansman, charged with the bomb blast that killed two Jewish boys and maimed their father. Fast-forward 30 years: that Klansman, now aged and set to be executed in the Mississippi State Penitentiary in 28 days, is represented on appeal by the grandson he's never met, a young but not incompetent attorney who figures he's his grandfather's only hope. (Family loyalty gets the green light here, though the reasoning behind the kid's pursuit of this case is tenuous at best. Fans of novelist John Grisham may say "the young man's motivation is clear, to heal family wounds and to mitigate his secret shame," but that only works for a book jacket; on the screen, with N-words exploding and hate-speech spewing out of the one lively character, it's another matter.) When Chris O'Donnell is at the jail, being led down hallways and through locked doors to meet racist, grizzled old Gene Hackman--sharper and saltier than the other Death Row inmates we see--one is apt to get "Silence of the Lambs" déjà vu. Indeed, Hackman is a vile cuss who distrusts everybody, but as the drama unfolds--wherein the attorney and his grandfather learn to work together--one has to wonder if this is meant to be the heart of the material or is there something else lying in wait to surprise us. Are we supposed to be sympathetic towards Hackman's poisonous, hate-filled Sam Cayhall just because he's revealed to have a conscience deep down? Or that he didn't work alone? William Goldman and Chris Reese (a pseudonym for Phil Alden Robinson) adapted Grisham's book, and I'm guessing they weren't clear on how much redemption Sam Cayhall should be shown. It's a movie full of muddled logic, nondescript performances (save for Hackman and an overacting Faye Dunaway as Hackman's daughter) and credibility issues right from the get-go. *1/2 from ****
dierregi
Certainly not a cheerful movie or the best of Grisham adaptations, The Chamber still has some merits. Chris O'Donnell looks a lot like Matt Damon (who ended up stealing his thunder) and plays Adam Hall, the lawyer grandson of Cayhall, a racist, convicted murder, waiting for his execution in a Mississippi jail. Hackman plays Sam Cayhall, gran-dad in death row with not a soft bone in his old body - or has he?Hackman's interpretation is amazingly good. His Cayhall is an ignorant brute who lost his youth and family to the demented ideas of the KKK and now feels betrayed by his ancient friends, but still reluctant to let go of his foolish beliefs. Cayhall is truly a tragic figure, an ignorant man, manipulated for purposes he was too stupid to understand and sacrificed by more powerful players. One cannot avoid feeling repelled, yet sorry for him.Dunaway is Lee, Cayhal's alcoholic daughter and - obviously - Adam's aunt. The main problem is that Dunaway was too old for the part. She does a decent job and has a heartbreaking goodbye scene with Hackman - really well acted and not fake or manipulative. However, she is only 11 years younger than Hackman and she was not believable as his daughter. I guess somebody like Patricia Clarkson or Susan Sarandon would have been a better choice.Anyway, for once I think that the 6 in IMDb is a fair vote. The story is too depressing, O'Donnell does not carry enough weight for such a difficult part, Dunaway was too old and the script is very uninspired. To be seen mainly for Hackman's amazing interpretation.
ThatMOVIENut
Based on the novel by legal thriller king John Grisham, 'The Chamber' deals with a hotshot young lawyer Adam (O'Donnell) who must defend his racist KKK grandfather Sam (Hackman) from the long standing death sentence for the supposed bombing of a Jewish legal firm. However, despite his grandfather's protests and nastiness, Adam suspects something bigger at work...Despite sleek direction and Hackman's stellar work as a despicable Klansman, 'The Chamber' feels like a lot of hot air. A film built around uncovering secrets and rocking the Mississippi boat wastes time on alluding to threads that are never explored, including possible corruption, political backstabbing and racial tensions, instead of focusing on the core story of a man coming to terms with his family's dark past. It's in the interactions between Sam and Adam that the film feels its sharpest, as despite their disdain, they do gradually grow closer to each other over the course of the film as both face less than pleasant aspects about their family history, and O'Donnell and Hackman work well together.When it's not there, however, the film just seems more interested in building up to nothing. There's a whole chunk devoted to a local KKK leader (played by Raymond J. Barry) that seems to imply him having some sort of influential power, and characters love going on about how Adam doesn't want to 'go digging into this', but in the end he gets taken in like a regular thug, so what was the point of making seem like the big bad? Indeed, any thread related to possible discussion of the still strong tensions among groups in the South is little more than window dressing, which is a real pity. I suspect replacing Bill Goldman with Phil Alden Robinson (credited as Chris Reese) during the writing had something to do with how choppy this script feels.Never boring, thanks to our cast (even Fray Dunaway as a ditzy Southern Belle isn't too bad) and veteran director James Foley handles tension with a sure hand, but it dramatically feels as light as the gases in the titular room.
eric262003
A few years ago, I read the novel "The Chamber" by John Grisham and I thought it was a spectacular reading experience. Then, in 1996, they released it in the theatres and I was hoping that the outcome would turn out on a positive note, just like the novel. Also I was hoping that very talented performers like Chris O'Donnell, Gene Hackman and Faye Dunaway would grace the screen like they've done before. However, the high expectations were sadly shattered. Nothing exciting happens as opposed to what's in the book, there's very little happening here, the acting is very wooden and the actors were woefully miscast. On a positive note, some stuff from the novel were brought into the movie. So for those who never read the novel or seen the movie, I won't give too much away. But those who expected an equally riveting novel to movie adaptation, you will be disappointed. One thing that upset me most here is the different characteristics between Adam Hall in the novel and Adam Hall (Chris O'Donnell) in the movie. In the novel, Hall is a typical attorney who's a bit green and does not know what to expect. In the movie, he's made like a big-shot who can get by in this case like a piece of cake. Okay, I understand we can't cram everything from the novel, because then it would take too long, and we're not all patient for a three hour movie; so I respect that. I think the movie had it's mind on cutting to the chase rather than unravelling the events that led to the scenes. In the end it's just better that you all should just read the book and forget about the film.
