There’s something about the dramatization of historical events that gives a film an extra layer of satisfaction. Perhaps the fact that the events unfolding actually happened lends more gravity to the plot. Or maybe it’s the paint-by-numbers underdog story that connects with wide audiences. Biopics and brand movies have recently followed these themes, but perhaps the best archetypes are films about sports and courtroom procedurals. These generally follow a straightforward blueprint where the unlikely hero, through hard work and perseverance, overcomes the opponent in dramatic fashion. While some procedurals may focus more on legal proceedings or the mystery of the investigation, 1998’s A Civil Action feels more like a movie about human competition than one about a lawsuit.
A Civil Action is based on the nonfiction book of the same name, which documents the poisoning of citizens of Woburn, Massachusetts, through the irresponsible disposal of chemical waste from local tanneries. A hotshot personal injury lawyer, Jan Schlichtmann (John Travolta), takes the case after learning that the tanneries are owned by large corporations – Beatrice Foods and W.R. Grace and Co. Jan first learns about the case through a cohort of citizens led by Anne (Kathleen Quinlan), whose children developed and died from leukemia. Jan, joined by his colleagues Kevin (Tony Shalhoub), James (William H. Macy) and Bill (Željko Ivanek), puts his firm and career on the line in his pursuit to hold these corporations responsible. Opposite him is Jerome Facher (Robert Duvall), defense attorney for Beatrice, and a hardened, stoic attorney who shows no weakness or mercy while litigating the case.
The case, at a high level, is straightforward and has an obvious hero and villain. But as the film progresses, it becomes clear this isn’t your typical David versus Goliath story. Instead, writer and director Steven Zaillian focuses less on the righteousness of the cause and more on the complexities and flaws of the lawyers involved and the judicial system at large. Unlike other courtroom dramas where the underdog wins against all odds, A Civil Action shows the pursuit of justice as an exhausting endeavor that doesn’t always end in triumph. Schlichtmann knows how to work a court from his experience as a personal injury attorney. But now that he’s no longer “ambulance chasing” and is instead driven by the belief that he can bring justice to the victims of Woburn, he’s outside his element and outmatched against Facher. In one scene, Facher warns his students that pride is the biggest liability a lawyer can have, and that it has lost more cases than any piece of lousy evidence or an idiot witness. This omen turns out to be true – by the end of the film, Jan is left with nothing, having sacrificed his career, his firm and his financial stability, all for a case that leaves him and the victims without much to show for it, and notably without anyone to own up to the mess.
The battle between Facher and Schlichtmann underpins the story, making it feel as much like a boxing match as a courtroom procedural. Fortunately, the star-studded cast makes this approach effective. Duvall, in particular, excels as Facher, delivering a performance that contrasts sharply with Travolta’s increasingly desperate Jan Schlichtmann. Facher’s stoicism and mastery of legal tactics make him a formidable opponent, and Duvall’s performance elevates the film. While this approach offers a refreshingly honest look at how the human element is a key factor in the justice system, it also makes for a less satisfying story. Unlike films like Dark Waters or Erin Brockovich, which center on uncovering the truth and achieving justice, A Civil Action shifts focus to the dynamics between the lawyers and their firms, overshadowing the case itself. The environmental science behind the case isn’t as well explained as in these movies either, and this lack of clarity detracts from the plot. Zaillian’s decision to focus on the legal process rather than the victims or the corporations involved results in a narrative that, while authentic, isn’t as engaging or impactful as it could have been.
This shift in focus also affects the film’s pacing and tone. The first half of A Civil Action is stronger, focusing on uncovering the evidence and the initial courtroom battles. However, as the story progresses, the film loses its momentum, culminating in an ending that feels anticlimactic. It’s not just that the good guy doesn’t win in dramatic fashion – it’s that the film itself seems to fizzle out. Travolta’s character arc is also simplistic and hard to believe. Stylistically, the film is also very simple, and while this helps ground the story in reality, it can also make the film feel flat. The dialogue is sharp, and there are some good monologues, particularly from Duvall, but the film’s straightforward approach may leave some viewers wanting more.
Ultimately, A Civil Action is a more-than-worthwhile watch, if for nothing else, offering a glimpse of the acting firepower iconic of the ’90s and early 2000s. Beyond Travolta and Duvall, the supporting cast – featuring the likes of James Gandolfini, William H. Macy and John Lithgow – provides solid entertainment, even as the story becomes cheesy in parts. Zaillian, in his second directorial effort, presents a courtroom drama that is rooted in reality, one where both the strengths, faults and resources of the attorneys are as important as the facts. It serves as a reminder that legal battles often come down to practicalities and rarely follow Hollywood arcs.
The post Revisit: A Civil Action appeared first on Spectrum Culture.