Simply Perfect

Great Film overall

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

There needs to be more thrillers like this, the plot is decent and the twist is surprising. The dialogue is perfect and the actors all do a great job. The director and editor also did a good job due to the movie being at a perfect pace and there are no scenes that are too long, unnecessary or too short, however there is one particular scene that did not make sense, but is necessary to have the viewers confused about one of the characters - the scene where "Charlie Grimes" (Morgan Freeman) is trying to discreetly spy on some of the other soldiers at the strip club - a few of them take him outside, beat him up and look like they're about to kill him by breaking his neck until a couple of people interrupt them, - that scene is over the top and didn't have enough reason for them to beat him and attempt to kill him.The guy that was stalking "Claire" (Ashley Judd) may have seemed like an unnecessary character, but clearly he was put there to throw off the audience about the entire situation with the husband "Tom" aka "Ron" (Jim Caviezel)."Claire's" sister "Jackie" (Amanda Peet) brings a little comic relief to the movie, that is what a good thriller needs, and High Crimes pulls it off due to a few of "Jackie"'s lines and scenes being delivered at the right times, it's on the same level as "Enemy Of The State" where the wife of the main character brings a little humour at times.The film score is nice and suits the movie, the lyrical soundtrack also suits the scenery and vibe of the film, this motion picture gives the impression that San Francisco is hip, cool, funky and laid back, the lyrical music featured backs that up even from the radio stations playing in the background in a couple of short scenes.The only thing that is corny in this cine is "Claire's" wig at times, it seems to change a lot and looks the worst in the scene where she is telling her sister and the army lawyer that she needs some time alone. Hair and makeup must have had the night off or something because they didn't do their job properly for that scene.Overall High Crimes is a must-watch for thriller fans.

Claire Kubik (Ashley Judd) is a brilliant defense lawyer with a loving husband Tom (Jim Caviezel). They have the perfect life but then Tom is arrested accused of being Sgt. Ron Chapman who massacred villagers in 1988 El Salvadore. He is defended by inexperienced military lawyer Lieutenant Embry (Adam Scott). She is over her head in military court and gets help from Charlie Grimes (Morgan Freeman). Brig. Gen. Bill Marks (Bruce Davison) was the commanding officer at the time, and Tom/Ron accuses him of a frame job. And there is Claire's flaky sister Jackie (Amanda Peet) and the crazed Maj. James Hernandez (Juan Carlos Hernández). Michael Shannon has a minor role as witness Troy Abbott.It has the bones of a functional courtroom action thriller. It's nothing special. Director Carl Franklin tries but it's not his best work. Judd and Freeman are both great actors trying to do good work. It may work a lot better if there is more doubt thrown into the movie earlier about Tom/Ron's guilt. That takes away much of the drama. This makes the twist way too jarring. Then there are the attempts at their lives. For skilled killers, they don't really follow through. It piles on a little too much. It's a close call. I have to say it fails by a hair.

A woman has to defend her husband after she learns that he may have killed someone while still serving in the military. she has to learn the ways of the military court, as civilian laws to not apply in military court., Morgan Freeman is pretty good in this,, Ashley Judd does a decent job,, the story however, is full of holes and hard to follow as far as the whole military cover up scandal going on.. Bruce Davison and Amanda Peet have supporting roles in the movie as well. our military officer accused of the crime comes off as a decent enough guy, but soon we learn that maybe he isn't who we think he is,, is there a military cover-up going on,, will the wife keep defending her husband,, watch and find out,, not a bad movie,, just a little hard to follow in the middle of the movie, made it a little confusing to piece together for me .

I have learned two things watching this movie: 1) If you are fan, focus on the prime and not the beginnings unless you only see the star you support as supportive cast at best if it isn't just in background: As an Amanda's fan, this movie belongs to her beginnings so we don't see her a lot. But she is perfect as the liberal, inhibited young sister.2) America has an extrovert relationship with violence, thus with military that is its legalized form. So she can do movies about wars (Vietnam, Gulf, Cold-war) or the military world (this one for example). In France, all those things are kept hidden under the rug and french citizen are forbidden to watch movies about decolonization, Indochine, Algeria, ... This is the real trademark of my country: no movies on politics, institutions. The facts aren't distributed by movies in France thus it's hard to have an opinion in my country and I don't really think we can call us a true democracy.That's why a movie like this is like a breath of fresh air, above it depicts the "the big mute" (the nickname of the army in France) as well indeed a big mute... However, if the cast is talented and we feel a good chemistry between Jude and Freeman, the movie doesn't really kick-ass. Maybe it's because the classified crimes is a bit too faraway. By the way, for a movie about soldiers,there are paradoxically a lot of cries!