I love this movie so much

One of my all time favorites.

Good concept, poorly executed.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

I found myself thinking in bullet points so here it is:1.Gene Hackman gives a solid performance, the rest of the cast are competent but the Adam Hall character could do with a better actor - less mechanical, more believable with a broader range of emotion. 2.An interesting story although it never really grabbed me and there are better ways to spend ninety minutes. 3.I'm sure the book reads well and the movie might well have been more watchable if Nicholson and Pitt hadn't withdrawn. 4.This is an old theme and if you've seen the theme before it reduces the entertainment value of the film. 5. The technology of the day should means that you shouldn't have to strain to hear the actors' mumbling, but you do - and no, it's not my hearing, age or TV to blame, I watch a lot of films.All in all, disappointing, sadly.

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.

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.

I know that probably goes for every book made into a movie ever made but for this one it really shows. The movie is good at times at portraying just why the book was so great and at other times cuts out some of the most important part of the film.The film gets the first 1/6th of the book done in about 10 minutes, fine, I can accept that, need to get to the center so people are not bored, it was only when after 2/6 of the book was after 30 minutes I started to get annoyed and I state this below...The middle just sort of cut to the chase and this bothers me, if anything, this is one of the worst things you can do to a book, they cut out a lot of the feel of the book in these first 30 minutes of the movie, and fans of the book should feel angered by this (Like Me).On the good side of the book, the film does pick up after the initial part, and by the end you have sympathy for all the characters (Much like the book). The film is definitely a tribute to the book by the end.Overall, fans of the book will like this movie after the initial stage, and while they do add a lot of stupid chunks of the movie (Adam Meets Rollie Wedge) the film does do well to the book.I rate this movie 62%.JOHN GRISAM RULES!!!