Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Pretty Good

Awesome Movie

The story-telling is good with flashbacks.The film is both funny and heartbreaking. You smile in a scene and get a soulcrushing revelation in the next.

Hot Coffee is a must see. It shows the reality of what is behind the tort reform movement and how tort reform would hurt people and make safety and the consequences of cutting protections just a business decision based only on profit. Safty can be expensive, and the purpose of suing for harm done would make it more expensive to not be safe.Watch with an open mind, and you should be outraged.Again, a must see.Profit makes a good motivator to cut corners.A must see.

I saw one thing and one thing only in this documentary: Assigning blame to anyone but yourself.It goes over how damage caps on lawsuits is wrong, how ridiculous it is that a boy born with brain damage didn't get enough money to live on the rest of his life and how unfair it is that the woman who burned herself on coffee didn't get the 2.7 million USD she was promised at first, but fails to even once mention the main issue: Who was really to blame?Let's take it from the top down! The Coffee Case: An elderly woman is handed her coffee in a car by her nephew at a parking lot. She decides to put the coffee in her lap while trying to get the lid off, so she can pour some cream inside. The cup tips over and she gets 4th degree burns over her entire upper legs.The degree of the burns, the medical bills, the heat of the coffee and the number of complaints about the heat of the coffee has nothing to do with who's at fault for this woman spilling coffee in her lap, thou that is the "evidence" used in both the trial and this documentary. They claim it's McDonald's fault that she spilled her coffee because the coffee machine was "set too high". If she had dropped the cup because of the heat it would have been one thing, but all I kept thinking while they laid out the evidence is that it has nothing to do with who's at blame. They might as well have sued Ford because there were no cup holders or the company making the paper cups.Also, the reason she sued was because McDonald's had given her 800$ without even questioning who's fault it was, but her medical bills went up to 10 000$ and she couldn't pay it. She even admitted herself that the reason she sued was not because she thought they were at fault, but because she couldn't afford the medical bills, but this documentary makes it seem like that is the reason it was McDonald's fault!Exhibit 2, the boy born with brain damage: A mother pregnant with twins feels less movement at night. She goes on the second day to the doctor who listens to the heart beats and couldn't find anything wrong there. She waits a week and the movements had been less and less each day, so she goes back. An ultrasound confirmed that one boy didn't get enough oxygen and she was rushed to the ER for a C-section and the boy came out with brain damage.What the documentary tries to prove here is that the cap on damages is wrong, because the mother sued the doctor and the jury thought 5.6 million USD was enough for taking care of the boy the rest of his life, but the cap on damages that the state had brought that sum down to 2.7 million USD instead.Again, no real evidence that the doctor actually caused the brain damage through malpractice, other than the fact that she had two previous lawsuits filed against her. The documentary only mentions the previous lawsuits, but fails to go into any details about them. What was the background for those? Who won those cases? What had happened?But instead of trying to find any evidence that the doctor had actually done anything wrong that caused the brain damage, they decide that previous complaints and lawsuits are enough evidence that this is true.Next one, damage caps vs medical bills: Again, using faulty logic they try to prove that no cap on damages doesn't mean medical prices go up. Their reasoning being that in Texas in 2003 they put in a cap for non-economic damage (this is the arbitrary sum a successful lawsuit generates that cannot be measured in money) and in 2004 the people spent more money on medical care.They are completely satisfied with keeping that as proof without going into any surrounding circumstances, such as was the prices really higher or did more people seek medical attention, or if anything else happened around the same time, such as legislations that forced companies to pay for medical care. They don't even go into what kind of medical care they included, if it was only emergency costs or if they included plastic surgery for beauty operations, holistic medicine and other non-vital medical care.It might just be the fact that doctors and nurses no longer fear being sued that makes them perform their jobs better and enables the hospitals to take on cases they otherwise wouldn't take on, therefore increasing the number of patients treated that causes the overall spending on medical care to increase.In short, this documentary is heavily biased, has no factual grounds to stand on and doesn't even try to prove their claims with anything resembling facts. Instead they play the Blame Game and just point their finger at the "evil corporations", to such length that they actually try to convince you that the "tort reform" is wrong just because some of the biggest corporations in the US is for the reform and have a financial gain in it. Of course they have a financial gain in not being sued left and right for things they have no control over. Does that mean it is wrong to prevent unnecessary lawsuits? Does that mean it is right for doctors, EMT's, police and business owners to live in fear of lawsuits?Unless you want to be shaking your head in frustration, skip this one. There are better ways to waste 82 minutes of your life!

It took me a few minutes after watching this "documentary" to remember that my mother used to visit friends or have them over, and they were all serving each other tea which they made by boiling water (212 degrees Farenheit...or 22 to 32 degrees hotter than MacDonald's coffee), pouring it into a flimsy teacup and handing it to each other. If any of the ladies had fumbled the tea onto their lap right after the boil, it would have left even worse burns than the old lady in the documentary suffered. I guess that would have been the fault of whomever was serving tea that day! This film was a good example of a public relations effort by the Democrat National Committee or the Obama re-election campaign, but its inability to deal with contrary views (other than as being summarized in a smarmy manner and thrown away as a paper tiger) shows how weak the effort was.

I wish every American could see this film to understand how their views can be manipulated by high paid corporate lobbyists. It also shows how important our court system is to all of us as long as it is kept clean and independent and not subject to outside influence through the campaign financing process. It is well researched and well produced. I am impressed. I have to commend HBO for this production. It is truly relevant and a great contribution to documentary media. I must say I would not have expected them to support such an insightful production that touches on a topic that exposes some of the worst examples of abuse by corporate America. What Halliburton did to its employee was truly outrageous. You will have to see the film to know what I am talking about.