High Crimes - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

High Crimes Reviews

Page 1 of 30
Super Reviewer
½ September 10, 2007
really good interesting and surprising twist
Super Reviewer
October 18, 2006
I like to think that my film ratings are aimed at great performances, storyline etc, rather than how good looking a person is, which is why this film gets a 3. It was an ok film, with ok performances and an ok storyline.

The reason I say this is because if I had such a thing as a list of good looking actors, then my guess would be, Jim Caviezel would be at the top.

VERDICT: Watchable, but forgetable
Super Reviewer
½ August 3, 2007
Ashley always plays the victim and does it very well. Great cast. Story about a husband who is accused of murder and his wife defends him in court. It has a twist though.
Super Reviewer
June 18, 2007
A good military, court room drama with a strong cast.
Super Reviewer
½ February 25, 2007
An okay legal drama that mates A Few Good Men with Jagged Edge.
Nate Z.
Super Reviewer
½ February 24, 2006
[font=Arial][color=darkred]The last film Ashley Judd starred alongside Morgan Freeman was 1997?s ?Kiss the Girls,? a laughably bad serial killer potboiler that solidified Judd as a rising star. Now five years have passed and while Judd remains a top female actress (at least looks wise) her choices involving Freeman continue to disappoint. Maybe he?s bad peer pressure.[/color][/font]

[font=Arial][color=darkred]Judd is a hot-shot attorney (is there any other kind in the movies?) happily married to retired military man Ronald Chapman (Jim Caviezel). As they walk merrily from holiday shopping arm-in-arm they are besieged by a police sting and Ron is hauled away. An angry Judd learns that the military is charging her husband with massacring civilians in a brief engagement in El Salvador in the 1980s. Judd is determined to prove her hubby?s innocence and contacts the wily and aged defense lawyer Charlie Grimes (Freeman). And, you guessed it, he?s a crafty ole? dog that doesn?t ?play by all the rules.? So they team up and try to trump the military court and endless shadowy figures behind the scenes.[/color][/font]

[font=Arial][color=darkred]The killing point for ?High Crimes? is that the movie has a giant black hole of a plot that keeps expanding and sucking more inside. There are more subplots than you can shake a stick at, that is, if you?re one of those people that shake sticks at movies. Also included in the whole convoluted mess is an appointed defense attorney (Adam Scott), Judd?s sister (Amanda Peet) who moves in on base, Bruce Davison as a general looking to hide some things, a distrusting former friend of Ron?s, and even in the most far-fetched way a shady character who just happens to have been a boy who witnessed the El Salvador massacre.[/color][/font]

[font=Arial][color=darkred]With ?High Crimes? the film keeps twisting and turning and dropping red herrings, but there?s much too much going on and too little of it mattering. It seems like the film embodies a shark, afraid that if it stops moving it will die.[/color][/font]

[font=Arial][color=darkred]Director Carl Franklin has officially failed to deliver on whatever promise he showed with his earlier films ?Devil in a Blue Dress? and ?One False Move?. He mines the material as far as he can but seems uncertain as to where this large revolving tale is going. Inconsistencies and logic loop holes abound. ?High Crimes? seems exactly like one of those movies where the book was so good but then they lost so much of its feel during the translation of mediums.[/color][/font]

[font=Arial][color=darkred]Judd and Freeman do credible jobs and have a fairly sparkling chemistry between them; however, this is not a movie either will place at the top of their acting oeuvre. Her scenes in the court room as the strong willed woman give about all the characterization that she gets in the film. Freeman remains solid, despite being aloof for most of his screen time.[/color][/font]

[font=Arial][color=darkred]?High Crimes? is like a pulpy formulaic puff piece that keeps squirming and writhing until the lights in the theater go back up. It may be harmless but it?s also joyless. But at least, for now, it stops Freeman from doing another serial killer movie. For now?[/color][/font]

[font=Arial][color=darkred]Nate's Grade: C[/color][/font]
Super Reviewer
½ January 16, 2010
High Crimes follows the struggle of attorney Claire Kubik, played by Ashley Judd, to exonerate her husband, played by James Caviezel, who has been charged with the murder of innocent people that supposedly happened during a covert operation fifteen years earlier. Jim Caviezel was magnificent and shone in his role here.... could weep tenderly on cue and be the affectionate husband to his wife who desperately wants a child, and be the perfect criminal to the extent of even passing a lie detector test when he was presumed guilty.

Claire defends her husband in the court case with the help of another lawyer, Charles Grimes (Morgan Freeman).They played off each other perfectly and Amanda Peet was very watchable in her underwritten role.
Despite its flaws, I was entertained and engrossed by the intriguing storyline but the final twist unfortunately became all too evident because the entire movie tried to convince us otherwise.
Super Reviewer
½ November 25, 2007
Judd and Freeman have delivered a whole lot better than this...
Super Reviewer
½ July 9, 2011
Slick but unapologetically manipulative while losing credibility by the minute towards the end. Female lawyers were in high fashion during the Ally McBeal era, and here we get a crafty Ashley Judd sporting a variety of bad Marcia Clark hairdos. Her performance is a good one though, while Amanda Peet seizes the opening provided by Judd's lousy locks as top hottie, and Morgan Freeman steals every scene as a has-been military counsel. I was enjoying myself with a lenient attitude of acceptance, but High Crimes couldn't even behave itself within that loose criteria. Overplayed red herrings, people suddenly appearing to save the day in a different city (and in one case a different country!), and a "surprise" ending that finalizes the exasperation. Too bad because I was ready to give a recommendation at the halfway point, but it lamentably loses a full star from there on.
Super Reviewer
½ November 9, 2007
I lost track of how many times Morgan Freeman played the same role in different m ovies. The good-hearted renegade policeman or lawyer or whatnot whose streetwise ways of dealing with with problems make the world a better place. In this case, I do not really mind Freeman being typecast because he fills the stereotype well and adds wamrth and humanity to the movies. Yet, in some cases the films are unbalanced because the rest of the cast cannot hold their ends up. High Crimes suffers from an incredibly weak cast (except Freeman). While Ashley Judd is not the worst actor, her character is very superficial and you can tell that the script is written by a bloke because no woman like here exists in the world, shallow. The axis of the film, the accused, is James Cavaziel and he is a pain in the eye to see acting and he really breaks this movie, because I do not really care what happens to him. The story is simple and resemblent of "A Few Good Men" without the subtleness and tension, without the quality if you want to put it that way. The characters are all onedimensional and the bad guys look bad and the good guys look good, like an old western, but not in a good way. You can smell the twist from miles away so the climax is more or less a anti-climax. All this and many story inconsistencies make this a below average thrilles that is poorly executed as well. Can be missed.

Super Reviewer
October 21, 2007
Good movie..
Super Reviewer
April 29, 2008
½ March 7, 2014
Wasn't the best thriller, and was predictable most of the time. But a movie with Morgan Freeman can't be that bad right? His role in this movie with Ashley Judd's capable performance makes this a decent flick, but don't think too hard.
December 20, 2012
Badly written and predictable. Morgan Freeman is the only redeemable part of the movie. But it was still mildly entertaining.
½ October 19, 2012
Surprisingly effective and entertaining courtroom thriller based on a court marshal. It told differing opinions and didn't let the audience know which one was the truth until the very end. Also Morgan Freeman is just a great actor.
January 4, 2012
I didn't have a lot of interest in seeing this movie- in fact, I only agreed to go see it because my best friend is an Ashley Judd fanatic and I had nothing better to do. Turns out it was a good thing I went, because it's a great, albeit a bit cheesy film. Jim Caviezel is outstanding as usual.
½ February 12, 2012
A decent film but not very believable. Good work as always by the great Morgan Freeman but Ashley Judd in a UCMJ case? I don't think so. I have never seen a civilian represent a service member in a UCMJ court. Is it possible? I am sure it is but give me a break. Jim Caviezel was excellent as Ron Chapman/Tom Kubik, especially when his true nature finally gets revealed at the end of the film. The subplots with Ashley Judd's Claire Kubik's relationship to her sister (Amanda Peet) took away from the film more than it added. While Carl Franklin is a solid director, this film was not one of his finest works. Good ending and good pace, but the acting in the film was not good. Worth seeing if you are a Morgan Freeman fan.
October 19, 2011
not a bad courtroom drama/thriller, but it seems to lack any real grit or ingenuity. while the twists and turns are many, there are still several unknowns (or at least unclears) when the story wraps up. the characters are neither particularly deep nor interesting. I like the overall suspense, and it's actually pretty good at challenging the traditional protagonist/antagonist perceptions, but as thrillers and character studies go, it's definitely on the bland side.
July 9, 2011
Fairly average thriller in which it's not too difficult to figure out where the story is going before it gets there. The acting was very good and the diagloue flows well. Judd and Freeman have done a better movie together, but this is worth your time as long as your expectations are not too high.

You wrote this on 7/19/08.
March 26, 2011
Judd/Freeman, what a great combo. I liked them in "Kiss The Girls" and they did not dissapoint here. Well acted, well produced.
Page 1 of 30