Ein Richter sieht rot

(Credit IMDb) Disgusted with criminals escaping the judicial system via technicalities, an idealistic young judge investigates an alternative method for punishing the guilty.

I wouldn't call this one of Douglas's best movies, but it is fairly enjoyable for a thriller. Douglas hadn't attained the star power like he would in the upcoming years at this juncture. It is clearly evident that he would become a household name in the acting world. This is a good story about uncovering the corrupt system. It's nice to see a Judge that cares, wanting to do right. If anything else, this movie will uplift you. It's definitely worth a look

6.8/10

Judge Hardin has a problem. He is beginning to be disillusioned by the legal system he represents and is repeatedly forced to release people who are clearly guilty due to legal technicalities set-up to protect the innocent. When the torture and murder of children comes before his court he is forced to release the suspects leading him to join a select court of Judges who are self appointed to a shadowy group that pass judgment behind closed doors before employing a hitman to carry out the sentence. However it doesn't take long before developments show Hardin the limitations of this alternative version of justice.

The story here is in two parts. First we have the investigation side where Detective Lowes and others try to catch the child killers, but we also have the side with Hardin and the other Judges. The latter allows the film to debate the issues of justice and the legal system using the former as the catalyst for the debate. Both strands are fascinating when separate however when the two come together for the conclusion it doesn't quite work. The film is then forced to pick a side and manages to fudge it a bit and lose it's way. Up until then it's a great piece of work that makes intelligent argument both in attack and defence of the legal system. The film is still relevant today - in the UK we recently saw the alleged Lawrence killers walk free despite overwhelming evidence due to technicalities - in fact it is probably more relevant than it was then.

The cast are roundly good - Douglas is good despite his slight scout style character. Holbrook does one of the best performances I've seen him give and Kotto adds some real class. It also gives small roles to Gless and David Proval (Ritchie in The Sopranos). The only weak link are the bug-eyed performances of suspected murders Monk and Cooms who are almost like cartoon characters at times.

Overall an intelligent film that manages to hold a clever debate before blowing it with a ham-fisted conclusion.

I am amazingly surprised that no user has pointed it out. Nearly every one realized that STAR CHAMBER was very similar to MAGNUM FORCE. Correct. Every one speaks of Hal Holbrook. OK. But no one tells that Holbrook played in MAGNUM FORCE too, and in a very similar character as this one. One of the lead of a vigilante police force who wanted to wipe all criminals out. Are they blind or what?

Besides, I must admit that I prefer Ted Post's most famous feature, starring Clint Eastwood. Peter Hyams gives here a correct film, but he has done much better. See CAPRICORNE ONE, for instance.

I will finish this comment in pointing out that this kind of topic was very common in the late seventies and early eighties.

The 1983 film THE STAR CHAMBER posits a situation that must seem outlandish, but does go right to the root of our justice system. What if a secret cabal of judges were set up to pass their own verdicts on criminals who had gotten off on minor technicalities?

This is the problem facing Michael Douglas, who portrays an idealistic judge of the L.A. Superior Court who finds himself being forced to free criminals up on charges that include kidnapping and murder because the police bent the law a bit to get the evidence that would send "the bad guys" to jail for life or possibly to Death Row. Douglas later learns from his mentor (the always watchable Hal Holbrook) about a secret cabal of judges--a Star Chamber--that metes out its own brand of justice against those it feels have wrongly been set free. As a result, numerous criminals wind up getting executed. The further Douglas gets into the Star Chamber, however, the more he realizes that the cure these judges propose to rid society of criminal disease is far worse than the disease itself.

Though it is not always plausible, THE STAR CHAMBER is nevertheless compelling, with Douglas and Holbrook giving standout performances under the direction of Peter Hyams (OUTLAND; CAPRICORN ONE; 2010), who co-wrote the film's script with Roderick Taylor. Some might compare it to the 1973 Dirty Harry film MAGNUM FORCE (in which the cops take the law into their own hands), and many would say its theme of vigilante judges is drenched in right-wing gilt, but I don't think that's the case. This is one of those films that definitely makes you think; and while THE STAR CHAMBER may have been released twenty years ago, its themes still hold up in a world where, rightly or wrongly, people see the justice system as too slanted in favor of the criminals.

When "The Star Chamber" was released to theaters in 1983, the movie bombed at the box office. I was lucky to see the movie in its second week of release. I have seen the movie several times on cable TV and video and even though the movie had some good ideas, it was ruined by turning it into a mindless, sometimes laughable action thriller.

The story (by Roderick Taylor with the script co-written by Taylor and director Peter Hyams) rose slightly above the usual vigilante movie clichés. The movie asks what if some judges, frustrated by the law that they are supposed to uphold, took matters into their own hands? Despite strong evidence that would incriminate the accused, the judges have to reject the evidence on technicalities, freeing the accused individuals.

Though the film has a strong cast, I though Michael Douglas was a little too young to play a judge (he was 39 at the time the movie was released). Hal Holbrook is essentially playing the same role he played in Hyams other "what if?" conspiracy thriller a few years earlier (Capricorn One): the veteran judge who is involved in this conspiracy and gets the Douglas character involved.

Yaphet Kotto does what he can in the underwritten role of the L.A. police detective investigating the case. Sharon Gless is wasted as Douglas' understanding wife. Veteran character actors Don Calfa and Joe Regalbuto (Frank Fontana from "Murphy Brown") played the unsympathetic, cartoon criminals who are on the Chamber's hit list.

Only James B. Sikking's performance as a victim's father who finds himself in prison when he tries to take the law into his own hands, came through. It was a very sympathetic and heartbreaking. In retrospect, it's interesting that Sikking played the SWAT commander on "Hill Street Blues" when the movie was released.

Hyams' films (including "2010", "The Presidio", "Outland", the previously mentioned "Capricorn One", even the Jean Claude Van Damme flicks "Timecop" and "Sudden Death") are interesting to look at. "The Star Chamber" is no exception. But many of his films tend to disappoint and, sadly, "The Star Chamber" is also on that list.

Update (July 2006): The current DVD cover of the movie is misleading. It has Michael Douglas holding a gun. In the film, his character never used a gun. What's up with the 20th Century Fox marketing department trying to mislead potential viewers of this movie?