La Nuit des juges

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.

10 years after some rookie cops took it upon themselves to meet out justice in Magnum Force, a group of judges decide to do the same thing. They are deciding to punish those who use the law to get released on technicalities. Sound familiar? Maybe it's a good idea, as they look like they are going to remake this picture in a couple of years.

Michael Douglas (Oscar-winning producer of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Oscar-winning actor in Wall Street) is a judge who is fed up with having to release child murderers. Hal Holbrook (4-time Emmy winner) convinces him that they have a better way. Unfortunately something goes wrong. In ride Yaphet Kotto (Emmy-nominated) to the rescue. I like Kotto and he doesn't disappoint here.

I even got to see Sharon Gless, who I haven't seen since Cagney & Lacey, and James Sikking, who I recall from Hill Street Blues.

Great concept, but they did it better on Magnum Force.

This thriller was shown at the 1983 Edinburgh Film Festival,back then it was not all Indy directors in checked shirts. I saw the film back then and always liked it but it is flawed but all films are. I give no plot details of course but an interest in American idealism will mean you enjoy the film more. Some good performances in this,a more modern film might have a less talented cast and more stars.

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?

In this quietly released early eighties film, Michael Douglas plays a young city judge who is sick and tired of being forced to allow obviously guilty criminals off the hook due to technicalities built up by lawyers. He realizes that there may be a way to correct this problem once one of the older, more experienced judges(Hal Holbrook) lets him in on a group of judges that meet privately to set up murders of the guilty criminals that got off the hook.

For the most part this is a highly entertaining and thought provoking film which always leaves you wondering where its going to turn next. However, there are a few important things that are left unexplained or just plain forgotten about, which was somewhat sloppy. Otherwise, a good film about an interesting topic. Certainly one of Douglas' best. 7/10.