(So… is this flick about a bird‘s underwear?)
CAST: Julia Roberts, Denzel Washington, Sam Shepard, Tony Goldwyn, John Lithgow, Robert Culp, Stanley Tucci, Cynthia Nixon, Jake Weber, Hume Cronyn, Ralph Cosham.
DIRECTOR: Alan J. Pakula
WARNING: Some SPOILERS and one really fucked-up way to be proven right - straight ahead…
IT’S LIKE THIS: In one night, two Supreme Court Justices, Justices Rosenberg (Hume Cronyn) and Jensen (Ralph Cosham) are brutally iced. Given that one was a conservative Republican (Rosenberg) who was older than mold with one foot in the grave, and the other (Jensen) was a middle-aged Democrat who liked to secretly frequent gay porno theaters (in fact, he is killed in one), it’s safe to say their social circles didn’t exactly overlap, know what I’m sayin’? So why would an assassin kill those particular two? What did they have in common that made them targets? While the FBI and the rest of Washington DC go into conniption fits over the assassinations and try to find out who was behind them, someone 1,000 miles away in New Orleans has already done their fucking jobs for them.
She is Darby Shaw (Julia Roberts), a brilliant and driven Tulane University law student who has a flash of inspiration after the murders - and writes a lengthy speculative paper explaining who ordered the hits and why. She dubs this saga as, ahem, “The Pelican Brief”, for reasons that you will find out if you see the movie. Anyhow, Darby passes the brief on to her professor/lover Thomas Callahan (Sam Shephard) - who then passes it on as a joke to FBI pal Gavin Verheek (John Heard), who then passes it on up to his higher-ups, who then pass it on to the… the President (Robert Culp).
Bad move. Because it turns out that whoever ordered the killings of Justices Rosenberg and Jensen is very well-connected - and very powerful. Before you can say “Run, Julia, Run!” Thomas is killed in a car bombing that Darby herself barely manages to escape. It appears that someone wants anyone who’s read “The Pelican Brief” to be a thing of the past - including the author herself. Especially the author herself. After lots of THREE DAYS OF THE CONDOR-like shenanigans and perils, Darby hooks up with Washington Post reporter Gray Grantham (Denzel Washington), and together they try to figure who hates Darby’s theory enough to kill her for it. Damn, Darby, what the fuck did you write in that thing?
THE DUDE (OR DUDETTE) MOST LIKELY TO SAVE THE DAY: Gray and Darby, I guess. They’re the only ones doing anything to figure out what the hell is going on. Everyone else just wants ‘em dead.
EYE CANDY MOST LIKELY TO FIRE UP A WOODY: It‘s the Julia and Denzel show - make no mistake….
MOST INTENTIONALLY EXCITING SCENE: The final parking gargage chase scene where the assassins chase Darby and Gray, just after they’ve uncovered proof of the conspiracy, is the closest thing this movie has to an outright climax - therefore it’s the most exciting, if only by default. Oh, and the scene where Darby and Gray break the story of the, uh, “bird brief”.
MOST UNINTENTIONALLY HILARIOUS SCENE: That dipshit assassin Khamel (Stanley Tucci) getting a dose of his own medicine when Darby’s “guardian angel” assassin crashes their party…
HOTTEST SCENE: Any time Julia is called upon to convey the kaleidoscope of emotions going through Darby - without a single word and just using her face. This. Woman. Rocks.
INQUIRING MINDS WANT TO KNOW: What the hell is in “The Pelican Brief”? What kind of a shit-storm has Darby started with her (apparently) dead-on speculations? And who is behind the whole thing? A powerful friend of the President’s? If so, is the President himself a baddie? And if he is, what hope does Darby have of surviving this thing? Can Gray help her? Or is he part of the conspiracy, too? Will the assassins eventually catch up with Darby? If so, how will she outwit them? And why didn’t she just take the brief to the NATIONAL ENQUIRER instead? Because assassins wouldn’t dare go after paparazzi. It would wind up in all the papers, you see…
WHY YOU SHOULD WATCH “THE PELICAN BRIEF”: If you like conspiracy-chase legal thrillers based on bestselling books. And if you like Julia, Denzel, and author John Grisham.
WHY YOU MAY NOT ENJOY “THE PELICAN BRIEF”: If you don’t care for conspiracy-chase legal thrillers and prefer to see Roberts in lighter fare like PRETTY WOMAN, RUNAWAY BRIDE, AMERICA’S SWEETHEARTS, and SLEEPING WITH THE ENEMY. Kidding about that last one…
BUT, SERIOUSLY: I first read John Grisham’s bestselling thriller “The Pelican Brief” not long after its publication in 1992. Hot off the mega-success of his previous novel “The Firm”, Grisham once again hit the bull’s eye with this story about a too-brilliant-for-her-own-good law student who correctly deduces the motive and perpetrator behind the high-profile assassinations of two Supreme Court Justices, and must go on the run to not only stay alive, but also prove that she’s right. From reading the heroine’s physical description the book, I couldn’t help but think Grisham had written the role of Darby Shaw with Roberts in mind. Whether or not this is the case, it’s a good thing she took the role because she elevates this film with her star power.
I write “elevates” because without Julia Roberts, THE PELICAN BRIEF would’ve been an average film. Suffice it to say, I was somewhat disappointed when I finally saw the cinematic version of the novel that I thoroughly enjoyed. I love Hitchcockian chase thrillers, and the novel was a solidly good example of one. On the surface, THE PELICAN BRIEF looks like it can’t miss: (1) Alan J. Pakula (director of such classics as ALL THE PRESIDENT’S MEN, KLUTE, and PRESUMED INNOCENT) at the helm; (2) Roberts and Denzel Washington as her co-lead; and (3) a solid supporting cast consisting of Sam Shepard, John Heard, Stanley Tucci, John Lithgow, Robert Culp, Tony Goldwyn, and a young Cynthia Nixon, pre-SEX AND THE CITY.
Unfortunately, the kinetic energy of the book is replaced by a broodingly-slow pace that might’ve been welcome in another kind of thriller, but somehow doesn’t feel right for this “race-to-stay-alive” story. Scenes that came across as tense and exciting on book and script page somehow feel muted and lackluster onscreen. To be sure, there are still a few suspenseful setpieces here, such as Khamel the assassin going after Gavin Verheek, and the final confrontation (as such) in the parking garage between Darby, Gray, and the killers on their trail. But these are too few and far between. Most of the time, we get a whole slew of perfunctory sequences of Darby being chased by nameless thugs, or she and Gray going about their investigation in mechanical manner.
I’m not sure what to attribute this lethargic feel to THE PELICAN BRIEF except Pakula must have specifically aspired to it. Sadly, Pakula was killed in a bizarre car accident years ago, and I certainly respect the man’s talent. After all, he gave us ALL THE PRESIDENT’S MEN, KLUTE, and PRESUMED INNOCENT. Like those films, THE PELICAN BRIEF is a thriller. Unlike those films, however, THE PELICAN BRIEF is a chase thriller. As such, it needed a more galvanizing, and less somber, feel. Think of THREE DAYS OF A CONDOR from 1974, which was the right blend of cerebral and visceral. Director Sydney Pollack made that movie a memorably energetic thriller that didn’t short-change the audience’s intelligence. Pollack would go on to repeat this winning combo with THE FIRM (1993 - the same year as THE PELICAN BRIEF and also from a Grisham novel) and THE INTERPRETER (2005).
Indeed, if you want to see the kind of directorial approach THE PELICAN BRIEF should have received, just watch THE FIRM (review coming next week) and see how Pollack manages to not only combine suspense and action, but also humor and humanity. Unfortunately, THE PELICAN BRIEF doesn’t have enough of these elements to allow it to reach THE FIRM’s level of quality. I often wonder how THE PELICAN BRIEF would’ve turned out if Sydney Pollack had directed it. Again, I’m a deep admirer of Alan J. Pakula’s talents, and I certainly mourn his passing like all film lovers, but I just feel his handling of THE PELICAN BRIEF was not the most ideal one.
Why, then, does THE PELICAN BRIEF manage to rate *** (above average). As I wrote before, two words: Julia. Roberts. Prior to THE PELICAN BRIEF, Roberts had done mostly comedies and dramas, and only starred in two other thrillers: the flawed-but-interesting FLATLINERS (1990) and SLEEPING WITH THE ENEMY (1991). Coming straight off PRETTY WOMAN, Roberts proved in these flicks that she was more than just a comedy actress and could also do “serious and scared” compellingly. There are moments in both FLATLINERS and SLEEPING WITH THE ENEMY where Roberts holds the screen and our attention with her expressions alone - revealing more about her characters’ emotional states than ten pages of dialogue.
She does the same thing in THE PELICAN BRIEF with Darby Shaw, beautifully. Some great examples to look for: (1) Darby’s reaction when Thomas is first killed in the car bombing; (2) her realization in the Emergency Room that his death was not an accident - and she was supposed to die, as well; (3) Darby hiding in the hotel room, trying to control her panic; (4) Darby’s reaction when she discovers that Gray’s contact at the law firm has been killed, and her ensuing “breakdown”; and (5) her farewell look to Gray at the end.
If there was ever proof of star power being able to save a movie from average-dom, it’s Roberts’ emotionally compelling turn in THE PELICAN BRIEF. As it is, Roberts manages to do this even when the script shunts Darby to the side for extended periods of time while it follows the uninteresting machinations of most of the male supporting characters (including Gray - more on that below). Imagine how much more stunning Eoberts could’ve been - and how much better THE PELICAN BRIEF would be - if Darby was the main focus of the story for most of the running time. That’s another reason why THE FIRM is a superior film to THE PELICAN BRIEF - in the former, we spend more time in the lead character’s shoes and get caught up in his dilemma.
Another reason THE PELICAN BRIEF isn’t as energetic as it can be is a rather bland performance from Denzel Washington. Anyone who reads this blog knows I’m a fan of the guy. But, as I’ve mentioned in previous Washington film reviews, I find him more interesting when he’s playing flawed, imperfect characters. When he plays “goodie-goodie” type of heroes (as in THE BOOK OF ELI), I tune out. Here, he is playing such a guy: someone who is not only perfect, but boringly-so. I didn’t feel this way about the character in the book, so I can only surmise it’s Washington’s “Knight-In-Shining-Armor” approach to the role - or Pakula’s direction of him. In any case, THE PELICAN BRIEF would’ve been a stronger thriller with a “rougher-edged” reporter as its co-lead. Think of Russell Crowe’s dynamic character in STATE OF PLAY - that’s how Gray should’ve been played. Or even just casting Laurence Fishburne in the role - he always seems to have an element of dangerous unpredictability to him, no matter how nice his character is.
Ultimately, THE PELICAN BRIEF is a curiously restrained chase thriller (there’s a contradiction in terms) that is enlivened by Julia Roberts’ sheer charisma and “X-Factor“. Without her, I don’t know how enjoyable this film would’ve been. No disrespect to the talented late Mr. Pakula. Just keeping it real.
