web
counter
 

The Lincoln Lawyer Is Better Than Good, It's Alright Alright Alright

By Dustin Rowles | Posted Under Film Reviews | Comments (22)



lincoln-lawyer-matt-mcconaughe.jpg

You knew Matthew McConaughey had it in him. After suffering a decade plus of mostly terrible high-concept flicks, McConaughey returns to the type of role that made him a star in the first place, a sleazy, cocksure defense attorney with a gooey center of humanity. The gritty shots, the handheld cameras, and the seedy surroundings are ideal for McConaughey — they are brutal on everyone else in this film (Marisa Tomei, included), but the sweaty close-ups that reveal pores and forehead veins are perfect for McConaughey — it’s his natural surroundings. They highlight both the man’s strengths and his actorly vulnerabilities. It’s like home, and Matthew McConaughey has finally returned to it.

In Brad Furman’s serviceably directed Lincoln Lawyer, McConaughey plays Mick Haller, a seedy defense attorney who works out of his Lincoln Town Car, and who is not above continuing a client’s trial until his fees are paid. There’s some indication that Haller is in it for the money, and he has a few ambulance-chasing tricks to demonstrate that. But he’s also about the justice system — he comes from a line of defense attorneys, and nothing weighs on him heavier than the idea of an innocent client being sent to prison, even if it means returning a murderer back to the streets. It’s his dedication to thugs and felons that cost him his marriage to Maggie McPherson (Marisa Tomei), a prosecutor and still occasional sex partner, with whom he shares a child.

Enter Louis Roulet (Ryan Phillipe), a spoiled rich kid who comes from money and who has been accused of sexually assaulting a prostitute. Roulet maintains his innocence, claiming he was set up by a gold-digging prostitute looking to make hay at the civil trial. Despite the police evidence, Roulet has a convincing story, but there’s something about the kid that just doesn’t sit right, a role also suited well to Phillipe, who has golden-boy handsomeness but the look of a privileged son, someone who feels like the world owes him a goddamn favor.

As Haller and his investigator, Frank Levin (the always brilliant William H. Macy) conduct their investigation, they uncover some evidence that doesn’t do Roulet any favors, but Haller has a client to defend, and by God, that’s what he’s going to do, even as the frame-up jobs multiply, threatening to take down Haller.

To say anything else would be to spoil Lincoln Lawyer, and for those are are into hard-boiled crime fiction, this one does a bang-up job. It’s exactly what you’d expect from Michael Connelly, the novelist behind the movie. There’s no flash or bang, but it’s a neat little story that tidies up the way legal thrillers are meant to tidy up. And as someone who has seen them all, the movies and the television shows, The Lincoln Lawyer presents a twist that even I haven’t seen before. It’s not a gotcha moment, and there are no smoking guns or last minute pieces of evidence, but Haller impressively demonstrates how to eat one’s cake and choke another man with the icing.

That’s not to say, despite all of McConaughey’s sweaty charm, that The Lincoln Lawyer is for everyone. The Academy is not going to be impressed, nor are the fanboys, and the Ellroy fans and the gumshoe enthusiasts might think it lightweight. But for those who thrive on narrative symmetry, who dig on Michael Connelly or Scott Turow, or have a little guilty pleasure in their back pocket for Grisham’s B-movies, The Lincoln Lawyer is an impressive potboiler, an old-style Hollywood movie with equal amounts steak and sizzle. It’s smart and engaging, a greasy plot noodle with some zing, and Furman brings some Memphis-style seaminess to the Hollywood location. It’s populist pablum, but it is terrifically entertaining, a page-turner come to steamy life onscreen.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



First Costumed Picture of the New Wonder Woman | Two Amy Ponds Flirting With Themselves ... Do I Need To Tell You Anything Else?









Comments

I've heard a lot of good things about The Lincoln Lawyer today. Especially surprising since BEFORE today, I'd not heard word one, and with this cast, I would have been looking out for it.

This is the sort of dramatic role for which McConaughey is particularly well-suited. [Of course, I say this as someone who felt that Fools Gold was delightful, lightweight trash, so who am I to talk?]

Looking forward to this. Thanks!
~~~

Posted by: Meander at March 18, 2011 9:31 PM

Is that Bryan Cranston in the header? You could have summarized this entire thing with "McConaughey doesn't completely suck. Has Bryan Cranston in it." and BAM!, it's on my must-watch list.

Posted by: Drayke at March 18, 2011 10:35 PM

Mmm the judicial equivalent of a steamy but somewhat legit bodice ripper, just the ticket.

Le Spouse and I are going to see it tomorrow night as part of our Totally Budgo Wedding Anniversary: home cooked steak dinner, then a stroll to our local, oldie stylie two theatre cinema to see Lincoln Lawyer with lots of smuggled in red wine.

Posted by: rebecca h. at March 18, 2011 11:40 PM

Oh thank Godtopus, I'd read three good reviews of this but had been waiting and wondering, "WWPT," which of course is "What Would Pajiba Think?" Because Mrs. , loves her legal thrillers, and I love some hot Tomei, and I was praying to the tentacled deity this would be good, so that maybe I could take her to see this and then Get Some from Mrs. , and imagine it was Tomei.

Fuck you, George Costanza.

Posted by: , at March 19, 2011 2:24 AM

My reaction was the same as Drayke until I noticed that Michael Peña was in it too. Now I'm conflicted.

Posted by: Uda at March 19, 2011 2:42 AM

Well as a person whose favorite movie is is "Street Kings" I may just have to see this film. Mother forgive me me. Oh wait, she would probably like this too. Shit.

Posted by: Blake Shrapnel at March 19, 2011 7:07 AM

And starring Michael Pare as Detective Kurlin. Eddie lives.

Posted by: kevin_m at March 19, 2011 9:49 AM

Saw it yesterday. Great ensemble cast, reminiscent of British films where great actors take relatively small parts to elevate a film like no other. Yes, MM is fantastic. And, brother, does the plot make him squirm. But in the end he's all handsomeness and control once again, sticking it to his slimy client with his ethics almost intact. Love Connelly. Loved this film. Might see it again.

Posted by: sittingpat at March 19, 2011 10:54 AM

I'm a BIG Michael Connelly fan so I was a little concerned that this movie would really suck. Thank you for the review, I feel a sense of relief that one of my favorite author's work hasn't been raped and pillaged.

Anyone else see the cartoon vulture in McConaughey? I think it's the neck:

http://looneytunes.wikia.com/wiki/Beaky_Buzzard

Posted by: snapnhiss at March 19, 2011 11:07 AM

yeah, it's alright alright alright..i love my boyfriend, i m almost 10years older than him....LOLi met him
via -----Eu Age Cupid .c 0;M---- it gives you a chance to make your
life better and open opportunities for you to meet the attractive young
man and treat you like a queen. i love that !Maybe you wanna check it
out or tell your friends--

Posted by: laneti at March 19, 2011 11:59 AM

Sounds like a perfect DVD-for-Saturday-afternoon flick. Not worth going to the theater for (going to the theater to watch a lawyer movie seems a little ridiculous), but definitely worth a rental.

Posted by: figgy at March 19, 2011 12:02 PM

Memphis-style seaminess?

Posted by: The Mutt at March 19, 2011 2:24 PM

I love sleazy McConaughey way more than endearingly quirky romantic comedy McConaughey. (Except in How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days. I love that damn movie, even with Kate Hudson.)

Posted by: TWoP_Fan at March 19, 2011 3:13 PM

SPOILERS ABOUND: The universal praise for his movie has left me seriously concerned about my fellow humans. First of all, the depiction of the legal system is less accurate than an episode of "Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer." And then, there's the treatment of women: the hookers are all beautiful, articulate women who check out their customers thoroughly via the Internet before agreeing to an assignation. One hooker's occupation is somehow unknown until trial, at which point brilliant lawyer Matt McConaughey points out the case would never have come to trial if that had been known, apparently since there's no law against beating and raping a prostitute. Tomei, who hates MM when the movie starts swiftly falls in love with him. Why? Uh...duh... because he's Matt McConaughey. And then there's the plot: a rich guy beats up a hooker and then hires the lawyer who defended the poor sap whom the rich guy framed for the murder of another hooker years before. The logic is that, when the rich guy is revealed to have killed Hooker #1 all those years ago, Lawyer will be unable to do anything about it due to confidentiality. (The movie has an odd definition of confidentiality, too) But then, if Rich Guy hadn't hired Lawyer, no one would have ever known about RG's murder of Hooker #1. But, hey, I know, I know...none of this matters because MATTHEW McCONAUGHEY'S BACK!

Posted by: Huh? at March 19, 2011 4:44 PM

Mmmmm........ Steak.........

Posted by: Odnon at March 19, 2011 9:59 PM

I started the book on Friday, finished on Saturday, and caught the movie on Sunday. It was a solid, thrilling adaptation. In response to Huh? Maggie never hated MM. They were formerly married. They never stopped really loving each other. And Rich Guy picked MM because he knew MM had a reputation for being a skeeze who values money over ethics.

The movie wasn't perfect, though, nor was the book. My major qualm was


[MAJOR SPOILER HERE. Scroll over]

Whatever actually happened in the central crime is NEVER EXPLAINED! Who hit Phillipe in the head and had him arrested in the first place? Who called the cops? Was there a 911 call? Who "planted" blood on his left hand? Or if he hit her himself, can we assume he is ambidextrous?

Posted by: Skyler Durden at March 20, 2011 5:40 PM

Shit! Shit! Shit!

In the preview pane, I blocked out the spoiler, but when I posted the comment, the html didn't take. Sorry. My bad :-(

Posted by: Skyler Durden at March 20, 2011 5:43 PM

@skyler

Thank you! I had the same issue. Was it actually a frame-up between the ho and her john? I know this might be about being probably far too wrapped up in the details, but based on the flashback of the scene, Roulet doesn't have ANY defense wounds. Wouldn't that back his story? And wouldn't his story of being clonked on the head in the hallway mean that there was glass in the hallway, as opposed to glass all over her living room? It's not like I poured over this to find these inconsistencies, but it seems really SLOPPY to me, and I'm a Micheal Connolly fan.

Posted by: cmj at March 20, 2011 6:44 PM

Did Spambot just do a McConaughey impression?

Posted by: Paultera at March 21, 2011 10:59 AM

Hey, Skyler, I believe Howard Hawks had the same problem with "The Big Sleep". Get over it.

Posted by: rocky at March 21, 2011 12:37 PM


i enjoyed the book and the movie... also agree with those above who
sense there are some big holes in the plot. there are but i think
it's a film that is best taken at a fast pace with a bucket of
buttered popcorn and a limited effort to parse the details. dustin
nailed this review.

Posted by: snake at March 21, 2011 4:47 PM

Def. watching this one. Reading the book first.

I predict this movie will replace Runaway Jury as "lawyer flick that must be watched every time it's on TV".

Posted by: Big Softie at March 21, 2011 7:55 PM