The Worst Film Ever

One of my all time favorites.

Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

As usual, I'm in the minority. This film was very compelling! It bears intrigue, suspense, and a high level of atmosphere! Gary Oldman (who is VERY young here) is a defense attorney in a crisis. His client, it seems, should have been convicted for the crime for which Oldman has successfully defended him. That's not a spoiler, by the way, the discovery is made just inside the first act.The rest of the film involves Oldman's character going through all he can in order to get the facts against his client. In the real world, Oldman's character would face being disbarred if his actions were discovered, while the DA and ADA who were involved with that little operation, would face, at the least, disciplinary action.Now, that's not to say that no defense attorney has ever committed the actions Oldman's character commits, however, the consequences are quite clear. Attorney/client privilege is sacred. Violations of that contractual agreement are severe, and should be; therefore, the suspension of belief required herein is a bit high, but since no one who will assist in prosecuting the defense attorney understands to what extent Oldman's character betrays his client, it isn't so great as to break that spell.All in all, I found the performances herein highly entertaining, and the atmospheric drama quite enjoyable. This is one I will watch again.It rates an 8.8/10 from...the Fiend :.

4 out of 10A somewhat unbelievable storyline with some haunted-house type "shocks" that really don't fit in.Gary Oldham's performance is very erratic...not so much the quality of the performance but the consistency. His character does not behave in a consistent manner. Sometimes calm/relaxed/methodical/thoughtful, sometimes violent/loud/almost crazed. It's just not believable. Have many 80s movies dated badly? Will they be more enjoyable 20 years from now?

A serial killer who avenges aborted fetuses by strangling their mothers; a lawyer who agrees to defend a man he knows is guilty just to ensure he is convicted. Both of these would make solid premises for a thriller and a legal drama respectively. But combining them, as is done here, proves much less successful. The resulting film is neither suspenseful enough as a thriller, nor well-plotted enough as a legal drama. Neither strand of the story gets the attention it deserves, making it necessary for a legal luminary to reappear in the last quarter to explain, from his deathbed, what we can presume is the point: vigilantism is not the answer; the law may be an imperfect reflection of justice, but it's a close as we can get. Thematically, this is a well-intentioned film. But it's undermined by a disjointed (or perhaps over-edited) script, and some violently hammy acting, especially from the usually excellent Oldman. Martin Campbell's strong visual flair and Jerry Goldsmith's ominous music – though blatantly stolen from Peter Gabriel's song ‘Rhythm of the Heat' – compensate, but nowhere near enough.

I really wanted to like this film because it had two of my favourite actors in it- Gary Oldman and Kevin Bacon. Their performance is great, as with some of Martin Campbell's (Goldeneye) direction, but it is the story-line that ruins this film comprising of some decent scenes but overall the plot is unbelievable and ridiculous.See this film if you're a huge fan of either Gary Oldman and Kevin Bacon! 'Criminal Law' has got some good moments but it equally has it's tedious ones due to a poor storyline and unbelievable plot! Visually, director Martin Campbell has a unique style and the performances from it's two leads are very good and intense in parts, but unfortunately doesn't save this film! 'Criminal Law' gets a **1/2 out of *****!