The Trial
Tags: murder

Plot synopsis:
On his thirtieth birthday, the chief cashier of a bank, Josef K., is unexpectedly arrested by two unidentified agents from an unspecified agency for an unspecified crime. The agents' boss later arrives and holds a mini-tribunal in the room of K.'s neighbor, Fräulein Bürstner. K. is not taken away, however, but left "free" and told to await instructions from the Committee of Affairs. He goes to work, and that night apologizes to Fräulein Bürstner for the intrusion into her room. At the end of the conversation he suddenly kisses her.
K. receives a phone call summoning him to court, and the coming Sunday is arranged as the date. No time is set, but the address is given to him. The address turns out to be a huge tenement building. K. has to explore to find the court, which turns out to be in the attic. The room is airless, shabby and crowded, and although he has no idea what he is charged with, or what authorizes the process, K. makes a long speech denigrating the whole process, including the agents who arrested him; during this speech an attendant's wife and a man engage in sexual activities. K. then returns home.
K. later goes to visit the court again, although he has not been summoned, and finds that it is not in session. He instead talks with the attendant's wife, who attempts to seduce him into taking her away, and who gives him more information about the process and offers to help him. K. later goes with the attendant to a higher level of the attic where the shabby and airless offices of the court are housed.
K. returns home to find Fräulein Montag, a lodger from another room, moving in with Fräulein Bürstner. He suspects that this is to prevent him from pursuing his affair with the latter woman. Yet another lodger, Captain Lanz, appears to be in league with Montag.
Later, in a store room at his own bank, K. discovers the two agents who arrested him being whipped by a flogger for asking K. for bribes and as a result of complaints K. made at court. K. tries to argue with the flogger, saying that the men need not be whipped, but the flogger cannot be swayed. The next day he returns to the store room and is shocked to find everything as he had found it the day before, including the whipper and the two agents.
K. is visited by his uncle, who was K.'s guardian. The uncle seems distressed by K.'s predicament. At first sympathetic, he becomes concerned that K. is underestimating the seriousness of the case. The uncle introduces K. to a lawyer, who is attended by Leni, a nurse, whom K.'s uncle suspects is the advocate's mistress. During the discussion it becomes clear how different this process is from regular legal proceedings: guilt is assumed, the bureaucracy running it is vast with many levels, and everything is secret, from the charge, to the rules of the court, to the authority behind the courts – even the identity of the judges at the higher levels. The attorney tells him that he can prepare a brief for K., but since the charge is unknown and the rules are unknown, it is difficult work. It also never may be read, but is still very important. The lawyer says that his most important task is to deal with powerful court officials behind the scenes. As they talk, the lawyer reveals that the Chief Clerk of the Court has been sitting hidden in the darkness of a corner. The Chief Clerk emerges to join the conversation, but K. is called away by Leni, who takes him to the next room, where she offers to help him and seduces him. They have a sexual encounter. Afterwards K. meets his uncle outside, who is angry, claiming that K.'s lack of respect has hurt K.'s case.
K. visits the lawyer several times. The lawyer tells him incessantly how dire his situation is and tells many stories of other hopeless clients and of his behind-the-scenes efforts on behalf of these clients, and brags about his many connections. The brief is never complete. K.'s work at the bank deteriorates as he is consumed with worry about his case.
K. is surprised by one of his bank clients, who tells K. that he is aware that K. is dealing with a trial. The client learned of K.'s case from Titorelli, a painter, who has dealings with the court and told the client about K.'s case. The client advises K. to go to Titorelli for advice. Titorelli lives in the attic of a tenement in a suburb on the opposite side of town from the court that K. visited. Three teenage girls taunt K. on the steps and tease him sexually. Titorelli turns out to be an official painter of portraits for the court (an inherited position), and has a deep understanding of the process. K. learns that, to Titorelli's knowledge, not a single defendant has ever been acquitted. He sets out K.'s options and offers to help K. with either. The options are: obtain a provisional verdict of innocence from the lower court, which can be overturned at any time by higher levels of the court, which would lead to re-initiation of the process; or curry favor with the lower judges to keep the process moving at a glacial pace. Titorelli has K. leave through a small back door, as the girls are blocking the door through which K. entered. To K.'s shock, the door opens into another warren of the court's offices – again shabby and airless.
K. decides to take control of matters himself and visits his lawyer with the intention of dismissing him. At the lawyer's office he meets a downtrodden individual, Block, a client who offers K. some insight from a client's perspective. Block's case has continued for five years and he has gone from being a successful businessman to being almost bankrupt and is virtually enslaved by his dependence on the lawyer and Leni, with whom he appears to be sexually involved. The lawyer mocks Block in front of K. for his dog-like subservience. This experience further poisons K.'s opinion of his lawyer. (This chapter was left unfinished by the author.)
K. is asked by the bank to show an Italian client around local places of cultural interest, but the Italian client, short of time, asks K. to take him only to the cathedral, setting a time to meet there. When the client does not show up, K. explores the cathedral, which is empty except for an old woman and a church official. K. notices a priest who seems to be preparing to give a sermon from a small second pulpit, and K. begins to leave, lest it begin and K. be compelled to stay for its entirety. Instead of giving a sermon, the priest calls out K.'s name. K. approaches the pulpit and the priest berates him for his attitude toward the trial and for seeking help, especially from women. K. asks him to come down and the two men walk inside the cathedral. The priest works for the court as a chaplain and tells K. a fable (which was published earlier as "Before the Law") that is meant to explain his situation. K. and the priest discuss the parable. The priest tells K. that the parable is an ancient text of the court, and many generations of court officials have interpreted it differently.
On the eve of K.'s thirty-first birthday, two men arrive at his apartment. He has been waiting for them, and he offers little resistance – indeed the two men take direction from K. as they walk through town. K. leads them to a quarry where the two men place K's head on a discarded block. One of the men produces a double-edged butcher knife, and as the two men pass it back and forth between them, the narrator tells us that "K. knew then precisely, that it would have been his duty to take the knife... and thrust it into himself." He does not take the knife. One of the men holds his shoulder and pulls him up and the other man stabs him in the heart and twists the knife twice. K.'s last words are: "Like a dog!".

Review: If you see it stars Matthew Modine than make sure you catch it.The film opens with Modine who has been unable to come to grips with the death of his wife and children ready to blow the top of his head off with a revolver.
As he's ready to do the deed, a phone call comes.It's from Judge Rance Howard who wants to get Modine back in the among the living and in the practice of his profession.
He appoints him the defense attorney of young Randy Wayne who is accused of the murder of his sweetheart, the daughter of a prominent family in the area.
When he came down he finds himself with her dead body and no memory of the crime at all.He gets all his courtroom skills back, it's like riding a bicycle, once learned it all comes back.
But this is a tough case and he needs the assistance of psychologist Claire Carey, research assistant Nikki Deloach and most of all Robert Forster his late wife's brother for some heavy muscle and a bit of detective work.
The answer is quite a bit more involved than a case of 'roofies' gone bad.Modine who also produced this gives a carefully delineated performance of a lawyer being brought back to life in his profession and every day living.
In the end he has reason to thank the Deity for being spared in the tragedy that overtook his family.The Trial has the look and feel of a television pilot and I'm sure Matthew Modine is trying to sell it to one of the networks.
Surprisingly good movie with Mat Modine.Some people said it's a religious movie but it's not as much others I've seen lately.
Except for some dialogs between Mac and the psychiatrist, there's no more of that.The plot is kind of predictable but much better than several of the current courtroom dramas we see in the theaters or TV.The movie has very good acting with some exceptions but those don't compromise the movie itself.
I am always looking for good films to watch with my family.
Last night, we sat down with our kids (13 and 15) and watched THE TRIAL.It was refreshing to see a movie that had a simple message and for once not have that message rammed down our throats.
Matthew Modine has always been a favorite and this seemed like one of the few recent films he's done that really challenged him.
I think it helped that they let actors like Robert Forster just be himself instead of putting on a fake accent.All in all, we liked it and recommend it..
I love a good "easy watch" film but this was just boring.
I feel the storyline was weak, not knowing whether to follow the tales of woe about the lawyer or the trial of the boy with neither being strong enough to carry the film.
The only good thing I can say was that the cast were well suited to the film (although that's like being told you were a good swimmer when everyone else round you are doing the Doggy Paddle) and it made me crave a cheese sandwich.
I went into this movie without knowing much about it besides it being about a criminal case that involves capital punishment.
My expectations weren't really that high, I just wanted to be entertained for an hour and a half, unfortunately this movie did not cut it.
If you've watched any other movie or TV show involving criminal cases or jury trials you can pretty much predict everything that is going to happen within the first 10 minutes of the movie and the cornier you guess the better.
If you think about going to see it I recommend you rent yourself a copy of any John Grisham movie or watch Law and Order Trial by Jury..
The problem with these kind of films is "how do you wrap it up", and The Trial doesn't escape from the same lame ending as many more films before it.interesting up to a point, the first half of the film qualifies as a "very good, for-TV show", but thats about it.
the current 5.8 IMDb vote pretty much sums it up, add the fact that the film itself is not really interesting, and you know you can do better with 90 minutes of your time.A retiring lawyer whose son just died takes on the defense of a very unlikely young ex-marine, who is obviously being framed for the murder of his fiancée.
The only two actors worth mentioning, the two lawyers, go trough the case until the verdict; Then, a rapid - and very unwelcome - change of pace leads to the fast and amateurish end of the film.The Trial is the very essence of a film that can be missed - it has no redeeming qualities, and although not horrible per se, there is absolutely nothing to keep you interested.
Not the kind of rubbish that makes you change the channel, but certainly not something you might want to rent or buy.4/10decent but uninvolved acting, recycled script with no conclusion, boring music, and so-so production.
Retired lawyer Mac (Modine) receives a telephone call from a judge who wants him to defend Pete Thompson (Wayne) who was arrested for killing Angela, his girl friend, and he has no memory of what happened that fateful night.
Hmmm.The clues were good, but there was no suspense or tension, and for a courtroom drama that hurts big time.
You know, the more I think about it, maybe this wasn't good enough to be a made-for-TV movie.
This movie should come with a label warning the viewer that the only people who will enjoy it will also enjoy sitting through a two hour church service with no singing and no suspense, while they listen to their pastor summarize his previous 20 sermons.What has happened to Matthew Modine?
This is not the same actor I saw in Full Metal Jacket or Vision Quest.There should also be a warning that nothing in the movie will have anything in common with a real trial.
THE TRIAL, adapted from Robert Whitlow's novel of the same name by director Gary Wheeler and Mark Freiburger, is in many ways a reminder of what movies used to be - movies that centered on trials of innocent victims or trials that, like TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD, surfaced other issues to ponder.
The film is set in the beauty of Georgia countryside, complete with mists and fields and rivers where we first see attorney Mac MacClain (Matthew Modine), pensive after the accidental death of his wife and two children nine years ago.
His practice has fallen, his mental sate has fallen below the flatline state, and he is contemplating suicide when a telephone call from the wise old town judge (Rance Howard) summons him to take on a case of the murder of one Angela Hightower, the young and beautiful daughter of the wealthiest man in the little town, the corrupt Hightower family being part of Mac's sad past encounters.
Mac feels a sense of responsibility to the boy and agrees to take on the case, hiring back his assistant Mindy (Nikki Deloach) and his investigator Ray (Robert Forster).
As they uncover facts Mac seeks advice from psychologist Dr. Anna Wilkes (Clare Carey) who in addition to testing Pete finds time to share her Grieving Group Sessions with Mac. The evidence is gathered and the trial begins after a plea bargain is denied by Pete.
Matthew Modine defends a man accused of murder.
Slow and not particularly well acted, "The Trial" stars Matthew Modine in what was possibly a TV pilot.Modine, one of the producers of this drama, plays Mac, an attorney who has been unable to cope with the horrible deaths of his wife and sons in a car accident.
He has not been practicing law and in fact, is about to blow his brains out when a call comes in from a judge (Rance Howard) who wants him to take a case.
A young man has been accused of giving a woman drugs and then killing her.Mac reluctantly takes this on, coming up against a prosecutor (Bob Gunton) who asks for the death penalty.
Mac hires an investigator (Robert Forster) and a psychiatrist (Clare Carey) to see what they can find out about what happened and about the psychological makeup of the man himself.Nothing original about this film or the story.
Modine gives a nice performance, as does Forster, one of my favorite actors.
There isn't 1 redeeming feature within the 95 minutes of this film which is actually hugely disappointing and has little to do with Christianity.
This may appeal to some Christians looking for affirmation of their own faith.However, as a movie it is very weak, with an embarrassingly bad court case (you could drive a truck through the prosecution case), which is really just a vehicle for the defence lawyer to rediscover God.There are so many flaws in the way the investigation, prosecution and defence are conducted.
Acting wooden.Cringeworthy.There is really no good reason to watch this tosh..
I like courtroom dramas, complete with clever attorneys, plot twists, and surprises.
and it's every bit as boring as that sounds.Matthew Modine mailed it in, and the rest of the cast were mostly wannabes who will never be based on their appearance in this movie.
Robert Forster was the only decent actor in this, and his part was cliché and predictable.The trial was horribly amateur.
Anyone who has watched Law and Order for the past 20 years could point out many courtroom errors and ask valid questions that were never brought out..
A young man is accused of murdering his girlfriend but he has a loss of memory and can't provide any evidence to the contrary.
Mathew Modine plays his defence lawyer but he has a few obstacles in his way due to the death of his wife and sons which brings him to the brink of suicide.
I'm a Matthew Modine fan now, as imo he carried the film.
About the only fault I can think of is that the motive of the bad guy was perhaps not made entirely clear.All in all an excellent legal drama movie and well worth watching!.
The plot is classic Southern courtroom drama, and appropriately, a little drawn out and deliberative.
Several plots intertwine in this film (don't they always?), and so the film's title is really a double meaning: There is a courtroom "trial", and at the same time, the lead actor (Modine) is undergoing trials on the personal and professional level.
Watch it for the personal trial, not the courtroom trial, and you'll catch the intended meaning.
Good acting, but VERY thin plot line..
"The Trial" felt more like a movie-of-the-week than a theater release.
Although the acting was relatively strong, it was as good as could be expected due to the incredibly weak script and plot.
A very predictable story-line: the main character is framed for a murder he didn't commit, only to be defended by a lawyer with depressive issues.
After sitting through almost two hours of it, hoping for the movie to get better, it just didn't ~ and finally!!!
I'm not giving anything away - if you decide to slog through this movie, you'll see what I mean.Initially watching this movie because the great Matthew Modine was in it, I had much higher expectations of what the film would offer.
great family, couple, and teenage and older movie to watch.
I think this movie is really good and that the main character, the lawyer, did a great job.
After watching this movie, you may not be inclined to talk about it, but I feel you will want to talk about the various topics presented.
Great movie to watch in a high school or college classroom, bereavement or church group, or setting for at risk teens..
This review contains spoilers.You have read the warning twice and believe me there is nothing I can say that can spoil the movie anymore..
There is/was no evidence for the conviction/non-conviction of the accused and yet the jury comes up with a verdict.There are a lot of unanswered questions in the movie and vice versa.
Movie about a murder Trial in a small Georgia town.
Matthew Modine (Mac) is very believable as a retired Attorney who because of personal circumstances has reached the end of his rope and sees no options.
During his preparation for trial on the Defendants behalf his old legal team help him to see life in a different perspective.
This was a entertaining film with a message of hope for those who are grief stricken in life..
But having been a trial attorney myself, as with every film featuring a criminal trial, I'm interested in whatever nuances the writers will bring not only to the climactic jury delivery (there were, to be sure, some insightful words in that respect), but also to the attorneys' stress, preparation, investigation, planning, questioning, etc.
And that is where for me the movie fails, in that in its subtle eagerness to put across its god-centered message, it ignores the gaping insufficiencies in the substance of the trial itself.
No defense attorney with a conscience and a capable intellect would ever come to a murder trial as ill-prepared as Modine's character.
If you are skeptical that this film's central message is advocacy for a theistically-centered life, be mindful near the end of the credits which inform you that for more information about the 'themes' in the movie, visit www.refuge.net.
A few of the reviews above here almost make the movie worth knowing about, like the 20 sermon summary one.
In this case, the viewer desperately wants the court scenes to end to get back to the main crime investigation.Matthew Modine is the down-on-his-luck attorney, who was closed to suicide after the tragic death of his wife and children in an auto accident.
The legal case serves as his "comeback" from depression, as he seeks an innocent verdict for a fine, young man who has been falsely accused of killing his girlfriend.As the trial winds down, the viewer begins to recognize that the subtext of the film is retailing a Christian message that has to do with the theme of "life." The trial drags on with the closing arguments, then deliberations of the jury for a sentencing.
The film's big "payoff" scene comes after the trial has concluded and we finally learn who is the real villain.
By this point, the film has lapsed into comedy.The best thing to say about the trial is that it appears on Amazon Prime for FREE!.
The acting and story line in this film were just awful!
The Trial is a 2010 drama film starring Matthew Modine together with Randy Wayne,Bob Gunton and Robert Forster.
It is based on the novel of the same title by Robert Whitlow.The screenplay was written by Mark Freiburger,Gary Wheeler and Robert Whitlow.Also,it was produced and directed by Gary Wheeler.Aging, small town attorney Mac McClain is defending a young man accused of murdering the daughter of an influential local.After his two sons and wife die in a horrific car crash, suicide seems to be the only escape for small town attorney for McClain until he's assigned a capital punishment case involving the murder of the daughter of a powerful business man, in which the victim was drugged.
At the end of the movie, a private investigator discovers that it was someone else who committed the murder and McClain's client is exonerated.This is a formulaic and predictable movie from beginning to end.But nevertheless,the movie works due to the fact that is combines the best features of courtroom drama, murder mystery and character story.Also,it is a powerful which shows the power of healing and hope.That in itself makes it a 10/10 rating..
This is a faith-based movie designed for young Christian audiences.
This review contains some early plot points, but seriously, nothing can spoil this film.
Mac is a lawyer who lost his wife and two sons on Christmas Eve. So he does what all men do when that happens.
He is ordered by a judge to take a murder case in a small Georgia town that has 3 black people and 4 people with mixed southern accents.
Mac has the accused murderer meet with a female shrink, who also runs a clinic to help people cope with the grief of a loved one through God. Why?
Her 10 year old son shows Mac that you can go on with life as they play catch.
First, based upon the real lack of evidence, the case should have never had gone to trial.
The evidence presented by the first witness should not had been allowed and even though the defense had a witness list, his testimony was a complete surprise!Watching this film was like watching a train wreak.
You just knew the defendant just had to be innocent: a blond and blue eyed young man looking like the boy next door.
I was struck by the contrast between the narrow squinty eyes of Matthew Modine as a world weary attorney and the young actor who played the defendant with eyes startlingly large and blue.
Surely such casting was not accidental.I also liked the appearance of Robert Forster.
A fairly good story...about a young man facing the death penalty for a murder he says he didn't commit."You have NO memory, NO alibi, and NO explanation..." says his defense lawyer.The defense lawyer (Matthew Modine) lost his wife and two sons in a car accident a few years before...Movie opens on him...in his empty home...he's ready to pull the trigger and kill himself.
Till the phone rings...and he's assigned this murder case.The prosecutor is an older, experienced man who has previously beaten the defense lawyer...Prosecutor rigorously pursues the death penalty.