MovieChat Forums > The Client (1994) Discussion > The good guys are made out to be evil in...

The good guys are made out to be evil in this movie and in the book

posted 18 years ago by ajb8487
1 reply | jump to latest

I don't think an established US Attorney like Foltrigg would be dumb enough to tell a kid that he doesn't need a lawyer on his parent present when he was being questioned. That was one thing I didn't like. That's like a surgeon telling a patient that they don't need anasthetics for the operation.

I also didn't find it believable that an alcoholic woman with only four years experience of law could outlawyer a veteran like Foltrigg. That was B.S. too. Gregory House is a more believable character than Reggie was.

The cops, FBI agents, and prosecutors are all made out to evil in this movie. All that Mark had to do was get a Witness Protection Program deal signed and tell them where the body was and the movie would've been about an hour shorter. Instead we have Mark faking seizures, outsmarting smart people, perforoming identity theft, and obstucting justice. Just wonderful. John Grisham, you suck. Watch and episode of Law and Order and you'll see how to do things right.

[–] glumpy_99 17 years ago

I don't think an established US Attorney like Foltrigg would be dumb enough to tell a kid that he doesn't need a lawyer on his parent present when he was being questioned. That was one thing I didn't like. That's like a surgeon telling a patient that they don't need anasthetics for the operation.

True, but Foltrigg in both the book and the movie is painted as an egotistical smart-ass who was desperate for any lead he could find to close the case. He was dealing with what he thought was a simple 'hillbilly' kid who wouldn't be able to retain adequate council. Or if he did, it would take much longer to get the vital info out of Mark, a lot of 'Objection!'s. Foltrigg's behaviour was unethical, but he was portrayed as a ruthless character, not above lying later on to cover his tracks.

I also didn't find it believable that an alcoholic woman with only four years experience of law could outlawyer a veteran like Foltrigg. That was B.S. too. Gregory House is a more believable character than Reggie was.

Again, Foltrigg's behavior was so brazenly unethical that anyone with even a smidgeon of legal knowledge would have been able to tear him down. Reggie may have lacked experience, but she 'knew her stuff' and merely had to apply basic ethical thinking to trip him up.

I don't think either the book or movie can be held up as a stinging examination of the law; I haven't seen it for a while, but remember it as a pretty decent way to spend a couple of hours.

Robert Altman
1925-2006
RIP