Miller The Fugitive Blog

Michael D. Miller

Prof. Mary McCay, Ph.D.

English V244-051

30 April 2014

The Fugitive

Dr. Richard Kimble (Harrison Ford) in the film The Fugitive is an innocent man wrongly convicted of the murder of his wife Helen Kimble (Sela Ward) and he has to prove his own innocence, but how can he do that when he is on his way to prison? The story plot is able to resolve this issue for Dr. Kimble in the form of the deus ex machine, meaning “god from the machine.” A plot device that solves and unsolvable problem. Dr. Kimble cannot effectively prove his innocence if he is languishing in prison. Therefore, the story line has to move forward for Dr. Kimble.

            While riding on the prison bus heading off to a life in prison for a crime he did not commit, the other prisoners on the bus help the story plot along by planning a prison break.  The prisoners lure the guards into the caged area of the bus where one of the guards is stabbed and then all hell breaks loose. The bus driver is killed and the bus careens off the side of the mountain rolling down and landing across a set of railroad tracks. Dr. Kimble is summoned to help one of the prison guards and requests to be freed from his restraints in order to effectively administer aid to the injured guard. The other guard tosses Dr. Kimble the keys and he removes his restraints and then drops the keys, affording the other prisoner to free himself. The survival of Dr. Kimble is compounded when a speeding train approaches the wreckage.

            Once Dr. Kimble was convicted of murdering his wife, he was branded a dangerous felon even though his actions indicate otherwise. Dr. Kimble summons the help of the other prisoner and the prison guard; both abandon him one out of fear and the other out of willful disregard for human life. In the face of almost certain death, “Here Kimble puts his medical ethics above his own life and helps rescue the wounded guard, leaving on a second to jump out of the way of the speeding train” (Pfeiffer 209). Are these the actions of a murderer? Dr. Kimble is now a wanted fugitive who has to race against time and the hot pursuit of U.S. Marshals to prove his innocence. 

            Dr. Kimble’s compassion and sense of duty continue on long after his escape from the train wreck. Kimble later reaches an area hospital where he is able to care for his own injuries and change clothes. There is now a full on county-wide manhunt for the escaped fugitive Dr. Richard Kimble. Kimble is leaving the hospital through the emergency room exit. He happens upon the ambulance that is transporting the wounded prison guard from the bus, who he rescued from certain death. Dr. Kimble, a wanted dangerous felon, acting out of respect human life at great risk to himself helps the medics with the gurney and relays, what he already knows, the injuries to the guard to the medics. These are not the actions of a cold-blooded killer as the Chicago police would have people think. Dr. Kimble’s acts of kindness and concern for human life are seen yet again in the film at the Cook County Hospital.

            Dr. Kimble is searching hospital records for the one-armed man he knows murdered his wife.  While in the hospital, the emergency room is busy with wounded passengers from a bus accident. Dr. Kimble is trying to make good his escape from the hospital without being noticed by any number of police officers who are present. While contemplating his exit strategy from the hospital, Dr. Kimble notices a young boy injured lying on a gurney with an obvious chest injury. Dr. Kimble notices that the attending medical staff overlooks critical information in the x-rays, but he cannot say anything directly to the attendant because of his disguise as an environmental service worker. He is asked by the ER physician Dr. Anne Eastman (Julianne Moore) for assistance in bringing the boy to an observation room. Kimble obliges. In doing so, Dr. Kimble reviews the x-rays, changes the orders, and brings the boy to the operating room for emergency surgery. It is learned later that his actions saved the boy’s life. Dr. Eastman conveys her assessment to Deputy U.S. Marshal Samuel Gerard (Tommy Lee Jones), in which he too begins to think differently about the dangerous felon he is pursuing. Deputy Gerard begins to question Dr. Kimble’s selfless acts of concern for his fellow man and is the actions of a guilty man. 

            Dr. Kimble’s numerous selfless acts of kindness and care for his fellow human being and usually at great risk to his own well-being reflect that he is an honorable and innocent man. Beginning with the bus crash, Kimble risks his life to save the life of a stranger. The other prison guard who is allegedly a friend of the injured guard abandons his friend and Kimble during the rescue. The man we all expect to be at the forefront of the rescue, his fellow prison guard and friend is running for his life. He later has the audacity to claim in front of law enforcement and the news media that he was the one who saved his friend and co-worker from certain death. It takes numerous acts of valor on the part of Dr. Kimble and his tenacious pursuit of the truth to convince the authorities that their mediocre murder investigation and the subsequent trial and conviction were completely wrong. In the end, Dr. Kimble gets the justice he was desperately seeking and is presumably exonerated for the crime for which he was convicted.

Works Cited

Pfeiffer, L. and Michael Lewis. The Films of Harrison Ford. Third Edition. New

York: Citadel Press. 2002. Print.

Wlos: Patriot Games and The Devil's Own

The Devils Own is a 1997 movie starring Harrison Ford and Brad Pitt, about an Irish terrorist, Frankie McGuire, who comes to hide in the United States and to acquire stinger missiles while doing so, and ends up butting heads with the police officer with whom he lives with in the US, Tom O’Meara, and the authorities.  Patriot Games is a 1992 movie starring Harrison Ford and Sean Bean about an Irish terrorist, Sean Miller, who escapes from prison and attempts to kill former American CIA agent, Jack Ryan, and his family out of revenge because Ryan killed Miller’s brother while Miller and his brother were attempting to assassinate a British Royal family.  Although each film was created as a completely independent story from the other, each manages to portray a corresponding foul nature amongst Frankie McGuire and Sean Miller.  This is seen in the manner in which the two Irishmen turn guns on the loved ones of their American counterparts. 

            In Patriot Games, a thrilling scene occurs when Sean Miller leans out of a car traveling on the expressway and attempts to shoot Jack Ryan’s wife and daughter while they drive in their car.  This scene depicts the criminal nature of Sean Miller with flying colors because of the way it showcases his actions as being carefully pre-meditated.  When the audience sees Sean Miller firing his weapon from a car, they immediately realize that he is going to be quickly getting away from the scene of the crime.  Also implied is the fact that he has purposefully traveled to the scene of the crime for the purpose of committing the crime.  Having him enact his criminal activities from a mobile devise shows that he is rapidly active and agile with his criminal activity, it’s something that is as tedious to him as driving on the expressway is for a commuter.

            In The Devils Own, a spine-tingling moment transpires when Frankie McGuire shoots Tom O’Meara’s beloved police partner and friend, Eddy.  When Frankie fires the gun on Eddy, he does so in a way that implies anticipation.  The first thing the audience sees McGuire do is point his gun at Eddy, in a motion to make Eddy freeze.  Eddy, however, does not freeze and draws his gun.  In this moment, McGuire fires on him, and goes on his way.  When McGuire saw Eddy pull his gun, he knew that killing Eddy would be the only way he would be able to continue with his mission.  His automatic realization of this, that was showcased by the abrupt movements he used within the scene, implies to the audience that he is a criminal that has an outlined agenda which he knows very well.  He’s not one of the impulsive, improvised criminals that O’Meara and Eddy are seen chasing earlier in the film.

            By observing these two scenes, we see that each film portrays the Irish antagonists as criminals with resonant agendas.  Although this is also illustrated by other aspects of storyline, plot, and character action within the movies, the above mentioned scenes are by far the most picturesque screenshots of such a notion.  Without the shots being done in the way they are, the audience might not see the Irish characters as being what the plot makes them out to be.  Each film worked in a very similar fashion to achieve artist effect, something that was probably due in part to the parallel nature of these too characters.  “Although the films are vastly different, one cannot help but compare. . .The Devil’s Own. . .with. . .Patriot Games.  (Pfeiffer 236).”

Andrew Wlos

Wlos: Presumed Innocent

            Presumed Innocent is a 1990 film that stars Harrison Ford as Rusty Sabich, a prosecutor who is accused of murdering a colleague of his.  The allegations against his innocence are made as a result of clear-cut evidence that illustrates him as the offender in the case.  In response to this, Sabich concludes that he has been framed for the killing, and invests his energy in proving this.  The notion of him being framed is not proven until the end of the film, however, when his wife admits to killing the victim and framing him for it.  Until this moment of confession, the audience is left questioning Sabich’s innocence, which is brought into reasonable doubt by some of the movie’s scenes.

            The first scene that brings Sabich’s innocence into doubt is the scene that features him being accused within his supervisor’s office.  Upon being blamed, Sabich responds with a fury of rage.  This raises an eyebrow because the exasperation such an accusation causes Sabich suggests a lack of confidence in his innocence.  A suggestion of his guilt is heightened when he steps out of his supervisor’s office in anger and is shown getting in the face of his accuser and belligerently yelling at him.  The large size of Sabich is highlighted by how the scene is shot and makes him look menacing as he yells at about being accused of murder.  Such a correlation naturally puts a doubt of his innocence into the minds of the audience.

            The next time that Sabich’s innocence is put into doubt is the moment that his friend and colleague Dan Lipranzer reveals that he kept a piece of evidence (a cup from the victim’s apartment) in his possession during the course of the trial.  The evidence could have possibly been incriminating against Sabich and the fact that his friend kept it hidden until the trial was over suggests that Sabich may not have been declared innocent if the evidence had been a part of the trail.  Furthering the doubt of Sabich’s innocence is his decision to toss the evidence into the ocean during the scene.  Such an action suggests he has something to hide.

            Sabich’s innocence is not put into a higher level of doubt other than the scene at the end of the film that displays him washing off blood from a hammer that belongs to him.  The hammer matches the description of the murder weapon, and the covert way Sabich cleans it, in a dark room by himself, suggests that he is trying to keep the knowledge of the bloody hammer a secret.  This scene makes it almost doubtless that Sabich is the murder, until his wife later confesses.

             Presumed Innocent is a dramatic film that time and again shows that someone’s innocence can easily be doubted by a result of patterns that do little to prove them guilty.  Essentially, doubt is something that can not easily be trusted, because one’s doubt can easily be deceived, as Presumed Innocent shows us.  “The film makes the audience consider excesses and temptations and how strong anyone’s resolve is in avoiding them” (Pfeiffer 187).

Andrew Wlos

Miller Presumed Innocent Blog

Michael D. Miller

Prof. Mary McCay

22 April 2014

Presumed Innocent

Rusty Sabich’s (Harrison Ford) innocence is undermined on several occasions in the film, Presumed Innocent. The scene in the film when Rusty Sabich has just been confronted in Raymond Horgan’s (Brian Dennehy) office and the evidence is laid out that the primary suspect in the case is Rusty. Rusty exits the office and walks down the hallway followed closely by Tommy Molto (Joe Grifasi) who accuses him of murdering Carolyn Polhemus (Greta Scacchi). Rusty responds by backing Molto against the wall and pointing his finger in his chest as he emphasizes, “Yeah, you’re right. You’re always right.”

The visual elements of the scene are two characters in a tight frame in a medium proxemics. The closeness of the two characters suggests that the topic of the conversation is accusatory.  The character Sabich (Ford) is taller that Molto (Grafisi) and Sabich is violating his body space physically and by pointing his finger in his chest. The two characters are observed in the foreground which leads the viewer to believe that the conversation is crucial to the story plot and confrontation with high emotions. The low key lighting and shadows on the two characters suggests that the confrontation is dark in nature, possibly secrets to hide or doubt. The background is a cold dimly lit office area that could be interpreted as a cold and callous environment, all serious business is conducted in this space.

The telephone call log from her home reflects a telephone call made from Rusty’s home on the night of the murder, which we later learn was made by his wife Barbara Sabich (Bonnie Bedelia). Rusty further complicates the matter when he tells Det. Lipranzer (John Spencer) not to worry about the telephone records. Rusty explains to Lipranzer that he had called her a number of times during the month prior to her murder. The prosecution could certainly take this information and make it look a lot worse than it really was. A grown man coming to grips with rejection and obsession with a woman he had an affair with. Lipranzer tried to console Rusty and that the phone calls could easily be explained away as work related. Rusty knew better and he would rather avoid the embarrassment altogether rather than lie to protect his good name.    

During the case preparation, Sabich and his attorney interview Rusty’s former boss and District Attorney, Raymond Horgan (Brian Dennehy). When asked about the events leading up to Rusty’s involvement in the murder investigation of Carolyn Polhemus (Greta Scacchi) by Alejandro “Sandy” Stern (Raul Julia), Horgan said that he would testify that Rusty insisted on taking on the case as opposed to what really happened when the case was forced upon him by Horgan. Rusty becoming visibly upset and feels betrayed by the obvious lie that Horgan was preparing to tell that could prove detrimental to Rusty’s future.

The scene when Rusty meets with Det. Lipranzer (John Spencer) on the ferry. During their conversation, Det. Lipranzer reveals the glass that was taken as evidence from Polhemus’ residence and dusted for fingerprints. The glass had been signed back into evidence by Molto. He said that he was prepared to give it to anyone who asked, but no one ever asked so he threw it into his desk drawer.     

Det. Lipranzer: How ya doin'? Christmas Present.

[takes out glass which was key piece of evidence that went missing during the trial]

Rusty Sabich: You're sticking your neck out pretty far on this one, Lip.

Det. Lipranzer: It was them that fucked up. Remember when they came around and gathered all the evidence? The glass wasn't there, I took it down to Dickerman. The next day, I get a call. The test is done, I can come pick up my glass. But when I went down there, Molto had signed 'returned to evidence.' I guess they figured I'd put it back. Only, I got no place to put it since it ain't my Goddamned case anymore. So I tossed the thing in my drawer. I figure sooner or later someone's gotta ask me about it. No one ever did.

Rusty Sabich: You think I killed her.

Det. Lipranzer: The lady was bad news.

Rusty Sabich: So that makes it okay that I killed her.

Det. Lipranzer: Did ya?

Rusty Sabich: Oh, pal.

[sighs, tosses glass into the water]

Det. Lipranzer gives Rusty the glass and he tosses it into the river. When he is asked about whether or not he killed Polhemus, Rusty neither confirms nor denies the accusation. Earlier in the film, it was Rusty’s job to get the glass fingerprinted and to determine the breadth and scope of the search for potential respondents in the fingerprint database. Rusty decided to narrow the scope to “just felons” which further casts doubt in the minds of the viewer as to innocence. The audience is still uncertain as to whether Rusty is guilty or innocent of the murder. The suspense has built during the trial, but once the trial was over, the audience is searching for some sort of resolution to who murder Carolyn Polhemus. The revelation was still yet to come.

The final scenes of the film reveal that Rusty was actually sleeping with Carolyn’s killer. Rusty is working on the fence in his yard and pulls out a hammer/pry bar from his toolbox. He soon notices that there is hair and blood on the end of the hammer. He returns to the basement to wash the hair and blood off when his wife, Barbara Sabich (Bonnie Bedelia) is seen standing at the bottom of the stair, “I fooled them. I fooled them all.” Those words echoed through Rusty’s soul. Upstairs Barbara explains that she was depressed and wanted to die, until she began to dream of “destroying the destroyer.” Barbara was relying on Rusty to discover that it was she who had committed the murder and that his feelings of guilt would move him to cover up her crime. Barbara said that she never intended for Rusty to have to suffer the way that he did. Rusty not only felt that he had caused his wife to murder his former lover, but could not put his wife, the mother of his son in prison for something that was the root cause of. Therefore, officially the murder went unsolved but personally, Rusty has compromised his principles of justice in order to protect his wife and live with his guilt of driving her to murder.

Works Cited

http://www.brianorndorf.com/2010/07/reliving-the-summer-of-1990-week-ten.html Web.

28 April 2014. (Picture)

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Presumed_Innocent_(film)  Web. 28 April 2014

Pfeiffer, L. and Michael Lewis. The Films of Harrison Ford. Third Edition. New

York: Citadel Press. 2002. Print.