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
Raven Richard
ReplyDeleteI agree with the scenes that were chosen that made Rusty appear less innocent than he actually was. These scenes not only made Rusty second guess himself, but it made the audience second guess him as well. This is interesting to bring up because this ultimately determines the mood for the rest of the film. Scene after scene new evidence was brought to the audience whether or not he was guilty. This made the movie more interesting for the audience. We wanted to believe he was telling the truth, but at the same time, all the evidence was stacked against him. The film does indeed allow the audience to see how small pieces of evidence and coincidence can alter the appearance of something. We saw that Rusty was sexually attracted to Carolyn and that he was almost obsessed with her. We assumed this to be a crime that a crazy obsessed person would do and all the other clues aligned with the evidence pointing towards him. It is very interesting how small details came together to make a conclusion such as the one in this film. Overall this film was quite a thriller for the audience and was a great twist and play on events.
This movie reminds me of a 2008 drama, Doubt with Meryl Streep and Philip Seymour Hoffman. Meryl Streep who plays Sister Aloysius Beauvier accuses Phillip Seymour Hoffmann, Father Flynn, of inappropriate relations with one of the boys from the congregation. Similarly to Presumed Innocence, evidence against and for him piles up and the audience begins wonder what has truly happened between the boy and the father. Unlike Presumed Innocence, it is never revealed if such relationship ever evolved between the father and the boy and instead the audience is left to fill in the blanks. The main plot revolves around doubt and consequently innocence. As you wrote, “someone’s innocence can be easily doubted as result of patterns that do little to prove them guilty”, both films go to show that it is hard to tell a scapegoat from someone who is actually guilty. I’ve heard from multiple people that we can be thrown into jail in a matter of life changing seconds and watching these movies proves their point right. The most frustrating thing about this is that no matter how you act when accused, as a society we are taught to believe that you are guilty because bad people do bad things. Consequently, our own social construct condemns us.
ReplyDeleteYunuen Cacique-Borja