Directed by critically acclaimed filmmaker and Oscar-winning producer Edward Zwick best known for 1989’s Glory and 1995’s Legends of the Fall, Trial by Fire is a well-crafted drama with terrific acting performances from the two main characters and a deeply compelling plot about a man on death row for a crime that he probably did not commit. Based on a true story, the film follows Cameron Todd Willingham, played by the talented British actor Jack O’Connell, as he goes through the flawed Texas justice system and eventually meets an unexpected supporter of his case for exoneration. In the beginning of the movie, we witness his trial which leads to his conviction and being sent to death row for the arson and murder of his three young daughters in Corsicana, Texas in December 1991. As a poor and uneducated individual living in rural Texas with tattoos and a love of heavy metal music, he quickly discovers that he has not received the same level of legal representation and thereby is more susceptible to a miscarriage of justice. He spends most of his twelve years on death row learning the judicial system in order for him to try and petition for a retrial or exoneration as a result of several investigative blunders and negligent lawyers. As the years pass, he develops a very close relationship with a single mother of two kids living in Houston who comes to visit him numerous times before deciding to help out on his case. Played by Golden Globe winner Laura Dern, Elizabeth Gilbert becomes a strong advocate for Willingham even as family members question her motivation for trying to free a convicted murderer. Over the course of the film, it becomes readily apparent that he is innocent or at least not deserving of the death penalty and therefore the movie becomes much more of a anti-death penalty film critical of the justice system. Overall, I found it to be a powerful movie by a filmmaker who does an excellent job of showing the emotional rollercoaster that someone like Willingham must go through as he faces certain death by the state while providing a unique perspective from the most unexpected source of Elizabeth Gilbert.

Directed by British actor Ralph Fiennes in his third film as director, The White Crow is a fascinating movie about one of the most famous ballet dancers and focuses on the seminal moment of his life in which he defects from the Soviet Union. Based on his real life, the film follows Rudolf Nureyev, played by Oleg Ivenko, and three distinct phases of his life: his early life in a struggling rural Soviet family, early career at a famous St. Petersburg ballet school, and his defection occurring during his company’s visit to Paris. The stereotypical tortured genius, he often exhibits egotistical behavior in which he does not shy away from berating his instructors, but his brilliant and unique talents are always desired by the Soviet ballet elite. The middle part of his life revolves around his relationship with the famed ballet teacher Alexander Ivanovich Pushkin, played by Oscar-nominated actor Ralph Fiennes, and his increasingly personal and strange relationship with Pushkin’s wife. The more contemporary chapter in his life is a rather slow-paced depiction of his falling in love with Western culture and society when his Soviet ballet company has a weeks-long residency at the Paris Opera in 1961 at the height of the Cold War. Nureyev enjoys the nightlife of Paris with his new-found French friends, and he eventually decides that he needs to defect from the Soviet Union in order to pursue a career in the West with much more freedom as an artist and individual. The one major problem area of the film is the often convoluted setup of having the story switch back and forth between three different time periods. Overall, I found it to be a very compelling story about a true genius against the backdrop of the Cold War that, despite the movie’s few flaws, feels like a very authentic portrayal of Rudolf Nureyev as a result of the film’s use of Russian dialogue and several beautiful dance sequences.

Directed by Mimi Leder best known for 1998’s Deep Impact and 2000’s Pay It Forward, On the Basis of Sex is an intriguing look at the formative years of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg that, although well-acted and with the best of intentions, fell short of capturing the truly extraordinary life of Justice Ginsburg. We first meet Ruth Bader Ginsburg, played by Oscar nominee Felicity Jones, as a first-year student at Harvard Law School in the 1950s when she is only among a handful of female students enrolled at the prestigious institution. Throughout the first half of the movie, she struggles with finding her place in the legal world primarily due to her gender and despite her being the top of her class at Harvard and Columbia. She even sacrifices some of her own academic work in order to help her cancer-stricken husband Martin, played by Golden Globe nominee Armie Hammer, to keep up with his work also at Harvard Law School. Eventually, they move to New York City where Martin works for a highly regarded law firm, and the only job that she can find is working as a law professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey. Up until this point, it is a rather paint-by-numbers biopic exploring the protagonist’s challenges that inspire the person’s later life and eventual great success. The remainder of the movie revolves around her most important case about gender discrimination, especially for women, that is brought to her attention by her loving husband Martin who is now cancer-free. At first, it seems like a rather straightforward and dry tax case until Ginsberg realizes it could provide precedent overturning the national and state laws that she argues discriminates against women and are therefore unconstitutional. The famous case involves an unmarried man named Charles Moritz living in Denver who is denied tax benefits for a caregiver for his sick older mother and must take care of her himself to his financial detriment. With the help of the ACLU lawyer Mel Wulf, played by Justin Theroux, and feminist civil rights advocate Dorothy Kenyon, played by Oscar winner Kathy Bates, the up-and-coming Ginsberg spends most of her waking hours in pursuit of appealing the tax decision and ultimately bring it up in front of the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals to further her crusade for gender equality. In yet another biopic cliché, she must face her prior foes in the form of the formidable defense team aided by the former Harvard Law School dean, played by Oscar nominee Sam Waterston, and her former professor, played by Stephen Root, both men who made her life difficult in law school at a time when women were frowned upon becoming lawyers. The film also presents a more personal side of now Justice Ginsburg by showing her tender and supportive relationship with her husband and having to raise young children at the beginning of her hard-fought career. Overall, I found it to be a good start for exploring the remarkable accomplishments of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, but ultimately it is bogged down by genre conventions and stereotypes. That is not to say that it is not a movie worth seeing because it is full of good acting performances and centers around a fascinating law case, but I would say that the recent 2018 documentary RBG is a much more important study of the venerable Justice Ginsburg.