Time To Kill

Two drunken white men raped a young black girl, Tonya Hailey, who was walking from a small store where she bought groceries. When the news reached her father, Carl Lee Hailey, he went to their hearing, where he shot and killed the two men, while also wounding a police officer. Carl Lee hires a white attorney, Jake Brigance, to represent him in court. Many people and organizations, such as the Ku Klux Klan, tried to sabotage Brigance’s likelihood of winning the case. With the help of a liberal law student, Brigance successfully acquitted Carl Lee Hailey for the murders of the two rapists.

In conclusion, A Time to Kill has many examples of how conflict between characters reveals society's dominant racist attitudes. These attitudes are presented to be negative throughout the film by representation of social groups, characterisation of Jake Brigance and the perspective from Carl Hailey. Together these conventions allow the viewer to understand the character Carl Hailey, and see how the film presents the dominant racist attitudes

While being interviewed by the cops, Jake stated, “He -Warren Redstone or the Indian- didn’t scare me. I didn't think he was going to hurt us or anything” (41). This quote signifies that Jake was not scared of the man, based on his skin color. Even in the toughest circumstances Jake accepted Warren Redstone and did not make any assumptions on his decisions or actions. Many people speculated that Warren Redstone killed the man because he was an Indian.

It is the juror's responsibility to prove the boy guilty or not. Many of these jurors applied their biases to the way the boy grew up and was treated throughout his life. They have created false accusations that are not necessarily accurate. They argue that teenagers his age have no sense of morality or respect for their elders. Which could be a justifiable reasoning for the murder of his own father. Juror Three appears to be prejudiced towards the boy due to the fact that his own son resented him and moved out. It is not uncommon to develop an explicit bias after generalizing impressions from a personal experience and applying that to all groups of that kind such as age, religion, etc. As Juror Eight votes not guilty during a vote, the third juror becomes infuriated and disagrees while ranting about how the defendant is completely guilty due to evidence. Two different categories came into play as Juror Three expressed his feelings about his own son relating to the boy on

Angry! Hostile!” This causes him to not listen to the other jurors opinions and block out any idea of the defendant being innocent. His prejudice is further understood when he says “this kid is guilty. He’s got to burn. We’re letting him slip through our fingers here.” Juror #3 is only able to see the young boy on trial as a symbol of his own son and is therefore unable to look past his own anger towards his son and see the case for what it really is. It is only through the help of juror #8 does juror #3 finally let go of his personal prejudice and sees the truth about the case and changes his vote to not guilty.

The film begins in New York City in a courthouse, it is clear by the expressions on everyone’s face including the judge that everyone is tired and it has been a long trial. The viewers are told that an unidentified, young Hispanic male originating from the slums is on trial for supposedly stabbing his father to death. The viewers are also given the final closing arguments, including the testimony of two witnesses; one an elderly man saying that he heard the father and son argue then heard a body drop, and the other a woman who lives across the street who claims to have seen the boy murder his father. The Jurors and audience are told that if a verdict of guilty is found then there is a mandatory death sentence that will follow.

In the movie A Time to Kill, an adolescent girl named Tonya Hailey is brutally battered, raped, and left for dead in a small southern town by two white supremacist men; Billy Ray Cobb and James Louis Willard. As she is walking home, a car approaches; two gentlemen confront her and start kicking and punching her. Then they rape her. Not just once, but twice. She cries out, looking away, and begging them to stop. As she looks up at the heavens above for guidance, she screams for her dad. When the attack ended, the men tossed her aside in the ditch, leaving her in hopes she will die. All the citizens in the town knew of these men as drunks; people that committed crimes and broke the law, like it was ok to do. What they

He implies if one does not follow their conscience will, they will live overwhelmed by guilt. Here, the moral of human beings is threatened by the recurring subject of racism, as well as discrimination issues. Jem is an epitome of a corrupted person as he justifies that Atticus is wrong because everyone else thinks so. Nevertheless, he finds himself after the testimony is given. When it comes time for the trial, Jem follows it closely. Having grown up in the home of a lawyer, Jem understands the workings of the courtroom, besides its racial bias. Once the judge goes over the evidence, Jem becomes increasingly confident that Atticus won but his belief that Tom is innocent contrasts with what actually occurs: Tom is found guilty. While looking at Jem, Scout sees how his “shoulders jerked as if each ‘guilty’ was a separate stab between them.” By comparing Jem’s reaction to a “stab,” Lee not only shows Jem receiving blows of devastation over the case and feeling physically attacked but also points to the broader attack on things that Jem thought were once true. This is something that causes him great emotional pain as he has a hard time coming to terms with general unfairness. Jem has counted on the strength of bigotry but in

The stories intertwine with each other in an innumerable amount of ways yet at other times seem to completely contradict the other's message. A great similarity to point out between the stories would be that they are both about a man who seeks justice for crimes he was accused of. However, these stories have enough in common with each other only to warrant a short comparison as they have a greater amount of themes and ideas not in common with each other. A Time to Kill is told from the perspective of a lawyer rather than the

A great example of how peoples beliefs can influence the way they think about other people.The juror number 11 sees the young man as still a child and in the men’s eyes all children are born as liars. They are incapable of telling the truth and therefore the boy would have had to kill his father and didn’t go to the movies that night during the murder like he said. This is backed up by juror number 4 who says that the boy couldn’t seem to remember the movie he saw or the actors that stared in the film. If he couldn’t remember that the movie then he must be lying about seeing the movie. But juror number 8 proves that not everyone can remember every little fact about every movie. The boy had just gone to the movies and came back to find his father dead on the floor and police arresting him. It is very unlikely that someone who went

The Klan continues to threaten Jake with a bomb and burning crosses, Jake’s wife and child have to leave town to avoid danger. Judge Omar Lewis decides to turn down Jake’s request for a change of venue on the grounds that it would be impossible to find a fair and impartial jury in any county in Mississippi. Jury selection begins with protests to “Free Carl Lee” and the Klan protesting outside as well, tensions are high and a riot breaks out. A Klan member is set on fire, the black sheriff is beaten, and Jake is stabbed in the leg. The day ends with the inevitable all white jury. The Klan continues to terrorize the city by burning crosses and burning Jake’s house down. The National Guard is brought into town to prevent riots for the remainder of the trial. The DA, Buckley opens the trail by bringing Cobb’s mother to the stand and showing the gun Carl Lee used to the jury. At the end of the first day Buckley calls Depute Dwayne Luny, the cop who was accidentally shot in the leg the day Carl Lee murdered the two men. Much to the surprise of everyone, Luny does not blame Carl Lee for the loss of his leg, in fact he admits he would have done the same thing if Tonya had been his daughter, he then turns to the jury and repeatedly shouts, “He’s (Carl Lee) a hero- you turn him lose!” the court room uproars in mixed reactions.

Benjamin wrote at one point in the book about the film A Time to Kill and Jake Brigance hearing closing arguments, which brought the jury to understand the personal, identifying the nature of the injuries that occur in young women, daughter of his defendant. He further talks about Brigance interest in winning the trial, but really don't have any interest in his defendant, Carl Lee Hailey. Their daughter never wil play together, because Brigance see him as the judge did not, on the other side. This is not personal, but the philosophy or politics.

Both the text and the film are set in the southern states of America, “To Kill a Mockingbird” in Maycomb Alabama in the 1930’s and “A Time to Kill” in Mississippi in the 1990’s. This was intended by Harper Lee and Joel Schumacher due to racial discrimination being a prominent issue in these eras as well as the southern states being known for their belief in white supremacy. In both towns in the text and the film there were definite segregations between white and black people. This allowed both Lee and Schumacher to easily portray the idea of racism to their intended audience. In the text “To Kill a Mockingbird” Lee utilises a variety of language techniques to convey the idea of racism to his readers. Whereas in the film “A Time to Kill” the director, Schumacher, uses language features as well as a range of stylistic devices to effectively present racism as a key idea.

The movie A Time to Kill is engrossed in the emotions that revolves around hatred, this hatred originates from racism in the south. It begins with the brutal rape of a young black girl, Tanya Hailey. The rape was committed by two rednecks in a pickup truck. Tonya’s father Carl Lee Hailey takes the law into his hands and lashes out by killing the rapist. Charged with two counts of murder, he is assigned the young and brilliant lawyer Jake Brigance, who still believes he is able to receive a fair trial. With the trial beginning, viewers get to see this hatred somehow rise to become more significant. Focusing on the relationship between Carl Lee and Jake Brigance, and its impact on the southern town. The producers of this movie tried to make the audience or the viewers understand how these people in the south struggle with this hatred of racism, facing segregation head on and its judicial system. A Time to Kill is based on the first novel by John Grisham. Directed by Joel Schumacher, with the strong performances from Samuel L. Jackson as Carl Lee Hailey, the avenging father, and Matthew McConaughey as Jake Brigance, the lawyer. This paper will be analyzing some clips and scenes from the movie, and discussing how every visual aspect of a film's language especially cinematography. For example, shots, sounds, settings, and movements can give the audience a clear sign of emotions, motive, and clues as to what the filmmaker feels and

She didn't answer Atticus’s questions and then she turned on the jury (Lee 189-91). She called out the white men, calling them cowards if they did not find this man guilty. This shows corruption within the court system because of race. The jury is being told to decide on race and personal image, rather than on the facts of the case (Lee).