that main juror speaking was the perfect red herring. the way he was smirking while the defendants were testifying really made me think he was on their side. it was nice reversal hearing him talk in the deliberations.
well it's on-theme with the rest of the movie. denzel is homophobic, and he points out that their whole society is homophobic. that guy's facial expressions, you're right, point to him sharing the generalized homophobia, being disgusted by gay people. but like denzel he's still seeking to apply justice. there's a difference between the bigotry of cultural distance and the bigotry of wanting to use all institutions available against a target.
@Him535 not sure if you saw the 90s version (12 angry men). Amazon has it, I liked it. As for movies with talking, give Conspiracy a look. It's about the Holocaust. Phenom movie
Jonathan Demme had a handful of favourite character actors that he would regularly cast, like Charles Napier (the judge) and Tracey Walter (the librarian). There were some others too. He was a loyal guy.
I watched maybe two or three movies between 1981 and 2000. I never got to see this of a young Denzel Washington. His acting is so honest and endearing. You just have to love the guy. Tom hanks was young and he had to play a hard part, most probably out of character for him; but that is the job of actor. Thank you for posting. I suppose I should see the whole movie now.
These random clips from the movie Philadelphia keep popping up here and I watch them. Thinking I should re watch the film. Sure I have already seen it 6 times but is an absolutely perfect movie.
I have seen this movie plenty of times and never noticed until just now.. that one of the lawyers at the law firm who said he would regret it the rest of his life.. congratulates Denzel on his win against the firm he works for... Unsure why I never noticed that before.
You notice it a lot in lawyer movies once you start noticing it. Its all serious and competitive until the verdict comes in then its game recognizing game amongst the lawyers. Handshakes, back slaps and offers to grab lunch sometime.
Right after the senior partners are served during a Sixers game in their corporate suite, they’re shown leaving abruptly and talking about defense strategy while walking down a hallway, and the partners learn then that one of them had suspected Andy had AIDS long before they sabotaged him which upset the others (1. Because it’s a weakness in their defense that can be exploited and 2. Because they obviously had expected him to say something to the other senior partners about it rather than hide it).
I know money isn’t justice, but I remember the faith in people I felt restored after watching this verdict as a teenager in the 90s. And this was before the LGBTQ mvt and at the very height of the AIDS crisis
@@vickykulig5080 I think overall the most significant element of this film was that it offered a realistic portrayal of an AIDS person. it presents the fact that gay people hold accomplished and important positions in society and they deserve sympathy and empathy. As is said in the library scene, AIDS exacts a social death that precedes the actual physical death. Dealing with the "Social Death" becomes more dehumanizing than the physical death, sadly.
Just realized, Andy’s “case” is bookended with applause. The partners applauding him when he receives his promotion, and now the gallery applauding when he gets his vindication. Not sure if I’m reading into it, but it makes a valid point that there was always somebody in Andy’s corner.
@@danielchilton5400 It wasn’t an insult. I didn’t say you don’t understand inflation. I just looked up the amount in case anyone was wondering what it was exactly. I’m really sorry for whatever is going on in your life that made you hostile to a RUclips comment from a year ago, but I hope things get better for you.
@@jtaco4101 Lord, Zoomers know more than I did at that age. If anyone in particular is giving you grief, laugh at them. It shuts people up without making you a jerk. If it’s the media making you feel that way, they’re lying. Generational arguments help them sell stories and get clicks. If it’s just general internal insecurity… make peace with it. You can wind up like me as a middle aged millennial who still doesn’t know anything. 😂
It is very true what others have commented on this film. Unless you lived through this terrible time, people who came after would have no idea what consequence this film has. God bless all those that we lost before this terrible virus was bought under control.
@@ashwaganda yes, congratulations, ill see you at the appeal. but i still think the congratulations was genuine. Besides the other lawyer, the man, also tells him "well done".
Does it ever bother you that in many civil cases, when it is definitively proven that a party has wronged someone in the eyes of a jury. Their first response is not self-reflection, remorse, or even acknowledgment of their wrongdoing. Instead, it's run straight to the appellate court to try and reverse the judgment?
All the time. No one likes taking responsibility. Especially in something as horrifying as this. Anyone who thinks such people would be willing to admit mistakes after doing such hateful things is in fantasy land.
It doesnt bother me at all. Thats the way the court system is. It is there to both protect the victim and the aggresor. If it wasnt, it would be running amuck.
@@kootybear Did you even finish reading the question? Someone is 100000% proven guilty and instead of learning, they run to twist the law to protect themselves from accountability. NOT from wrongful conviction.
@@Soldier4USA2005 Even though it may seem like the defendant may have been "100000%" liable in a civil case, there are many legitimate grounds for the defendant to appeal the verdict. For example, the jury may not have been provided the proper jury instructions; evidence that should have been excluded was heard by the jury; there evidence of jury tampering. The appeal process is a part of our justice system.
@@Adam-mj5hl Congratulations on completely missing the point of my comment. There are people on death row for DECADES because they abuse the legal system to keep pushing their execution date. NOT because they're innocent.
They are a form of justice. And they are total justice in a breach of contract where there is a liquidated sum lost and the liquidated sum lost is awarded in a money judgment. That's the very definition of justice.
Sometimes it's not about the money settlement. It's about taking it from a wrongdoer who only understands financial repercusions over moral repercusions.
The producers were sued for this film. It was based on interviews with a real man(men) who actually went through this and they had been promised to be compensated for their story being used.
The actor being cross examined is Ron Vawter who at the time of filming was HIV positive.He died in 1994 after a heart attack on a flight from Zurich to New York. The director Jonathan Demme had to convince Tristar to let Vawter act in the film pointing out the irony of the films message regarding AIDS and that they were pursuing the very stereotype the film was trying to dispel.
Like it's not bad enough he was going through a " shame filled" disease, but then he loses his job due to people's pure ignorance and stupidity. My heart goes out to any of you that were diagnosed with HIV in the 80's or 90's. 💜
Ron Vawter who played Bob Seidman here was openly HIV-positive at the time of filming the director went out of his way to make sure Ron was accommodate after he was hospitalized during filming. Ron Vawter died of complications from AIDS less than five months after the film's premiere
If I were on that jury then I would have insisted that at least fifty million dollars be awarded in punitive damages. This could set a precedent for other big firms and corporations who come under fire that the sexual orientation of any human being is not for them to judge.
Spoken like someone who has never been on a jury and has no idea how the justice system works. Punitive damages cannot generally exceed a certain ratio of the compensatory damages except in extremely extenuating circumstances. This law firm almost certainly doesn't have 50 million dollars to pay in punitive damages, and the judge has the authority to overrule the jury's decision on amounts. This has happened countless times when juries think like you do.
Great movie over all. But if you think about it the law firm (defendants) can appeal the decision and tie it up in court proceedings relatively for the next 10 years than pay a penny. Which in essence the plaintiff will have long passed away from his illness therefore never receiving a penny. The harsh truth.
I don't know what happened in this case specifically, but often in these situations the two sides will agree to a smaller settlement after trial rather than going through this process. E.g. they might take $1.5 million instead of the full $5 million as a compromise. It really depends on how risky the appeal is, how likely they are to get it reversed, etc.
Philadelphia is a great example of how playing a good person usually gets you far more accolades than playing a bad person, especially an anti-gay bad person. Washington and Hanks were great, but Jason Robards was phenomenal, as evidenced by how much you just absolutely hated the guy.
This was such a powerful movie well cast well written, it brought awareness of the Hate scare n discrimination of this disease, the out come was AWESOME!! This movie will NEVER get OLD!!!!
Who would've thought Mr. Kruger would end up in a position to award nearly 5 million dollars to somebody. I'll bet the court doesn't know he can also spin around in his chair 3 times in a row without help. "All me, all meeeeee"
It is nice to think that the jury would stick so faithfully to the remit of their task - can't deny though, I never bought it. The distraction of an aids carrier who got infected through casual sex with a stranger in a porn theatre would have been too much, I felt. People would have just had sympathy for the defendants for not wanting to be around him and the virus.
Well that’s generally the Hollywood route, they put the way things should go in these cases where Justice is served. If the film ended with him losing and then dying, then what is it wanting to show? The cold hard reality is something already seen. Don’t need it hammered home in a film
@@jjackson59100 Sorry, that is not JK Simmons. He would have been about 48 during the filming - this guy is a lot older; besides, Simmons was working as a Broadway performer while this movie was being filmed.
@@jjackson59100 Jesus how old do you think JF Simmons is? He's not even as old as that dude now never mind back in the 90's. Looks nothing like him either.
Man Denzel gonna clear almost a million in his cut of the settlement From what I understand the type of lawyer he is “you don’t pay unless we win!” Comes with a hefty price tag.
In 2024 money, that back and loss of benefits would equal $311,528.22, adjusted for inflation. The mental anguish and humiliation would be $217,851.90, while the punitive damages would be $10,417,678.01 adjusted for inflation. Given the laws back then, I wonder who would have inherited Andrew's money? Hopefully he had a will.
Hnnng. on the one hand...Andy REALLY should have been up front about his illness. If the firm had just been up front and let him go, that's one thing. The only reason they deserved those rather excessive punative damages was the LYING....the coverup. they were breaking thier own rules and KNEW it.
At the time, he would have been fired on the spot if he had volunteered he had AIDS. There was a lot of ignorance about it, how it was transmitted, etc., And was a death sentence.
There was really no legit reason for the lawfirm to let Andy go. They couldn't have let him go simply because he was infected with AIDS. And if they'd have let him go for "performance reasons" the timing would have been awfully suspect anyways, so Andy would have still brought on a lawsuit. The lawfirm would simply have to wait until he became incapacitated, and then hire a new lawyer for his position. They'd also have to keep his insurance coverage until he passed.
My uncle, D.C. Edwards died from AIDS in 1993 in Texas in some small remote tucked out of the way hospice center. Everytime I see and hear portions of this movie I am oft times asking myself, to what extent were God fearing people so hell bent as to have one of thier own family buried out and away from the family plot all over some paranoid fear that the body would contaminate the local cemetery and water supply.. I kid you not, that's exactly the way poorly edicated, ignorgant and prejudiced people think, and worse, act. The outright prejudice and hatred of anyone differnet than you is despicable.
A public apology from that firm that fired him plus the settlement.Money would've been a whole lot better but I still wouldn't have come close to what this character deserved.
that main juror speaking was the perfect red herring. the way he was smirking while the defendants were testifying really made me think he was on their side. it was nice reversal hearing him talk in the deliberations.
Very true. They definitely subverted expectations with that. Almost as if he was smirking in disbelief at the arguments of the defendants…
well it's on-theme with the rest of the movie. denzel is homophobic, and he points out that their whole society is homophobic. that guy's facial expressions, you're right, point to him sharing the generalized homophobia, being disgusted by gay people. but like denzel he's still seeking to apply justice.
there's a difference between the bigotry of cultural distance and the bigotry of wanting to use all institutions available against a target.
@Him535 not sure if you saw the 90s version (12 angry men). Amazon has it, I liked it.
As for movies with talking, give Conspiracy a look. It's about the Holocaust.
Phenom movie
Kruger, you couldn't smooth a silk sheet if you had a hot date with a babe . . I lost my train of thought.
I think his laughing and nodding is due to him knowing the law firm partners are making smooth-sounding bullshit claims about Andy.
I’m glad to see that one of the police guards from Silence of the Lambs has survived and become a judge.
Not to mention, one of the SWAT guys from that very same scene is on the jury! Conflict of interest? 🤣
And George Costanza's dim-witted boss Mr. Kruger from Seinfeld seemed sharper at the head of the jury table.
Also the older juror in the back on the left hand side was the funeral director in Silence of the Lambs.
Jonathan Demme had a handful of favourite character actors that he would regularly cast, like Charles Napier (the judge) and Tracey Walter (the librarian). There were some others too. He was a loyal guy.
That was after he was a major in the army and turned his back on John Rambo
I watched maybe two or three movies between 1981 and 2000. I never got to see this of a young Denzel Washington. His acting is so honest and endearing. You just have to love the guy. Tom hanks was young and he had to play a hard part, most probably out of character for him; but that is the job of actor. Thank you for posting. I suppose I should see the whole movie now.
oh boy you have a lot of good movies to watch...unless you're actually living life or something
@@jdlamb4212 One can actively live life during that period (or any other period) while still having time watch more than three movies.
These random clips from the movie Philadelphia keep popping up here and I watch them. Thinking I should re watch the film. Sure I have already seen it 6 times but is an absolutely perfect movie.
Why do you think we are getting the pop ups . This is the first I've watched. I don't think I'll be watching anymore. . I'm Feeling played
@@livingintongueslol
i watched it on new years day 2025 for the 4th new years day in a row
I have seen this movie plenty of times and never noticed until just now.. that one of the lawyers at the law firm who said he would regret it the rest of his life.. congratulates Denzel on his win against the firm he works for... Unsure why I never noticed that before.
That actor was Ron Vawter, who had AIDS at the time the movie was shot. He died a year later of a heart attack.
You notice it a lot in lawyer movies once you start noticing it. Its all serious and competitive until the verdict comes in then its game recognizing game amongst the lawyers. Handshakes, back slaps and offers to grab lunch sometime.
That actor died of AIDS unfortunately 😢
I think it’s implied this lawyer is actually gay.
Right after the senior partners are served during a Sixers game in their corporate suite, they’re shown leaving abruptly and talking about defense strategy while walking down a hallway, and the partners learn then that one of them had suspected Andy had AIDS long before they sabotaged him which upset the others (1. Because it’s a weakness in their defense that can be exploited and 2. Because they obviously had expected him to say something to the other senior partners about it rather than hide it).
I absolutely love this movie. This might be my favorite movie from both Tom Hanks and Denzel Washington.
Same.
No Forrest Gump and the Equalizer
Track down HBOs movie And The Band Played On with an all star cast.
Their very first movie role!!! They became big stars after this!!!
@@costco_pizzathis was not their first. Do research.
I remember sitting in a jam-packed theater watching this and when the jury foreman read the verdict, everyone in the theater clapped.
That’s good to hear.
Just realized the jury foreman is Mr. Kruger from Seinfeld!
Hey George, look. No hands its all me....
K-UGER! K-UGER!
THANK YOU I couldn't place him, and it was driving me crazy
Not just that, but Commandant Spengler from Malcolm in the Middle
Daniel Von Bargen, a great character actor who died too young.
I know money isn’t justice, but I remember the faith in people I felt restored after watching this verdict as a teenager in the 90s. And this was before the LGBTQ mvt and at the very height of the AIDS crisis
The LGBT movement was prior to the 1990s and prior to AIDS.
I do think though they played a role in real systemic change
@@vickykulig5080 I think overall the most significant element of this film was that it offered a realistic portrayal of an AIDS person. it presents the fact that gay people hold accomplished and important positions in society and they deserve sympathy and empathy. As is said in the library scene, AIDS exacts a social death that precedes the actual physical death. Dealing with the "Social Death" becomes more dehumanizing than the physical death, sadly.
Foreperson summed it up perfectly.
Just realized, Andy’s “case” is bookended with applause. The partners applauding him when he receives his promotion, and now the gallery applauding when he gets his vindication.
Not sure if I’m reading into it, but it makes a valid point that there was always somebody in Andy’s corner.
For you young folks, this amount is more or less ten million today.
Young folks know how inflation works 🙄
@@danielchilton5400 It wasn’t an insult. I didn’t say you don’t understand inflation. I just looked up the amount in case anyone was wondering what it was exactly.
I’m really sorry for whatever is going on in your life that made you hostile to a RUclips comment from a year ago, but I hope things get better for you.
@@83gemminsecurity about being a knownothing zoomer
@@jtaco4101 Lord, Zoomers know more than I did at that age. If anyone in particular is giving you grief, laugh at them. It shuts people up without making you a jerk. If it’s the media making you feel that way, they’re lying. Generational arguments help them sell stories and get clicks.
If it’s just general internal insecurity… make peace with it. You can wind up like me as a middle aged millennial who still doesn’t know anything. 😂
@@jtaco4101Good lord, how sensitive are you and Danny boy?
This trial is now concluded. It is time for a lengthy and prolonged appeal process. After all, they are all lawyers.
Why did I read this in Bazzini from the Godfather's voice.
Way to go Mr. Kruger
whatever!
He shot himself in the head and missed(he lived)
Coco the monkey
Thought he looked familiar lol
It is very true what others have commented on this film. Unless you lived through this terrible time, people who came after would have no idea what consequence this film has.
God bless all those that we lost before this terrible virus was bought under control.
at least the opposing lawyers were good sports about the verdict and even congratulated him on his victory.
Not really... she's being sarcastic and concludes with "I'll see you at the appeal"
@@ashwaganda yes, congratulations, ill see you at the appeal. but i still think the congratulations was genuine. Besides the other lawyer, the man, also tells him "well done".
@@ashwagandashe’s genuine, she states earlier she hates the case
Does it ever bother you that in many civil cases, when it is definitively proven that a party has wronged someone in the eyes of a jury. Their first response is not self-reflection, remorse, or even acknowledgment of their wrongdoing. Instead, it's run straight to the appellate court to try and reverse the judgment?
All the time. No one likes taking responsibility. Especially in something as horrifying as this.
Anyone who thinks such people would be willing to admit mistakes after doing such hateful things is in fantasy land.
It doesnt bother me at all. Thats the way the court system is. It is there to both protect the victim and the aggresor. If it wasnt, it would be running amuck.
@@kootybear Did you even finish reading the question?
Someone is 100000% proven guilty and instead of learning, they run to twist the law to protect themselves from accountability. NOT from wrongful conviction.
@@Soldier4USA2005 Even though it may seem like the defendant may have been "100000%" liable in a civil case, there are many legitimate grounds for the defendant to appeal the verdict. For example, the jury may not have been provided the proper jury instructions; evidence that should have been excluded was heard by the jury; there evidence of jury tampering. The appeal process is a part of our justice system.
@@Adam-mj5hl Congratulations on completely missing the point of my comment.
There are people on death row for DECADES because they abuse the legal system to keep pushing their execution date. NOT because they're innocent.
Kruger, my son tells me your company stinks!!
May he RIP.
You couldn’t smooth silk sheets if you had a hot date with a babe…. I lost my train of thought
@@katjoe1974
I find your belief system fascinating!
2:46 the original voice of The Sheriff on Squidbillies before he passed in 2011.
And Lt. Boyle in Silence of the Lambs. Such a distinctive voice.
Charles Napier
It’s refreshing to see Chuck play a nice guy good guy
He was also the Warden in Earnest Goes to Jail
And let's go WAAAY back to Charles Napier's role as Adam in one of original Star Trek's most (in)famous episodes, The Way to Eden
EXCELLENT MOVIE
This was an awesome movie
Miss Ya Daniel von Bargen....
And Charles Napier
I feel teary eyed at this scene
Firing someone for discrimination is wrong because they have aids which make me mad
Great movie!!!🖒
Money settlements are not justice
Correct. They are often well deserved punishments.
Of course winning money is not justice. But taking it from someone for a crime they commited is a deep, personal violation so there is that.
They are a form of justice. And they are total justice in a breach of contract where there is a liquidated sum lost and the liquidated sum lost is awarded in a money judgment. That's the very definition of justice.
Sometimes it's not about the money settlement.
It's about taking it from a wrongdoer who only understands financial repercusions over moral repercusions.
What would you suggest!! A box of donuts
A brilliant performance by the judge.
Well that's that ... 😂😂😂😂😂
Agree, obviously..!
The producers were sued for this film. It was based on interviews with a real man(men) who actually went through this and they had been promised to be compensated for their story being used.
The irony.
A "promise" is as good as the paper it's written on.
Unless you deal with a honest man some of us still find a promise to be binding. Though it seems to be a dying breed.
@@captainloaf4767 Say that again?
@@elmoblatch9787Verbal contract is legally binding.
The actor being cross examined is Ron Vawter who at the time of filming was HIV positive.He died in 1994 after a heart attack on a flight from Zurich to New York. The director Jonathan Demme had to convince Tristar to let Vawter act in the film pointing out the irony of the films message regarding AIDS and that they were pursuing the very stereotype the film was trying to dispel.
funny.
You fire one of your best.
The best comes for you and reminds you of it.
1:44 Mr Krueger telling stories again
Like it's not bad enough he was going through a "
shame filled" disease, but then he loses his job due to people's pure ignorance and stupidity. My heart goes out to any of you that were diagnosed with HIV in the 80's or 90's. 💜
Unfortunately not many who contracted HIV/AIDS during it's early stages are alive today. My uncle being one of them.
sadly most people who were diagnosed with AIDS and or HIV back in the 1980s and early 90s are gone now.
@@TRivera13 praise God for your uncle!
Im not too worried about it, George *spins in chair*
Ron Vawter who played Bob Seidman here was openly HIV-positive at the time of filming the director went out of his way to make sure Ron was accommodate after he was hospitalized during filming. Ron Vawter died of complications from AIDS less than five months after the film's premiere
Thomas Jeffrey Hanks
09 de julio de 1956
67 AÑOS.
If I were on that jury then I would have insisted that at least fifty million dollars be awarded in punitive damages. This could set a precedent for other big firms and corporations who come under fire that the sexual orientation of any human being is not for them to judge.
Spoken like someone who has never been on a jury and has no idea how the justice system works.
Punitive damages cannot generally exceed a certain ratio of the compensatory damages except in extremely extenuating circumstances. This law firm almost certainly doesn't have 50 million dollars to pay in punitive damages, and the judge has the authority to overrule the jury's decision on amounts. This has happened countless times when juries think like you do.
5 mil overall was a huge amount of money back then too. They made their point
5 million back in 1993 is likely worth 50 million today. 😱😱😱
@@costco_pizza inflation is bad but not that bad... 5 million in 1993 would be worth just over 10 million today.
Great movie over all. But if you think about it the law firm (defendants) can appeal the decision and tie it up in court proceedings relatively for the next 10 years than pay a penny. Which in essence the plaintiff will have long passed away from his illness therefore never receiving a penny. The harsh truth.
I don't know what happened in this case specifically, but often in these situations the two sides will agree to a smaller settlement after trial rather than going through this process. E.g. they might take $1.5 million instead of the full $5 million as a compromise. It really depends on how risky the appeal is, how likely they are to get it reversed, etc.
Philadelphia is a great example of how playing a good person usually gets you far more accolades than playing a bad person, especially an anti-gay bad person. Washington and Hanks were great, but Jason Robards was phenomenal, as evidenced by how much you just absolutely hated the guy.
This was such a powerful movie well cast well written, it brought awareness of the Hate scare n discrimination of this disease, the out come was AWESOME!!
This movie will NEVER get OLD!!!!
I love seeing the colonel. On and off the silver screen.
As the man said, never underestimate the predictably of stupidity or the ignorant. So many passed, such a waste of blessed people. God help us all.
Kruger did a great job after his company wound up thanks to him getting frustrated by George Costanza.
T Bone!!!
He really lost a lot of hair
No they aren't just ice at all i totally agree
I love how back then, they could smoke in the juror room
WHo noticed the lawyer of Erin Brockovic in the jury?
If you meant juror no. 9, no, that wasn't actor Albert Finney
We clapped when we heard the verdict of $4 million
Lawyers - it's all about the money baby!
Just like politicians... Funny how lawyers and politicians always flock together.
Who would've thought Mr. Kruger would end up in a position to award nearly 5 million dollars to somebody. I'll bet the court doesn't know he can also spin around in his chair 3 times in a row without help. "All me, all meeeeee"
I'd be curious to know if the juror rooms in Philadelphia are usually filed with boxes and mops....looks like a storage room to me.
$5,025,000 total verdict!
Who the hell put Mr Kruger in charge of anything?
The main juror shot his own eyes out cause he don’t want his legs cut off. Daniel von Bargen
holy f*ck this made me cry
That’s $5025000.00 and in today’s market that would be over $10000000.
You should check your numbers again.
Denzel Hayes Washington JR
28 de diciembre de 1954
68 AÑOS. (69)
Thank God Hollywood made this movi4.
Truth is, and maybe times are different now, but for a law firm that big, 4 million is pocket change.
What money…no one gets money except the lawyers…appeal after appeal…higher court’s decision
It’s not about money…it never was…it’s about what’s right
Mr. Kruger is absolutely correct.
The late great Dan von Bargen as the Foreman of the Jury
Hopefully this trial ends soon. The lead juror needs to get back to his job at Kruger Industrial Smoothing
This movie has everyone. K-ooger!
Denzel is by far the best actor by a long shot in this movie
When is he not to be fair.
Denzel is the BEST actor.
5 million minus a third
KRUGER! KRUGER!
Kruger?
Why are the Jury deliberating in a Basement?
Any other law nerds see a resemblance between the Judge and Judge McNally?
Smutné, smutné
Mr. Kruger what happened to you?
I hope he was reimbursed by Play Now!
@@CoCotheTurtleOr the Human Fund
money wont correct wrongs just reinstate beckett!!! thats justice.
I don't think he's medically able to contribute working at this point lol but that's the think he should rightfully be on paid leave
It is nice to think that the jury would stick so faithfully to the remit of their task - can't deny though, I never bought it. The distraction of an aids carrier who got infected through casual sex with a stranger in a porn theatre would have been too much, I felt. People would have just had sympathy for the defendants for not wanting to be around him and the virus.
Sympathetic, but their own feelings would point to the truth. He was discriminated against.
Well that’s generally the Hollywood route, they put the way things should go in these cases where Justice is served. If the film ended with him losing and then dying, then what is it wanting to show? The cold hard reality is something already seen. Don’t need it hammered home in a film
People still don't get it. How he got AIDS is irrelevant. That is the fundamental issue with discrimination.
Hate to burst the bubble, but this film was inspired by a true story
Thank God the jury was full of better men and women & justice prevailed! 🙏
2:44 JK Simmons on the jury?
Nope
His very first movie role!!! He became a very big star after this!
@@costco_pizza I thought that was him. Thanks!
@@jjackson59100 Sorry, that is not JK Simmons. He would have been about 48 during the filming - this guy is a lot older; besides, Simmons was working as a Broadway performer while this movie was being filmed.
@@jjackson59100 Jesus how old do you think JF Simmons is? He's not even as old as that dude now never mind back in the 90's. Looks nothing like him either.
Man Denzel gonna clear almost a million in his cut of the settlement
From what I understand the type of lawyer he is “you don’t pay unless we win!” Comes with a hefty price tag.
We'll see you st the appeal was hilarious to me. Its not over until the money is in your account
Has anyone noticed how shitty the inside of that courthouse looks? 😂
Let's be honest here. The REAL winner was Miguel. Massive inheritance, without the AIDS.😅😂
Says who? In the 1980s, they definitely weren’t married. Likely no binding civil union, either.
In 2024 money, that back and loss of benefits would equal $311,528.22, adjusted for inflation. The mental anguish and humiliation would be $217,851.90, while the punitive damages would be $10,417,678.01 adjusted for inflation.
Given the laws back then, I wonder who would have inherited Andrew's money? Hopefully he had a will.
See you at the appeal 😂
That is a ridiculous sum to award. What a joke.
congrats. we will see you at the appeal. Draw it out and cost everyone more money. Nice...
Juror number 9 😑
See u at the appeal.....wow
Why does gay men in movies always have a Latin lover.
Wishful thinking 😮
Hnnng. on the one hand...Andy REALLY should have been up front about his illness. If the firm had just been up front and let him go, that's one thing. The only reason they deserved those rather excessive punative damages was the LYING....the coverup. they were breaking thier own rules and KNEW it.
At the time, he would have been fired on the spot if he had volunteered he had AIDS. There was a lot of ignorance about it, how it was transmitted, etc., And was a death sentence.
Fuck this take.
There was really no legit reason for the lawfirm to let Andy go. They couldn't have let him go simply because he was infected with AIDS. And if they'd have let him go for "performance reasons" the timing would have been awfully suspect anyways, so Andy would have still brought on a lawsuit.
The lawfirm would simply have to wait until he became incapacitated, and then hire a new lawyer for his position. They'd also have to keep his insurance coverage until he passed.
@@M-hc9xm He would have been fired just if they found out he was gay. With AIDS he definitely would be gone.
It was none of their business until he was too sick to work.
Bull verdict.
My uncle, D.C. Edwards died from AIDS in 1993 in Texas in some small remote tucked out of the way hospice center.
Everytime I see and hear portions of this movie I am oft times asking myself, to what extent were God fearing people so hell bent as to have one of thier own family buried out and away from the family plot all over some paranoid fear that the body would contaminate the local cemetery and water supply..
I kid you not, that's exactly the way poorly edicated, ignorgant and prejudiced people think, and worse, act.
The outright prejudice and hatred of anyone differnet than you is despicable.
@1:25 this scene is missing George Costanza.
A public apology from that firm that fired him plus the settlement.Money would've been a whole lot better but I still wouldn't have come close to what this character deserved.
A public apology with the settlement money would have been a lot better but it still wouldn't have come close for this character
THEY SPEND MORE MONEY ON THE COURT PROCESS, (LEGAL FEES, ETC ETC) THAN THE AMOUNT AWARDED. WHY NOT JUST PAY THE AMOUNT?