When three star General Irwin is transferred to a maximum security military prison, its warden, Colonel Winter, can't hide his admiration towards the highly decorated and experienced soldier. Irwin has been stripped of his rank for disobedience in a mission, but not of fame. Colonel Winter, who runs the prison with an iron fist, deeply admires the General, but works with completely different methods in order to keep up discipline. After a short while, Irwin can feel Winter's unjust treatment of the inmates. He decides to teach Winter a lesson by taking over command of the facility and thus depriving him of his smug attitude. When Winter decides to participate in what he still thinks of as a game, it may already be too late to win. Written by
Julian Reischl <firstname.lastname@example.org>
The finished film's storyline for General Irwin and Colonel Winter diverted sharply from David Scarpa's original screenplay. While both the script and the film begin by presenting Irwin as the sympathetic lead character, and Winter as the bullying antagonist, Scarpa wrote the film's second and third acts, to show that Winter was a good man, and Irwin was a violent taskmaster who brutalized the other inmates into joining his crusade to get rid of the Colonel. The script was re-written when Robert Redford signed up to the film, with Irwin remaining the generally noble campaigner against Winter's reign of cruelty. See more »
When the Colonel is looking out his window to see a helicopter fly by, the American Flag is not moving, even though there is a helicopter flying right next to it. See more »
[on having his hands visible all the time during Gen. Wheeler's visit]
I guess that rules out the hand-job.
See more »
Written by Jim Sumber, Dave Jay (as Dave Bumpstead) & Austin Reynolds
Performed by Soul Hooligan
Courtesy of Maverick Recording Company
By Arrangement with Warner Special Products See more »
Most of the raves and pans you will read of this movie are equally true in their own respects. For my money, the film's weaknesses slightly outweigh its strengths but I can easily see someone else's scales tipping the other way.
The performances are splendid all around. Most especially, James Gandolfini (who had the inside track with the most richly drawn character) excels as the ambiguous villain who is actually right more than half the time.
The message which deals with the value of pride and the importance of identity and self-worth is certainly admirable. The fact that this occurs among men who have marred their own self-worth through violent crime makes the concept that much more interesting. It almost (but never quite) raises the idea of reclaiming integrity, once lost. If it had gone this extra mile, it may well have been a better film.
The weaknesses lie in the hundreds of stupid little inaccuracies which culminate into one stupid BIG inaccuracy: This place doesn't feel like a prison!
It is difficult to make a prison movie within ten years of 1994 without inviting comparisons to "The Shawshank Redemption." Rather than belaboring the obvious, I want to note one detail that is exemplary of the earlier film's superiority. Even the jolliest, funniest, most easy going prisoners in Shawshank had an underlying sense of danger about them. You didn't want to get on their bad side. You never doubt that they belong in prison (except, of course, for Andy Dufresne). But this is not so in "The Last Castle." No matter how often someone reads from a prisoner's file and discusses the horrible things he has done, none of the words, actions, or other moods conveyed by the men in this film make them seem in any way dangerous. Maybe it's a case of mass miscasting but I doubt it.
Compounding this problem is the lack of scholarship to be found in the little details. Robert Redford shaves with a safety razor in spite of the fact that no prisoner would be allowed such a tool. Razor blades, like belts and shoelaces, are potential suicide tools and, thus, prohibited in prisons. Also, people keep referring to an officer's side arm as his "gun" instead of his "weapon." These mistakes were easy to avoid and yet they remained in the film.
All of this makes a potentially fascinating film, filled with talent, seem a touch removed from reality. Like in "The Contender," director Rod Lurie has shown that his view of reality is based on his opinions rather than the other way around.
With all it had going for it, it's a shame really.
21 of 33 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?