Find Me Guilty (2006) User Reviews

Funny and Entertaining Courtroom Drama

[basemnt-dwellr · 8/10 · 18 February 2006]

I had the chance to see the movie at the Berlin Film Festival (actually I saw it twice), and I must say I really loved it. Even during the second screening I still thought it was interesting and funny.

Granted, I like both Sidney Lumet and Vin Diesel so I may be a bit biased, but the audience in the cinema seemed to like the movie too, because after both screenings they applauded.

The movie is a courtroom drama based on real events. The film depicts the longest Mafia trial in NYC history, and most of the dialog is taken from the original records of the trial. In 1987-88, some 20 members of the Lucchese crime family, each with his own lawyer, were indicted on some 76 charges ranging from criminal conspiracy to narcotics trafficking. The trial went on for 21 months.

The film focuses on Jack DiNorscio, one of the accused mobsters (played by Vin Diesel), who decides to defend himself. Even though he spent half his life in jail he doesn't know much about legal proceedings and mostly speaks what comes into his mind thus sometimes making fun of the whole trial.

Actually I was quite skeptical if Diesel could pull it off. C'mon, we all know him from some more or less mediocre action movies, so when I heard he was cast in a Sidney Lumet movie, I was quite surprised, and therefore even more eager to see him in this film. And yes, he is good. He gained some weight for this role and has hair (a wig), so he looks quite different from what you're used to.

During the Berlinale press conference Sidney Lumet said about Vin Diesel: "People make the great mistake with action heroes. They think that because generally the plots are simpler and their behavior is one-note that they can't act. But most of the time they can." And Diesel shows that he can act. With his charismatic persona he manages to carry the movie pretty easily. He has to talk a lot during the film which comes across very believable and authentic, and he shows a wide range of emotions from happiness to anger to mourning to being embarrassed to whatever.

The overall acting is really good, Linus Roache shines in his role as prosecutor Kierney. Contrary to his "Necromonger" role in "The Chronicles of Riddick" he gets a chance here to really show his talent. The other supporting cast is also really fantastic. I'd like to point out Peter Dinklage as lead defense attorney Ben Klandis, and Annabella Sciorra ("The Sopranos") who is really great in her single scene as DiNorscio's ex-wife. In this scene she goes through all the emotions from anger to frustration to jealousy. The other supporting cast consists of New York theater talent, as well as faces familiar to anyone who watches crime shows on the tube.

The film itself takes place almost entirely in the court room, and sometimes it drags a bit although it is not boring. It depends solely on talking, there is no action whatsoever in the movie. As DiNorscio joked around quite a bit during the trial, the film too is pretty funny in parts, and the audience in the cinema laughed quite a bit.

All in all I recommend this movie. But I have to warn the action fans: you might not like this film as it is a total change in comparison to the movies Vin Diesel has done until now.

Vin's best

[nimbleland · 8/10 · 14 March 2006]

I just saw this last night in Seattle. What drew me in was Sidney Lumet and when it started saying that all courtroom dialog was direct from transcripts of this trial, I sat forward.

This turns out to be a classic New York Lumet film with all the trimmings. Vin does some of his best work to date (and I actually like some of his other films. This is not the all in the head of the writer trick - the transcript is the real heart of the film and so the key is truly bring to life the real words. That's not a simple thing. Lumet has the right balance to make it all work.

For those that would ignore or wait for the DVD, take a chance and see with an audience. You do not get this kind of film from a great director of Lumet's caliber every day.

why is it I always leave movies with organized crime themes rooting for or embracing the criminals

[sharkoil · 8/10 · 13 July 2006]

I'm sure most of the comments about this movie will center around Diesel's amazing performance, but I'd like to focus on the overall quality of this film. From the time the movie gets to the courtroom, the true beauty of this film shines. Every character from the judge to the prosecutors were all well casted and their roles well defined and executed.

My one concern is why is it I always leave movies with organized crime themes rooting for or embracing the criminals. Their life style certainly is not most people would wish to emulate but yet most films which portray them don't manage to tap into the conscious citizen in all of us, somehow the writers and producers undermine your sense of right and wrong and render you powerless to pass negative judgement on the criminal.

With that aside, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie and welcome feedback on my commetns regarding my rant.

Surprisingly quite good

[tightspotkilo · 7/10 · 30 December 2007]

I see where people say that Director Sidney Lumet drapes the characters with moral ambiguity, and that the movie is "reprehensible" because we are asked to cheer for mobsters.

Hello?

This movie is based on real-life events and the dialog is taken directly from real testimony in the transcripts from the court proceedings of a real trial where real accused gangsters were acquitted by a real jury, and the courtroom actually did erupt in cheers when the verdict was read. It is what it is. And Lumet conveyed that.

After 27 years as a trial lawyer let me also tell you that the character of the prosecutor, the Sean Kierney character as portrayed by Linus Roache, was a spot-on bulls-eye. Most people never have any interaction with the criminal justice system so they just don't know, but prosecutors are very often some of the most loathsome, morally twisted, side-winding, double-dealing, four-flushing snakes in the pit. They are capable of anything, because to them the ends justify the means. They tell themselves that they have to be that way to be effective, to win, because they are up against evil and it's all really okay in the end because they are on the side of good. You may even agree with that since they are indeed charged with taking some very bad guys off the street and putting them away, which makes it much safer for all of us. Fine and dandy. But don't complain about it when a filmmaker like Lumet comes along and depicts that unpleasant and ugly truth like it really is. It's another thing that is what it is.

The best thing about this movie, the thing that commends it, is the outstanding performance of Vin Diesel. The man showed his chops here as a first rate actor. He isn't who he appeared to be, he isn't who we thought he was. There's far more to him. I wouldn't be surprised to see Vin Diesel become and be known as one of the true Hollywood greats somewhere down the road. He shows that much potential here.

Also, let me join the chorus of other reviewers, and agree that Annabella Sciorra was totally awesome in the brief role that she had. Stunning is the word I would use to describe it.

See it for Annabella, and see it for Vin Diesel.

The Longest Trial In USA

[claudio_carvalho · 7/10 · 27 October 2007]

The mobster Jackie DiNorscio (Vin Diesel) is shot by his own cousin at home while in probation but survives. Later he is arrested dealing drugs and sentenced to thirty years in prison. The prosecutor Sean Kierney (Linus Roache) proposes a deal to Jackie, immediately releasing him if he testifies against the Lucchese family and other mafia families but Jackie does not accept to rat his friends that he loves. When the trial begins, he asks the judge Finestein (Ron Silver) to defend himself without the assistance of a lawyer.

"Find Me Guilty" is a good movie of courtroom, directed by a veteran expert in the theme, Sidney Lumet, which also directed the awesome "The Verdict". Vin Diesel has a great performance and is unrecognizable in the role of a charismatic gangster, actually a "gagster". However, the screenplay of the longest trial in USA seems to be manipulative, creating a great empathy of the viewers with the "nice" gangsters, while the obstinate prosecutor is presented as an evil man. I do not know who sponsored or produced this film and in spite of based on a true event, has a bad message in the end. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Sob Suspeita" ("Under Suspicion")

A Nutshell Review: Find Me Guilty

[DICK STEEL · 7/10 · 6 May 2006]

We're all familiar with Vin Diesel being the new action hero, with his buffed muscular body, bald pate, gruff voice and his high octane movies like Fast and the Furious and xXx. He took a different path into comedy with The Pacifier, and now, into drama with Find Me Guilty. How did he fair?

Pretty good, in spite of the focus being on his new look hairdo and belly (ok, so it's prosthetics and makeup assisted). Playing a real life mobster Jack DiNorscio, and the true story of his defense of himself in court without a lawyer, in an extremely long trial spanning 21 months, where it's the US Government versus the Lucchese crime family.

The movie started off promisingly with a tense scene classic of any mafia movies, that of a hit job, though it's laced with some unexpected humour. Alas, just as you thought the movie will go uphill from then on, it actually stalled and cruised along, before tapering from the halfway mark until the end.

Diesel as DiNorscio deftly balanced dramatics with flair for comedy, labelling himself as a "gagster" rather than a "gangster", inevitably forming a bond with the jurors of the case, getting into the skin of the prosecutors and having a hard time convincing his fellow chums that his loyalties still lie with the family, that he'll never rat them out or knowingly jeopardize their chances in court. However, amongst his buddies, he fared the worst, having to defend himself in court and go home to his jail cell, where he's still serving time. It's a bit like doing your all for your family, but yet experiencing a non-reciprocal feeling from them.

You probably won't care much for the other characters, consisting of many minor role hoodlums and their numerous legal representatives. Perhaps the only other role having prominence is Ron Silver's Judge Finestein, who has to precede over this gruelling cast and at the same time reining in DiNorscio's antics.

Although this movie boasts the using of actual court transcripts for its dialogue, there are not enough compelling arguments, objections, challenges and square offs. Rather, the movie zooms by quite quickly to the basic significant courtroom sessions - it's obvious you can't cover 21 months worth of material in 2 hours.

So for those eager to watch top-notch courtroom drama, you might go away a little disappointed, but if you buy into Vin Diesel's charm, and of course for Vin Diesel fans, you might go away enjoying every moment of his screen presence.

I have to say that Vin Diesel isn't anything like I expected him to be in this role. He did an amazing job.

[ucanusemy · 9/10 · 16 March 2006]

I went to a screening in NYC this week, and Vin's performance knocked the socks off of everyone in attendance.

The physical transformation was astonishing. He gained a lot of weight for this role, and many of the people around me (myself included) did not recognize him when he first appeared on screen. While watching the film, I totally forgot that I was watching Vin Diesel. He really became the character for me.

Annabella Sciorra is another actor I will never look at the same way again. She had exactly one scene in the movie and I thought the screen was going to burst into flames or something. It was really that hot. She and Vin barely touched each other ... didn't even so much as kiss ... and I swear the entire audience needed a cigarette afterward.

The entire cast was first-rate. Every single one of them hit the ball out of the park, no exceptions.

The 2+ hours of running time went by like 15 minutes, and I sincerely did not want the movie to end.

There was a Q&A session after the screening, and Vin was humble, funny, personable and sometimes boyish in his interactions with the audience.

I wasn't a big Vin fan before this movie, but now I can't wait to see him in Hannibal. This guy isn't just an action star ... he's a very talented, dedicated and capable actor.

Vin Diesel being a good actor

[daniel-mannouch · 6/10 · 30 March 2020]

Find Me Guilty finds Vin Diesel in an unusual role and perhaps his best and Sidney Lumet directing with his usual care and attention towards his cast. Everyone gives a solid and believable performance and the script is as true to the real events as much as it needs to be for the story they are telling. Though not as funny as it thinks it is, as well as being burdened with an ill fitting soundtrack, Find Me Guilty is a very good courtroom drama that features possibly Vin Diesel's best performance as well as is a great latter entry into Sidney Lumet's storied filmography.

Viesel Dazzles

[aharmas · 10/10 · 21 March 2006]

When I first heard of Sidney Lumet's unorthodox casting lead for this film, I was intrigued because Van Diesel's selection was indeed a daring move. There was little doubt Lumet would err, and he has truly come up with a sensational film and presented us with an outstanding turn by Diesel. The film would have worked and been at least a decent movie because of Lumet's expertise. Getting Diesel to take command of the screen, channel the spirit of the infamous defendant to ultimately convince the audience in both the movie and the theater audience that we were witnessing a rather unique individual.

The success of the film hangs on every single line that Diesel delivers. There is conviction and sincerity in his delivery. Here is a character that has a tarnished background, ultimately finds an outlet for a new perspective in life, and runs with it. Eventually, we get to discover he is a more powerful force than we expected.

Lumet once again shapes the film with his assured hand, allowing the actors to shine in their respective roles, not interfering with dialog that is practically taken from original transcripts by adding over-dramatic touches or unnecessary inspirational music. There are long silences when we are allowed to reflect on what is taking place in front of us. We see a situation change, witness how the players moves are changed because of unexpected twists in the story, and never is the intensity of true emotions and the power of relationships diluted by a false note. There is a superb scene between Diesel and his ex wife, in a great performance by Sciorra that is both incredibly moving and sexy. These are real people with overpowering feelings and passionate exchanges, and it all comes through because of these two performers' chemistry and electrifying delivery.

This is a film that will probably divide its audiences, depending on what you think of the defendant and his connections, but most people will probably agree that a star has been born, and with the support of a masterful director, we can see that he deserves to have a long and fruitful career in front of him. Many people heaped praise on Hoffman not too long ago. I felt Diesel outdid Hoffman because this time the gimmick and the make up felt apart by the soulful approach of a real actor.

Very, very bad.

[ragouster · 8 June 2017]

The triumph of the organized crime. Selling drugs, prostitutes, money loaning. Oh, these are my friends since I was a five years child. We did nothing bad. We have families, children and are making money just for living, because we had no money to study in Harvard and the furking capitalists almost killed us. I still can't understand why in US they admire criminals. And a great director make this joke a legend. This film insults me. Insults my moral, insults my way of life, insults my faith.

a different one

[khorasanimgn · 6/10 · 29 June 2019]

Find me guilty is a 2006 comedy-drama film based on a true story which is written and directed by Sidney Lumet and stares Vin Diesel as Jackie DiNorscio who is accused of several charges and sentenced to thirty years in prison and despite having no knowledge and background in law, he decides to have no lawyer and defend himself in the court.

In fact, most scenes of the movie take place in the courtroom and sometimes it seems to be boring in some parts since it mainly depends on talking and there is no action. Also, the film, irrespective of being an entertaining one, was not really a comedy and it did not make me laugh that much.

I believe Vin Diesel is a quite reasonable choice to act as the mobster, DiNorscio and he presents a perfect performance. In addition, other actors were pretty good and believable in their roles including Peter Dinklage as the lead defense attorney.

The most important and interesting facts about find me guilty that has made it a watchable film are that it is about the longest Mafia trial in American history and the most of dialogues are taken from the original records of the trial. In addition, watching Diesel having hair and performing in a quite different role is surprising.

Find me guilty can be considered as a totally different court drama. Generally in most cases, these kinds of plots are about an innocent person trying to defend and acquit himself. However, the movie is about a guilty man trying so hard to bamboozle the jury.

Although, the film is not one of my favorites, it is definitely worth watching once as it propounds the true story of one the most unusual and interesting trials.

Highly Creative in Part by Lumet and Diesel

[alexkolokotronis · 8/10 · 22 April 2008]

Great performance by Vin Diesel in here. I always just thought of him as an actor who did not have the ability to take on a non-action leading role. Wow did he prove me wrong here. Find Me Guilty was really a revelation in itself and for Diesel.

The acting like I just said was great from Vin Diesel. Diesel has shown in the past some great supporting performances. With this movie he clearly showed that he can give a real acting performance. The way he displayed his character as a loud mouth, slick talking mafia man was just so genuine and real. He made me laugh every five minutes and still was able to draw me into the movie as a serious character. The supporting performances were nice here to from Peter Dinklage and Alex Rocco.

The directing was very good if not great as well. When it comes to any film involving court Sidney Lumet is the man who should direct it. This is the man who directed 12 Angry Men and The Verdict which are probably the two of the top five court movies ever. This time though he is able to perfectly balance the comedy and drama of this movie to make this film very engaging and exciting to watch. Sidney Lumet once again proves to me at least why he is one of the most creative and best movie directors ever.

The writing was perfect for this movie. In a way the movie was making fun of itself which is always nice to see in these type of comedies. Together with Diesel the writing made for some many laugh-out-loud scenes. Sidney Lumet with his directing and writing really is able to show that a real-life courtroom drama can realistically funny too.

My advice is to definitely watch this movie if you have not. It is not a superficial meaningless movie and believe it or not is a little inspiring. Creativity in movies at its best.

Ladies and Gentlemen, it's a courtroom movie

[siderite · 7/10 · 19 June 2006]

...and it is an acceptable one as well. Vin Diesel does make a weird and uncharacteristic role, the story is based on a true fact, so they can't really change too much, only dramatize a little.

However, the pretenses of the movie are all wrong. The things said in the commercials, all lies. Yes, it is one of the longest US trials ever, but that's because they decided to prosecute a whole lot of people, each of them having a lawyer (so in reality Jackie played just a role, not the lead), for 76 counts. Any jury forced to sit there and listen to lawyers for more than six hundred days hates the government. Then the comedy is not that great, the film is funny from time to time, but not especially.

Reading between the lines you see that the character of Vin Diesel was more related to the one played by Al Pacino in Donnie Brasco and indeed, the movies seem to flow from the same source. They even seem too long after three quarters of the time has passed :)

But overall it was a good movie. A script that is original because it takes from real life, good acting, the music was a bit too corny for me, but OK. It truly is a courtroom drama, and as hard it should have been to push almost 21 months in two hours of a movie, they did it. Just don't expect too much.

A Review of the film, not Vin Diesel

[Jules-116 · 5/10 · 19 March 2006]

Movies, hopefully, should be about more than their stars, or lack thereof. Whether or not you were charmed by the unique choice of Diesel for the starring role, you cannot ignore the blaring faults of this movie. It is a courtroom drama-a genre which should promise us conflicts of principle and belief; choices people have to make. (See "A Few Good Men," for example). The conflict in this movie? Is Diesel's gangster good or bad ? Why? Can he defend himself? Those are possible answers, but the only time we are made to believe he is otherwise are from the rants of the prosecutor. Why not show us examples of the mobsters life? Another possible theme-Is the U.S. Government being racist in its prosecution of Italian Americans ? Again, this is mentioned, but only one side of the argument is briefly explored. Perhaps the theme that was adhered to the most was that of the main character's loyalty to his "family." Yet, the strongest attempt to illustrate this poses Diesel as the simpleton gangster speaking from his heart to his co-mobster-defendants, waxing eloquent that he would never rat on the people he grew up with. A taps-like trumpet fanfare accompanies his speech at the end. Very dramatic, except that he is in a meeting concerning whether or not the group should unanimously decide to take a plea bargain-a situation which has nothing what so ever to do with ratting on one another. So when each member stands up and says "I vote no!" -who cares? Overall, this film took a potentially charming/strong character poised to stand for his beliefs, but only ends in playing at several hackneyed and borrowed dramatic ideas. There are some decent performances that unfortunately cannot save the meandering lack of direction in this movie. And it was BADLY edited.

"Send me to jail. I'm not guilty, but I'm used to it" !!!

[elshikh4 · 12 September 2008]

This movie bugged me. What was that anyway? And what were its problems? Sure it got many!

The movie looked provocative in dealing with the monsters it had. True, it demands to look into its characters like usual human beings inside their own world. But the main problem is that it happens at the moment of taking revenge on them by us, the moment where they go to their righteous end, as the natural fairness from our very point of view. You sense anger and fear when those mean old criminals go free at the end that easily! So it's hard to see any human type that Mr. Lumet wants us to see in (Jackie DiNorscio / Vin Diesel) and learn about. And it's harder to feel sympathy out of this courtroom movie.

Moreover, how the logicality of the whole trial / movie has gone with the wind? It's impossible for us as viewers to BELIEVE for a second how the jury decided that the accused killers and dealers are all NOT GUILTY! Even if it's a very known case from the 1980s, the movie, dramatically, pushed me to not buy that, and to assume that those mafia bosses bribed all the jury?, or maybe, it's Sidney Lumet's special satire...

When we see all the mobsters walk joyfully in one street with the members of the jury to mingle with each other you'll conclude what vision is shown for the American society, or its big family - echoes from Lumet's (Family Business - 1989) - like it's that nation's naked truth. Which even breaking it, is a breakage for a LIFE STYLE, like their lawyer's first pleading. So, similar to Lumet's (Q & A - 1990) also, it's the case of perversely established ground. It's like Roman Polanski's films where evil is finally dominating. Or the world of Coppola's The Godfather however the mafia is axiomatic fact and ordinary part, yet with no purgation.

Therefore the federal prosecutor's shouting "They're Criminals" wasn't to assure sense of morality at it only. But to manifest how hopeless his character is in a world like this. Though the movie doesn't try to give us the reason how he has been beaten at the end, since the answer of why is: naturally!

It could be another violent commentary on the American, explicitly incomplete, justice. So the prosecutor looked nasty while his efforts to achieve the lost justice, as the evil man of "this" world who had to lose to "our" world's real evil men! I told you earlier, this movie can bug cleverly. It makes you think: Maybe the mob produced it?!

In fact, the moral dilemma was for the viewer to decide is (Jackie DiNorscio) a hero of his world or not? The finale just answered a big yes for that, and exaggerated it passionately, after living his redemption till his noble statement of willingly self-sacrifice at the end. However, you have to ask: How he sacrifices for people who will kill you and your kids by bullets or drugs?!, How even his attempt to sacrifice was fake, since he's going to jail anyhow?!, and How he didn't learn about himself as long as he says: "Send me to jail. I'm not guilty, but I'm used to it"?!!, Baby, you're so guilty to the backbone. And I think I must say the same about (Sidney Lumet) here too.

It was difficult to catch on the movie's message, or its type of a hero. Simply, (Jackie) is the only one who discovered through the whole trail that he lost everything and everyone by himself, the only one who owns love, and asks for non-conditional love. But the treatment didn't pinpoint that seriously. I sunk under so many defects. One of them is making it as a courtroom movie, which tried to be so loyally realistic also, since the normal viewer would live continual heavy defense for the mafia's sake, with a happy end for them too! This distracted the attention to heed anything but the appearance of a heart of gold inside the personality of (DiNorscio). Not to mention the ethical complication of understanding his redemption with another possible satire about the ones who he sacrifices for. You can't ignore that precise look into the world of Italians, who are not the progeny of Italian artists but Italian bottom, to ask what's the original basis of America exactly?, and how its crime is a victor force, and organic limb.

Ok, the try of 2 movies in one is the same problem of (Lumet)'s (The Anderson Tapes - 1971), refer to my comment about it on the IMDb: (A Political Crime Movie? NAAAY!!). However, like that last one, (Lumet) uses criminals to expose something wrong in the American system, but this round it seemed disharmonious and annoying. It's not the movie where the evil guy goes to jail at last, it's the movie where the evil guys go to society free while the good guy is beaten, and the less evil imprisoned, but none of these stories was done fairly.

This is one of (Lumet)'s less powerful movies. Marketing it as a "Comedy" tells you how they were desperate to market it anyway. They did it before with his better one (Family Business). Maybe he's making movies about subjects that are too hard to face or stand. Here as a director / co-writer, he went to the sink to seek heroes, read: less impure, yet he did it in a movie that needed to be more emotional, concentrated, and effective.

PS: Despite Diesel's good efforts, the make-up and the gray wig were heavy mask that made him a freak, and devitalized his acting.

Strange Heroes.

[rmax304823 · 7/10 · 3 May 2007]

Lumet seems to have returned to the theme he tackled in "Twelve Angry Men" -- one stand-up guy who is disparaged in court by the others on his team until, in the end, he enters his house justified.

Vin Diesel is the star and he does a surprisingly good job, mixing vernacular English with the savvy of a street rat. He's like the inarticulate bumbler in a classroom who manages to come up with the highest grade on the exam. But then the rest of the cast is excellent too. Peter Delage is especially impressive and it's good to see a totally gray Alex Rocco as the Capo. Ron Silver, as the stern judge, plays to his strengths.

The script sticks to the courtroom and the jail house where Diesel is incarcerated for a looong time. A dozen or so racketeers are charged under RICO and brought together for a huge trial lasting more than a year. All of the defendants have lawyers except for Diesel, as Jackie DeNorsia, who decides to defend himself (he's spent half his life in jail). He tells the court that he's known the other defendants all his life and they are his family. But if they're his family, they treat him like the family idiot when he puts on his lawyer hat. His presentational style is engaging. He's full of jokes, some of them obscene. And he doesn't mind playing the wounded victim either. The others, however, are not sure whether he's helping them or damaging his case with his clumsy, low-brow stand-up comedy act.

Still, Jackie sticks to his guns, even when he's shunned by the others. He will not rat on them, though they may have been responsible for Jackie's being shot several times. And in the end, they salute him as they leave the courtroom -- free at last. Jackie, laden with more chains than King Kong, beams at them as they wave and blow kisses, though he's returning to the slams and there is nothing much to lead us to believe that once Jackie is out of sight, he will not also be out of mind. If this is victory, someone will have to explain the meaning of the word "victory." In fact, I've begun wondering what "victory" is supposed to mean for the past year or two.

This is a strange plot. We don't know what the horde of defendants are charged with. They wore pinkie rings, ate in Italian restaurants, and passed each other greasy paper bags filled with money. So what? Lumet and his writers aren't interested in the court case. They're interested in Jackie and how he responds to the pressure from both sides. If he cooperates and rats, he's out of jail. If he doesn't -- well.

In the end I didn't care much for the hero of the play. Jackie's shown as a proud and sometimes loving human being. The corrections officers clobber him and when asked about it by the judge, he replies, "I fell." He has a mother who dies halfway through the movie. The problem is that he doesn't deserve much in the way of compassion because in fact he shows so little for others. Diesel is such a huge and awkward presence that we sense from the various hints that he can be, and has been, one mean mother in the past. And his "regular guy" act may have impressed the jury but struck me as not-quite-expert manipulation, akin to Willie Stark's "I'm a hick, just like you," in "All the King's Men." "I'm so stupid that I can hardly walk, so you believe me, okay?" Not okay with me. I was glad when Marlon Brando turned on the gang in "On the Waterfront." I don't know if these particular goons committed crimes or just were guilty of wearing pinkie rings, but if they did half of what the prosecutor accuses them of, Jackie should have dropped the dime. In the last few years I've wondered not just about the meaning of the word "victory" but about whether loyalty is the greatest of all virtues. Maybe it's better to follow the law. Generally speaking.

B+

[rdg45 · 7/10 · 30 November 2022]

Vin Diesel playing the part of a mobster. I know that's hard to believe. But, he did. And, he did a credible job. This story is based on true events about the mob on trial in New York for doing bad things with Vin Diesel as Giacomo "Jackie Dee" DiNorscio who defends himself in court. A mobster with a sixth grade education is presented as doing a better job at defending himself than the lawyers representing eight-or-so other bad guys. I'm not a Diesel fan since he normally plays himself in movies and his acting ability seemed limited played a part made for his acting ability. This story is presented well and acted well by the usual bad guys you might see in all gangster movies. This story is worth the viewing time.

A guilty pleasure

[bowmanblue · 7/10 · 7 November 2014]

Okay, if you're a fan of Vin Diesel you'll probably be expecting him to do his usual busting heads and driving fast cars routine. However, I get the impression he took this film for the reason that it doesn't include any of that.

In fact, 99% of the film is set entirely in the courtroom. 'Find me Guilty' is based on a true story of the longest Mafia trial in American history and Vin Diesel plays the man accused of... well, pretty much every crime going. He decides to represent himself and what follows is everything from black comedy to drama.

If you like Vin Diesel, you'll probably think that this film proves that he's a real actor and is more than just a hard man who can punch people. He is the highlight of the film, however, if you don't like him, you – like a fair few other detractors on the Internet – will pour scorn on his performance.

I'm no die hard fan of Vin Diesel, but I thought he did really well as the fast-talking gangster accuse due to spend the rest of his life behind bars. It's one of those films that I enjoyed watching, but, based on the fact that the whole film is just people talking, I'm not sure I'd want to watch it again for quite a while.

Action-packed, it is not. But fair play to Vin Diesel for trying to do more than just be cool (even if his hair piece is a little off-putting!).

I have no idea how close this film is to the real story, but they did a great job in making this film.

[planktonrules · 9/10 · 12 February 2021]

I have never particularly cared one way or the other about Vin Diesel as an actor. I never loved nor hated him and his work. However, after seeing "Find Me Guilty" I found myself really respecting him and his craft. He and this film were very compelling.

The story is about the life and trial of Jackie DiNorscio, a lower level mobster who was prosecuted along with a huge group of other co-conspirators in what turned out to be the longest trial in US history...nearly two years long!! And, during he course of this trial based on the RICO statute, each defendant ended up having their own lawyers...except for DiNorscio...who, insanely, decided to defend himself! What?! Some seemingly dim New Jersey mobster defending himself?!

The film amazed me because although I don't like mobster films at all, I was mesmerized by the story...mostly because it's supposedly true. And, oddly, Diesel made you almost like the guy...almost. His performance was very compelling...and well worth seeing.

By the way, if you are concerned about adult content, there is a lot of very harsh language but not much else. Very little violence, no nudity and only a bit that might make parents feel uncomfortable about letting their kids or mother watch the movie. Interesting from start to finish and never dull.

movie too long but Vin Diesel amazing, Lumet should have made a character study rather than a courtroom drama

[SnoopyStyle · 6/10 · 15 June 2015]

Aimiable mobster Jackie DiNorscio (Vin Diesel) is shot by his own cousin Tony Compagna at home while on probation. He is later sentenced to 30 years for dealing drugs. Prosecutor Sean Kierney offers him a deal in an upcoming RICO case against his mob family. He refuses and also fires his lawyers for doing a bad job. He's defending himself in the massive trial and becomes an endearing jokester in front of the court. At first, defense lawyer Ben Klandis (Peter Dinklage) sees advantage in the juror laughing at Jackie's joking personality.

It's a pretty long trial and a pretty long movie. Director Sidney Lumet is unable wrangle it into a tighter, more thrilling story. What's great is the amazing performance coming from Vin Diesel. He's not just great but also very versatile. It's a great character and he's terrific in it. This could have been an award winning character study if Lumet concentrated on that rather than a courtroom procedural. The court case could never end well when the mob guys get away with murder especially for a real case. However a personal drama digging deep inside Jackie's personality could be something truly great.

Surprisingly good

[gillygalls · 8/10 · 20 March 2006]

The movie had a really great script; it was funny, dramatic and touching. I was really surprised by Vin Diesel's performance, I wasn't expecting him to pull it off. I think Jackie D himself, his personality and his words helped Vin a lot there. I was also impressed by Raúl Esparza as Tony. I've seen him on Broadway and I have been wowed by his stage performances. I wasn't sure if he could make the transition, but he was the perfect paranoid junkie. The only problems I had with the movie are with tiny details like extras dressed in 2006 fashions and flat screen monitors on desks. Knowing that the trial began in the early 90's, it caught my attention and stuff like the computer monitors shouldn't grab attention. Overall, "Find Me Guilty" is a great movie, and I highly recommend it.

The story of the longest Mafia trial in history is at least an hour too short

[dbborroughs · 7/10 · 21 April 2006]

This is the story of Giacomo "Jackie Dee" DiNorscio, who found himself facing charges under the various Federal conspiracy laws along with 21 other defendants and decided to defend himself. Jackie's lack of court room experience turns the whole trial on its head.

Sidney Lumet strikes again. Once more the master of cinema is stalking the halls of justice in order to tell us a very compelling legal story. Its a great story that's masterfully told (for the most part) and shows us what happens when a regular guy takes his own destiny in his hands. Vin Diesel is excellent as DiNorscio. We care for him in ways we probably shouldn't and root for him even though we really do know he's not a nice guy. Equally as good as Diesel is Peter Dinklage who plays one of the attorneys who is at first annoyed by what DiNorscio does in court and then amazed as he realizes that he actually is scoring points with his unorthodox unschooled style. While these two stand out the rest of the cast is pretty much note perfect as well.

The movies one problem is that its too short. This is a movie that essentially compresses three years of events into two hours and a good deal of material is cut out. Don't get me wrong there is no problems following the course of events, nor is there any problem with becoming emotionally invested in what happens, the problem is that there are way too many characters, some of which, like the prosecutors, who are given the short end of the stick. In the case of the prosecutors I had the sense that there was more to them and what they went through. As it stands now they are simply a chorus that shows up from time to time to set something in motion, they aren't real characters. At other times I had no idea which defendant or witness they were talking about since I couldn't keep who was who straight. Its not fatal to the film, but you get the feeling that this should be an hour or two longer since the film seems to bleed off the screen and into a real place.

Definitely worth seeing, as pretty much any film that Sidney Lumet is worth seeing.

solid courtroom drama focused (successfully) on character and a little more

[Quinoa1984 · 8/10 · 25 March 2006]

It's amazing to see certain actors working with a director like the veteran Sidney Lumet (if it's appropriate to use for him who knows, though this is his latest film, at 81, over a near 50 year career), and see really intriguing, special things happening on screen. Actors like Pacino, Lee J. Cobb, Rod Steiger, and Peter Finch among many others undoubtedly have other noteworthy performances in other films, but in the work they've done with Lumet there's something that connects just right, to get that full touch reaching into the character and pulling out the humanity, or lack thereof. Vin Diesel, in this case, has possibly his most convincing and on-spot performance to date and, with the exception of his supporting role in Boiler Room, goes beyond the typically macho-roles of his career in the past several years. He is a tough guy in this, true, and Jackie DiNorscio has the life of a criminal to him. But in the story presented in the film, of this man defending himself in the longest trial in American history, it's essential that the actor playing him gets it right with the emotional connections of the character, of being truthful. Diesel gets that right, in a performance that has that gangster quality (err, 'gagster' as DiNorsci refers himself as), but is also has a certain fascinating complexity that the character of, for example, the prosecuting attorney, could never have.

Still, Lumet captures this ensemble with enough nuance and well-spun, real dialog, for two movies. It's not at all strange to see him doing a courtroom drama, as it reaches back to his first film 12 Angry Men. This time however there is a difference in the focus on a story lasting three years, and the evidence in the sprawling, elephantine case against the crime families is not as crucial for getting involved in the film as the people who make up the case and courtroom. There are at least a few character actors providing some terrific work, like Ron Silver as the judge, or Peter Dinklage as one of the defense attorneys. And while amid a scene or shot here and there that could've been lost or put on the cutting room floor (it's hard to pinpoint which after a first viewing without notes), there are at least a few that do provide some extra interest that most other filmmakers would've lost. The detail of the one mobster who becomes ill and has to come in every day to court on a stretcher is one thing. Or the detail of the importance of a chair in Jackie's prison cell.

And in this mix there are a few scenes that rank up with being some of the more dramatically perfect scenes Lumet has done, chiefly by letting the actors- who have inhabited the roles to the point of doubtless believability- just do their work. Two that come to mind are when the judge informs Jackie about the death of his mother, and how what Diesel doesn't show to the audience is even more important than what is (I'm reminded of the scene towards the end of Serpico where he gets the badge). Another is when Jackie is questioning his cousin on the stand. The filming of this scene isn't all that complex, but the dynamic between the two characters is, and the right notes are just there between the two actors. By the end of Find Me Guilty, I didn't think I saw an outright masterpiece like some of the director's other films. Neverhtheless, I also knew that I had seen an extremely confident and very good piece of work that brings out what's dependable in Lumet and what's unexpected in an actor like Diesel. Not to mention that, here and there, the film is quite funny. 8.5/10

Life is Funnier than Art!

[merylmatt · 7/10 · 18 July 2009]

I was not surprised that Vin Diseal was so good in this movie. His role really is not a stretch from who he is in real life - a tough guy who grew up in New York City.

That this is based on a real court room trial makes it all the funnier. The script writers used much of the transcripts from the trial of Mobster Jack DiNorscio. Crime may not pay, but it can be hilarious.

Critics of this movie get wrapped around the axle that it is sympathetic to criminals. Forget the moral outrage, this particular criminal was funny, he was human, he did terrible things which the movie does portray.

Maybe I'm more forgiving than some because I've known people like this in real life - not criminals, but real life everyday people who walk, talk and think like "Fat Jack" DiNorscio. You don't need a formal education to be smart, and you can rise to being a Prosecutor or Judge without smarts.

I say watch, relax and enjoy.

Reprehensible

[grahamclarke · 3/10 · 27 December 2006]

Films based on true life incidents always take a stand, one way or another. The stand that Sideny Lumet takes with "Find Me Guilty" is, in a word - reprehensible.

When the no guilty verdict is delivered, we the audience are expected to share the joy of the defendants in their celebrations. It's tantamount to being asked to celebrate OJ Simpon's "victory". Forget about the crimes committed and the ruination of numerous lives from the racketeering, drug trafficking and more. After all, the defendants are basically a bunch of good hearted Italians who incidentally happen to be mobsters.

Worst of all is the portrayal of prosecutor Tierney. The part is written and played (by Linus Roache, wasted in the part) in a shallow, two dimensional fashion. His accurate description of the crimes perpetrated make him the party pooper we are asked to dislike.

It's difficult to understand and disappointing to observe a director of the calibre of Lumet completely siding with the Mafia mobsters. This from the director of "Dog Day Afternoon", a marvellous film based on a true life crime, yet presented in all its facets. Lumet panders to the lowest common denominator which is indeed a far cry from his previous work. How the mighty have fallen.

Lumet has always been a great director for actors. Fine performers have turned in unforgettable performances; Steiger in "The Pawnbroker", Pacino in "Dog Day Afternoon", the entire cast of "Long Day's Journey into Night" and many more. Even very mediocre actors rise to the occasion when guided by Lumet - see Tab Hunter in "That Kind of Woman". Vin Diesel is yet to prove himself as an actor, but under Lumet's direction he turns in his finest screen performance yet with a convincing and winning performance. Too bad it has to be in this spurious vehicle.