The Star Chamber (1983)
Peter Hyams (Outland, 2010, Capricorn One) directed this film, which takes a more “psychological” slant on the vigilante issue. Michael Douglas plays a judge who is tired of seeing criminals walk based on technicalities. His friend Hal Holbrook eventually recruits him to join a clandestine panel of judges who rule on cases outside of the court of law. When a person is rendered “guilty,” a hitman is contacted and the sentence is carried out in a swift and brutal manner.
When a couple of thugs implicated in a child porn ring go free, Douglas is pushed too far and joins the star chamber. After placing a hit on the two men, it is revealed that they had nothing to do with the crime. However, the men are obviously not upstanding citizens, so Douglas has to decide whether the cost of killing possibly innocent men outweighs the value of being able to take out the truly guilty.
Thus, the basic problem of vigilante justice is revealed. The Star Chamber has a great set up, goading the audience into sympathizing with the judges and their frustration over the shortcomings of the system. It then tries to twist the story around to show how taking the law into one’s own hands can go wrong. By avoiding a black and white approach, it remains somewhat realistic and thought provoking.
Unfortunately, things become rushed toward the end, and the film veers off the cliff into ill conceived action movie territory. It’s hard to imagine anyone being satisfied with the ending, and almost seems as if studio execs had stepped in at the last minute and changed the direction of the film.
The Star Chamber is worth watching for any fan of vigilante films or 70s and 80s crime movies in general. The cinematography retains a decent amount of grit, and the cast does what they can with the material. Holbrook is excellent, Douglas is average, Yaphet Kotto is great as usual (but pretty much wasted on a minor part), and Don Calfa (Return of the Living Dead) and Joe Regalbuto (Murphy Brown) are likeably over the top as the “innocent” criminals. James Sikking also turns in a great character role as the father of a young murder victim. There is also a humorous scene-chewing performance by John DiSanti (I think) as Kotto’s partner.
This film was obviously designed to provoke debate, and it probably succeeded in that. However, its flaws were apparent and it tanked at the box office. There is a remake in the works, and depending on who is involved, it might actually fare better than the original. But I’m not getting my hopes up; it will probably be another Hollywood special effects wank job by the time it gets released.
BLANKED AS ORDERED 