With time to reflect I began to see the mastery of this film that had so profoundly provoked my emotions. I was alienated from this film, because there is noone to become involved with here. The only likeable characters have minimal onscreen time. The focus of the film is on John Travolta and Robert Duvall and both are flawed.

Travolta plays Jan Schlichtmann, a personal injury lawyer, often referred to as an ambulance chaser. He's ostentatious but not without his skills. He understands what a person is "worth" in court. More so, he also understands his own ability to make money from the misfortune of others.

In the opposite corner is Duvall as Jerome Facher. Facher is as brilliant a lawyer as Duvall is an actor. We see superb craftsmanship here. And if we dislike Facher, as I do, it stems from the fact that Duvall's particular and painstaking delivery makes his character fastidious.

So the focus of the film is the clash between the flashy showman and the wily artisan. We never see the victims. Travolta explains in the opening scene that dead children are worth little in personal injury court. So we never meet the twelve children who have died because of water pollution in a small Massachusetts town. And we only briefly meet their parents. Kathleen Quinlan as the spokesperson for the parents explains that all they want is an apology. David Thornton as the father of another child, describes his son's death with emotionally intensity. But both parents onscreen time is kept to a minimum. Facher knows they can never testify, they'd win the case.

Travolta complains to the judge that the jury seeks a "human interest drama" and this trial isn't giving it to them. His comment might refer to the film as a whole. "A Civil Action" is not your run of the mill Hollywood courtroom drama. There's no sappy happy ending here--no Tom Cruise to save the day for the underdog.

Instead this film is a biting and tragic examination of the machinations of the law. There's a delightful scene where Facher explains courtroom basics in a voice-over. The camera cuts between Facher teaching his class at Harvard and practicing law in the courtroom. As he articulates the 'dos' and 'don'ts' of any good lawyer, we see them acted out. Facher demonstrates all the pros, Schlictmann is victim to every con.

The film is based on the book by Jonathan Harr and the story is true with typical liberties taken for the screen. But the end result is a sad commentary on the legal system.