Reversal of Fortune (1990) User Reviews

Fascinating character studies

[DennisLittrell · 8/10 · 23 July 2003]

Striking, if sometimes creepy, performances by Glenn Close and Jeremy Irons highlight this unevenly directed take on the Claus Von Bulow story of the degenerate rich adapted from the book by Harvard Law School Professor Alan Dershowitz. Dershowitz, who loves being in the limelight almost as much as he loves the law, took on the task of saving Claus Von Bulow from prison for the attempted murder of his rich wife initially as a means of raising money to help him in his pro bono cases. The rather heavy-handed manner in which we are advised of this should not detract from Dershowitz's work. The irony is that as the case developed Dershowitz became persuaded that Claus was innocent.

Whether Dershowitz convinced himself of Von Bulow's innocence to assuage a possibly guilty conscience is a good question. Remember Dershowitz is the guy who said after the O.J. Simpson trial (he was one of Simpson's lawyers) that he didn't know whether Simpson was guilty or not. While that may be a good stance for a defense attorney, it is an insincere one for the public figure that Dershowitz has become.

Starring as Dershowitz is Ron Silver in an uneven performance that at times made me think of Gabe Kaplan doing a young and uncomedic Groucho Marx. I wonder if Dershowitz was entirely flattered.

Director Barbet Schroeder (Barfly 1987; Single White Female 1992) uses several points of view to tell the story, including a voice-over from Glenn Close's Sunny Von Bulow as she lies comatose, but also from recollections by Jeremy Irons' Claus Von Bulow. We see some scenes twice, colored by the differing points of view. This technique is entirely appropriate since what really happened is far from clear to this day. It is Claus Von Bulow's fortune that was reversed. Whether the first two juries or the third were right is something Schroeder leaves for the audience to determine.

But make no mistake about it: the heart of the movie is Jeremy Irons' Oscar-winning performance. His subtle artistry based on a deep conception (true to life or not) of the aristocratic and Germanic Claus allowed him to create a persona that is cold and aloft, yet somehow sympathetic. The contrast with Silver's Brooklyn-born hyper-energetic Dershowitz made for some good cinematic chemistry, although sometimes it came across like nice Jewish boy defends a vampire.

Glenn Close's flawless rendition of the idle, drug-befouled Sunny reminds us once again that she is a great actress. Unfortunately I don't think Schroeder spent as much time and energy as he should have with the people who played Dershowitz's law students. They seemed amateurish and unconvincing in just about every scene. And there were too many of them--law students, that is. Some distillation of intent, and more directorial guidance might have helped.

Nicholas Kazan's script has a number of good lines in it, not the least of which is this: Dershowitz: "You are a very strange man." Claus Von Bulow: "You have no idea." Also nice was Von Bulow's observation after they are seated in the restaurant and after the waiter has called him "Doctor" Von Bulow: "When I was married to Sunny, we never got this table. Now, two injections of insulin and I'm a doctor." Indeed it is partly Kazan's snappy, comedic and self-revelatory lines that humanize Claus Von Bulow's character and persuade us that he could very well be innocent.

While I like Dershowitz's self-serving style and his confidence, what I admire most about the man is his realistic conception of the defense attorney's role in our society and his idea of what makes a good lawyer; that is, a good lawyer is one who recognizes not only that every person deserves the best defense their resources allow, but that he himself deserves to defend those with the best resources.

(Note: Over 500 of my movie reviews are now available in my book "Cut to the Chaise Lounge or I Can't Believe I Swallowed the Remote!" Get it at Amazon!)

"What do you give a wife that has everything? ..... (long pause).... a shot of insulin." - Claus Von Bulow

[MichaelMargetis · 7/10 · 14 September 2005]

Barbet Schroeder's darkly comic murder mystery 'Reversal of Fortune' was actually better than I thought it would be. It surrounds a social climber Claus Von Bulow (Jeremy Irons - Lolita) who is Charged and convicted with the double counts of attempted murder on his obnoxious and drunken wife Sunny Von Bulow (Glenn Close - Fatal Attraction) with insulin. Claus needs a lawyer to appeal so he contacts a stereo-typical Jewish lawyer, Alan Dershowitz, played incredibly by Ron Silver. Alan takes on Claus' case even though he believes him to be guilty and Alan and his team try to prove him innocent. Glenn Close gives a small but engrossing performance in this as the not so sympathetic victim while Jeremy Irons steals the entire film with his creepy and neurotic yet brilliant and amazing performances as the could-be murderer Claus. The screenplay is really solid and although kind of predictable offers nice thrills and very dark humor. 'Reversal of Fortune' rightfully won Jeremy Irons the Oscar for Best Actor in a Leading Role. If you want something kind of out-there be sure to rent 'Reversal of Fortune' one of these days. Grade: B

Lifestyles of the rich and murderous

[blanche-2 · 8/10 · 29 August 2011]

Ron Silver is Alan Dershowitz, the brilliant attorney who takes on Claus von Bulow's murder conviction on appeal in "Reversal of Fortune," a 1990 film starring Glenn Close and Jeremy Irons, beautifully directed by Barbet Schroeder. The film, of course, is based on the notorious von Bulow case. Sunny von Bulow was a socialite who became brain dead, and her husband, Claus, was accused of injecting her with insulin in an attempt to kill her. Sunny lived in a coma for nearly 28 years.

Sunny (Close) herself narrates the story, beginning when Claus (Irons) calls Dershowitz and asks him to take his appeal. Dershowitz takes the case and involves his law students (including a very young Felicity Huffman) in it.

It's all left pretty ambiguous - Sunny tells us that this is all we can know for now. Though von Bulow was found guilty of attempted murder at the first trial, Dershowitz won his appeal, and von Bulow was found not guilty at a second trial. After that, von Bulow moved to England. Since his daughter Cosima had taken his side in the case, Cosima's maternal grandmother disinherited her. In order to get her back in the will, von Bulow gave up any claim to Sunny's money.

Glenn Close is excellent as the unhappy Sunny - a woman beset by health and weight problems as well as drug addiction and her husband's infidelity. But the backbone of the story is the character of Claus, and here Jeremy Irons does a fantastic job and deservedly received an Oscar for it. He is cold, unemotional, snobbish, and really makes you wonder if he did it or not.

There are other good performances in the film, including that of Fisher Stevens as a supposed witness, the great Uta Hagen as Sunny's devoted maid, Christine Baranski as Claus' new girlfriend ("I told him, get the Jew," she tells Dershowitz), and Julie Hagerty as Alexandra Isles.

After the first trial, I transcribed an interview with one of the jurors, and boy, did he think Claus did it. Despite the second verdict, "did he or didn't he" is a shadow that will always hang over Claus von Bulow.

How Good Is This Film?..."You Have No Idea!"

[peacham · 15 May 2002]

Ever since the film premiered in 1990 Jeremy Iron's portrayal of the Aristocratic Claus Von Bulow has been etched in my memory. Iron's has without question created one of the most brilliantly layered historical characterizations to ever grace the screen.He gets to the heart of the haughty Von Bulow and brings us as close to liking the man as anyone ever could.His performance rightly won Him an Oscar for Best Actor. Just as engaging is Ron Silver's driven and hyper Alan Dershowitz. his performance of the great trail lawyer is facinatingly accurate. Having seen Dershowitz speak and meeting him afterwards it is very clear that Silver was able to capture even the smallest details of the man's movements,vocal inflections and dynamic rhetoric(Dersowitz himself claimed Silver used a tad too many hand gestures however!)

The supporting cast is equally strong. Glenn Close narrates the film as the comatose Sunny Von Bulow and appears in flashback during the events that lead to her coma. She captures Sunny's selfishness as well as her vulnerability. The great Uta Hagan appears as Sunny's maid and protector and give a performance worthy of her reputation.

Barbet Schroeder slickly directs the film,not as a linier plot but as a series of flashbacks,moments and current incidents. This is one of the few films that I cannot find a single flaw in.For direction,plot,characterization,writing..and Jeremy Iron's wonderful performance this film is an absolute 10!

Strange but good

[onepotato2 · 7/10 · 28 February 2008]

Early on in this movie, Jeremy Irons delivers a line so poorly, that he just comes off as Jeremy Irons doing a terrible impression of Claus von Bulow ("Becauwz, Sunny detested dawk-tawrs!") If you were to roll your eyes and turn it off there, you'd miss a dryly funny, creepy, sad movie based on a nonfiction legal procedural... which is pretty bizarre in and of itself. This view into the lives of the idle rich is stunning.

The movie is narrated by Sunny von Bulow from her coma, which is only the second time I've seen a device like this used. (Sunset Blvd you'll recall, has an atypical narrator). People take issue with the narration, but I found the conceit to be the reason the movie grabbed my attention. Sunny's narration haunts the characters. Her august, bitter pronouncements lend the movie a compelling tone, which she and the movie wouldn't have if she was limited to just living scenes. The freedom the creative team feels in adapting a non-fiction news item is exhilarating: Narrating from a coma? A ghost-cam? A funny docu-drama about killing your wife? A deliberately chilly blue cast to the cinematography... Black humor from Irons sounding like Boris Karloff... What a mash-up. It does makes me wonder how such an unflattering portrait of Sunny was allowed by her children. And Irons more than makes up for that early dud line with many acid subtle readings. Lastly the film has an eerie, amorphous score that is very nice.

If I take issue with anything it's the Dershowitz (Ron Silver) portion of the film; which comprises a lesser, more sanctimonious product. With a "diversity-approved team" of coeds seemingly borrowed from 'the kids from Fame,' who generally give bad, uber-sincere performances that almost tank the movie.

Ultimately a woman with unlimited freedom and money is nonetheless shown to be as deliriously unhappy as anyone else. Irons won the Oscar, but Glenn Close inhabits her role also. She's quite good. Just rent it.

A delightful movie. Bravo!

[cdavis-6 · 8/10 · 23 October 2000]

I really enjoyed "Reversal of Fortune." It was a wonderful, satiric (take your pick: black comedy/crime drama/mystery). The acting was tremendous. Jeremy Irons was fantastic and his performance was definitely Oscar-worthy. The movie itself pushed the lines between arguing the truth and arguing the facts. Although the movie was never clear on whether Claus was in fact guilty or not, the movie was actually more enjoyable because of its ambiguity. The tactics used by Dershowitz were very convincing and plausible. One thing I must complain about was the addition of Sarah's relationship with Alan into the film, which wasn't very well done. Otherwise, fun for the whole family, if your family is a sardonic, evil, emotionless wreck.

Now I'm Conflicted

[view_and_review · 7/10 · 23 February 2020]

A few years ago I read the book "The Von Bulow Affair" by William Wright. He certainly didn't share Alan Dershowitz's belief in Claus Von Bulow's innocence. In fact, his book points very much towards Von Bulow's guilt. "Reversal of Fortune" is based upon Alan Dershowitz's book of the same title. He was the defense attorney Claus Von Bulow (Jeremy Irons) hired after he was convicted of two counts of attempted murder.

"Reversal of Fortune" picks up with Claus Von Bulow hiring Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz (Ron Silver) to defend him on appeal to overturn a conviction of attempted murder of his wife, Sunny Von Bulow (Glen Close). The movie goes into the full scale and in-depth work Dershowitz and his students engage in to defend Von Bulow. Interestingly enough, author William Wright believes Von Bulow hired Dershowitz, not because he was innocent, but because Dershowitz was the preeminent attorney in finding legal loopholes to get his clients off.

"Reversal of Fortune" is engaging even for the legal novice. It's brimming with legal arguments and strategy. And even though it is a story primarily from Dershowitz's and Von Bulow's perspective Von Bulow doesn't come off as guilt free. Though I didn't finish the movie fully believing in Von Bulow's innocence, I'm certainly not as convinced of his guilt as I was before.

Taut drama, great acting

[kjff · 8/10 · 20 June 2005]

This one is a big winner! Based on the true story of the trial of Claus von Buelow and conviction of murdering his socialite wife and rich heiress, and famed attorney Alan Dershowitz's handling of his appeal.

This movie takes a fascinating topic, a fine book and terrific acting, mixes them all together and bakes a winner. But it is the acting that is supreme.

Another wonderful performance by Glenn Close (is there nothing she can't play) but an absolute smasher by Jeremy Irons as von Buelow. I've seen this movie several times (and read the book) and I still can't make a judgment on whether von Buelow did it. Irons' portrayal of von Buelow is that good.

money and murder

[mjneu59 · 7/10 · 29 December 2010]

The facts in the case of Claus von Bülow, convicted of murdering his wife but later acquitted in a headline-grabbing re-trial, are filtered through a European sense of irony into a portrait of icy upper-crust alienation and detachment. The film itself is no less aloof than its subject, favoring the legal technicalities of the case over its moral implications (the team of legal eagles defending the accused killer even wear nifty self-promotional t-shirts), and contrasting the upper class ice of von Bülow to the blue-collar fire of his lawyer (Ron Silver). Jeremy Irons gives a pitch-perfect reading of his character's cold, careless life of privilege, while Glenn Close plays the ill-fated Sunny von Bülow as a somewhat more pathetic variation of her psycho role in 'Fatal Attraction'. Her clumsy death-bed voice-over narration is an awkward attempt to balance the scales of justice, but in the end both the film and the legal case favor the defendant, with ace attorney Silver presenting his client as a public scapegoat for daring to fulfill every henpecked husband's darkest fantasy. In which case the film itself has to be regarded as the same browbeaten husband's perfect daydream of legal vindication.

Cold, and cruel and the way of the world...

[MarieGabrielle · 10/10 · 27 June 2006]

That is Sonny von Bulow's narrative as she describes the marriage between her and Claus, an infamous fortune seeker, who had made his way in the world the old fashioned way- he inherited it, by marriage.

This is an intriguing story because it is based on truth, and both Glenn Close and Jeremy Irons give stellar performances. It is trite but true; money has not brought happiness to either of these people. Sonny has apparently led a life of depression, eating disorders, alcoholism and prescription drug abuse. Claus was probably no stranger to similar vices, as well as episodic infidelity. It may have been even more interesting had the screenplay delved into their earlier years, lifestyles in Europe and world travel, living a hedonistic life.

In this case, murder is a nebulous concept. Claus von Bulow insists he is innocent, yet his many assertions to attorney Alan Dershowitz indicate otherwise. von Bulow is calculating, mysterious, and cold. Does this indicate guilt? The audience is never completely informed. That is what makes the story so real. As in real life, when murderers are set free, one may never know the truth. There is also a good side-story where Dershowitz is attempting to save two young black males from a death sentence. He does their case "pro bono", for the sake of justice, whereas von Bulow's case, as Dershowitz proclaims, is paying for their defense.

Overall, this is a tragic story which leaves many grey areas, one wonders how the children, Alex and Alah have survived this debacle. Another viewpoint would be an interesting screenplay. 10/10.

Dershowitz is portrayed by Ron Silver, who projects a realistic image.

Flashbacks bring a famous case to life

[timmy_501 · 7/10 · 15 May 2010]

All I knew that it was a courtroom drama of some type. Thus I was pleasantly surprised that it isn't really courtroom bound; the film consists mostly of famous lawyer Alan Dershowitz working on his latest case which the audience is familiarized with through the generous use of flashbacks. The film is concerned with a rich woman who is in a coma following an overdose of some kind. Her less wealthy husband has already been convicted of her murder and it's up to Dershowitz and his crew of student aides to overturn this conviction in a higher court.

The film is diverting enough not to be a drag but it isn't particularly memorable. The main flaw is the narration from the comatose woman that adds nothing and doesn't mesh with the sober tone of the rest of the film. The apparent purpose of this framing narration is to give the victim (and actress Glenn Close) more screen time but this throws off the pacing in a few spots. Still, the film seems to do a fairly good job of covering the facts

Reversing conviction

[TheLittleSongbird · 8/10 · 16 February 2019]

Had actually seen 'Reversal of Fortune' for the first time years ago, thought it a very good film then and was bowled over by Jeremy Irons' performance. Yet inexplicably, it took me such a long time getting round to review it with so much going on and so much seen since. Decided to refresh my memory in seeing it again, being someone who thinks very highly of both Irons (my main reason actually in seeing it again) and Glenn Close and who wanted to see whether it was as good as remembered.

'Reversal of Fortune' did turn out to be as good as remembered, and considering that that has not been the case with all films that is a relief. Although there were a couple of problems had with it this time round that weren't noticeable before, it actually was also an even better experience this time. What stuck out to me as good on first viewing still stands out as good now, would go as far as to say great, while with more knowledge of the real-life case and with a (hopefully) wider film taste since there was even more to appreciate about 'Reversal of Fortune'. It was a brave risk doing the film when the real Claus Von Bulow was still alive and the case a long way from forgotten with feelings still raw (the outcome of the appeal having occured only in 1985, Irons very nearly didn't do the film or was nervous about taking on the role of Claus apparently for this reason), and the risk paid off thankfully.

Anybody who is familiar with the case won't be surprised by the outcome, though actually with the film's purposeful ambiguity in regard to the guilt/innocence this wasn't a problem. For me, neither was the inconclusiveness with the film intentionally leaving things open. It will frustrate some, especially those not familiar with the real-life story and wanting every aspect answered, though those with knowledge of the story and taking into account how soon the film was made after the events with the subjects still alive should find it far more understandable from personal opinion. Actually thought it was a good decision to do that and a tasteful one.

There is not an awful lot wrong actually with 'Reversal of Fortune'. Did feel though that inexperience did show in the directing and acting in a few of the scenes with the law students. The scenes were still interesting and sharply written, offering an insightful perspective on the legal work and preparation for the case which the film focuses on a good deal, but the trial, flashback and Claus-Alan Dershowitz interaction scenes felt much tighter, more rehearsed and more polished somehow.

On the other hand, 'Reversal of Fortune' looks great. It's very slickly and stylishly photographed, taking full advantage of the classy costume and production design/locations reminiscent of 'The Great Gatsby' sort of style. The music is every bit as haunting and unsettling as the narration, without any over-emphasis needed. Barbet Schroeder's direction has its uneven spots, but much of it, particularly in the interactions between Claus and Dershowitz and the emotional detachment within the family which was intriguingly eerie, indicates someone who really engaged with the story and was in control of it. A major strength is the script, it is very intelligent and thoughtful structured tightly and rich in dark humour and deliciously deep irony. Things that are obvious in Claus' (the one with all the script gems) dialogue, including one of Irons' most iconic and quotable lines of any of his films in "You have no idea" (referenced briefly in 'The Lion King' when he voiced Scar).

What was especially surprising with the script was the narration. Have always been very mixed on narration in film and have found with too many films that it is not needed and not used well, overuse and over-explanation being big offenders. 'Reversal of Fortune' is one of the best examples of how to do narration on film for me, it is an atypical kind of narration being told by a character one doesn't expect to do so and it is very cleverly used. It has a very haunting effect and achieves what narration doesn't too often do in film and should do when used, it moves the story forward, makes it clearer rather than confusing it and keeps one up to date. It didn't feel like it over-explained at all and intrigued in alternative to irritated. The story is from start to finish thoroughly absorbing, with an interesting focus and told tactfully, personally didn't find it biased and that the characterisation had enough layers and shade to avoid caricature. Dershowitz is juicily written here, but what is also fascinating about Claus in particular was how enigmatic he was and how easy it was to feel hate and sympathy for him, not an easy feat to achieve. Found myself very engrossed and caring for how it would turn out and whether Claus was innocent or guilty.

The three leads are on top form. Close plays Sunny's small unsympathetic role in a way that's truly unsettling yet at times vulnerable, Claus and Dershowitz are far meatier roles and are on screen for longer but it is very difficult to forget Close's presence when she does haunt the mind and really did try to give Sunny nuance. Ron Silver, with the most to do of the three, comamnds the screen throughout with effortless bravura and he was clearly having fun here, his animated presence being such fun to watch. Irons was the one who stayed in my memory the most though, here he is in one of the bravest roles of that year, for reasons mentioned earlier on, and of his career (along with those in 'Dead Ringers', that he wasn't even nominated for that performance was one of that year's most inexplicable oversights/omissions that year, and 'Lolita') and to this day his performance-of-a-lifetime acting (enigmatic, cold, haughty, chilling and darkly humorous) here is some of his career's finest, in how he managed to avoid making Claus caricaturish and one-dimensional and instead making him greatly fascinating and layered. Regarding the debate as to whether he deserved the Oscar, it was a strong category that year with all the nominees worthy and in my mind he did deserve it, and he deserved one for 'Dead Ringers' as well which he was even better in.

Summarising, very good film. 8/10 Bethany Cox

Dramatization of a True Story

[claudio_carvalho · 6/10 · 10 July 2010]

On 27 December 1979, the millionaire Sunny von Bülow (Glenn Close) is found in coma for the second time in her bathroom with an overdose of insulin. Her European husband Claus von Bülow (Jeremy Irons) is convicted for attempted murder of Sunny, but he hires the expensive Harvard Professor Alan Dershowitz (Ron Silver) to revert his sentence. Dershowitz teams up with his students to collect evidences to disprove the accusation and prove the innocence of Claus.

"Reversal of Fortune" is the dramatization of a true story based on the book of Alan M. Dershowitz. The originality of the screenplay is that it details the work of Dershowitz and his students to disprove the prosecution and the trial itself is just glanced. I do not like this type of inconclusive films based on true stories since the truth is not disclosed. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "O Reverso da Fortuna" ("The Reversal of the Fortune")

Cold and Dry

[itamarscomix · 5/10 · 22 December 2012]

Reversal of Fortune is a dramatization of a real-life attempted murder case, as documented in the book by the same title which was written by Alan M. Dershowitz, defense attorney to the main suspect, Claus von Bülow. The film works as a solid little courtroom drama with an intriguing story, a clever script and an impressive cast; but it doesn't go the extra mile into something more than a daytime TV movie. It tries hard to break the mold - most notably, by having much of the film narrated by the victim - but at heart, it remains a very plain legal drama; and emotionally, it maintains a dry, distant coldness that doesn't allow the viewer to care about anything that's going on. That feeling of emotional disconnection leads to a film with a steady pace, with no highs and lows, and with no real climaxes or tension. In other words - rather dull, and unless you really pay attention to the details of the case, there's nothing much to grab onto.

It's also worth mentioning that the film's poster, as well as Jeremy Irons's Oscar win, is more than a bit misleading, because Irons and Glenn Close aren't really the main characters, though the story revolves around them; and in fact Irons's performance is completely over-the-top and certainly not up to the standards he set two years earlier with his masterful work on Dead Ringers. The majority of the film revolves around Ron Silver, who plays Dershowitz himself; and while Silver's performance is understated and quiet, it's also the strongest one in the film. But it's just not enough to give it any emotional or moral weight and to keep the whole thing together, because the viewer doesn't care about Dershowitz winning or losing the trial any more then they do about Von Bülow being found guilty or not.

Schroeder's "Rebecca"

[manuel-pestalozzi · 6 January 2004]

Reversal of Fortune sent more chills down my spine than any horror movie. The story once more proves why real murder cases are so interesting: It is not a (supposed) criminal act or the lawsuit that fascinates but the detailed insight into human relations and behavior patterns which a investigation of the circumstances allows. Barbet Schroeder, certainly a brilliant observer, seems to share this view and created a wonderfully stylized, finely crafted, superbly cast movie around the Claus von Bülow trial.

Fotography, lighting and the set design really are of the first order. The main "stage" of the film is a big mansion in Newport, Rhode Island. I don't know how much of the movie was shot on location - in any case the place reminded me strongly of Manderly, the country home in Alfred Hitchcock‘s "Rebecca". Somehow Sunny von Bülow, she is seen lying in her state of eternal coma and heard recounting events and musing about them in a voice over, is the mythical Rebecca Hinrich become flesh and blood in the most gruesome way imaginable.

The home of the von Bülows has the feel of a funeral parlor. The most important room is Sunny von Bülow's private bathroom, the door of which is flanked by two porcelain busts on high pedestals, like some gate of doom. Despite the warm colors, the opulent furniture, the glossy surfaces (they seem to come out directly of an old fashioned women's magazine), it is deadly cold in the world of the von Bülows. The emotional detachment of the whole family - apparently even the children - is truly horrific. The most hilarious scene is ever expressionless Claus von Bülow joining his wife in the marital bed with a thick sweater, a scarf and a woolen cap (Sunny von Bülows insists on keeping the window open on principle even in freezing temperatures). He turns away from his wife and, as the last act before turning off the light, puts his earplugs in.

Oh, and then there is law professor Dershowitz and his team. What has he got to do with this movie? Very little, I should say. The bubbly intellectualistic crowd occasionally allow the viewers to relax a little, but their sporadic intrusions into the "circle" of the von Bulows in no way counterbalance the weight and the frigid opulence that comes to dominate Reversal of Fortune. And that's just fine with me – as far as cinematic art is concerned.

Dershowitz reverses good possibilities

[Kakueke · 6/10 · 8 December 2001]

"Reversal of Fortune" has many elements of a fine movie. The details of the captivating circumstances surrounding Sunny von Bulow's death are explored in depth, coming to the fore in a legal context, a good choice. Glenn Close as Sunny is so-so, but Jeremy Irons as Claus is excellent. The world of the rich and famous is screened effectively, and the plot, with and without legal twists, moves along well.

I do not agree with those who say that this movie is even-handed. It is clearly biased in favor of Claus as far as the principal charges against him. However, this is only the beginning of attorney and director Alan Dershowitz's contamination of the film. A disgusting, sleazy person in real life, Dershowitz manipulates the screenplay in line with his desire for self-serving, pompous ego gratification. Also, remember that in real life he always criticizes those who oppose him of not telling the truth, in contrast to his absolutely truthful statement when asked by TV interviewers well after the trial whether his client O.J. Simpson was guilty of murder: "I don't know."

Dershowitz (played by Ron Silver) rationalizes his atypical representation of an affluent client (a lie anyway -- witness O.J., Mike Tyson, and Leona Helmsley) -- why not just say you are out for yourself, Alan? This down-to-earth man of the people plays basketball with his students. Of course, helping poor black kids falsely accused is worked in prominently, and Dershowitz ultimately tells Claus he has indirectly helped poor black kids by retaining him as his attorney. Deeply moving, and Claus -- cares? Dershowitz could not resist hamming up his "impossible" legal victory over a judge, citing the judge's own apparent contradictory ruling -- it was face-to-face with the judge, which is another "of course."

Nauseating scene: On the elevator, Dershowitz righteously (and yes, that is clearly the manner) tells Claus: "Legally, you may be clear, but morally, I don't know." Amen. Dershowitz himself does not live in a glass house, but one covered in slime.

Though it is difficult, I try to separate Dershowitz's persona from the good elements of "Reversal of Fortune." If you are able to, it is definitely worth seeing.

A Unique, Deep, Dark, Psychological, and Suspenseful Film

[hschiller-229-850750 · 10/10 · 3 February 2013]

I love this film. Every shot feels effortlessly dense. In every shot, one can see texture, whether it is in the landscape of a bedroom or a hotel room, or the structure of a man or woman's face. The cinematography is dark and gloomy. The story, as you likely know, as you have either seen the film, or have read the IMDb summary, is about Claus von Bulow, who has been accused of attempting to murder his wife twice, both times sending her into a coma, the first coma which lasts only a few hours, the second which lasted until 2008 and turned Sunny Bulow into a vegetable. The story is, as all good stories are, so multilayered that it seems to evolve as time goes along. Unlike most films made nowadays, and indeed most stories told in history, it is not linear and obvious. The story threatens to go in any direction at any time. All of the characters seem human, balancing on the line of their own soul and being, reaching out toward other people or retracting into themselves. The Main characters are Claus Von Bulow, Sunny Bulow, and Alan Dershowitz. They are each played by great actors. The film is expertly directed and represents each of these characters separate lives. The viewer sees each character as sympathetic but realizes at certain points throughout the film that the characters may have reached a turning point and made a bad choice or perverted their hearts goodness and done wrong towards another. The film has a lot of subtext. Though the characters do come out and state what they are thinking at various points, for the most part the film shows, not tells. Although all the actors do good jobs in this film, the crown must be placed on the head of Jeremy Irons, one of the greatest actors in history. Irons is often mocked for being very dense and inanimated, I personally think this is because most film watchers are used to actors who are less subtle and less skilled than Irons. His subtlety is extraordinary. This performance may be the most subtle in film history. The performance is mysterious and dark, unexpressibly creepy, but also sympathetic. At one point int he film(don't worry, this isn't a spoiler),Claus von Bulow leans slightly forward in a car, with his head almost completely in shadow and responds to Alan Dershowitz claim "You are a strange man," with the words "You have no idea." Irons is just brilliant. His performance must be seen. The film as a whole explores many theme, favoring emotion and thematic depth over bare bones plot. One of the more interesting themes is the idea that every moment is in the now, and so every human being is freshly born every minute and so they must be forgiven for wrong things they have done in the past. Another theme is the idea that no one truly knows another person, that all people have secrets, hidden characteristics and emotions that are hidden even to themselves as well as to other people. This is the theme I fell that this patient film expresses best. It is well paced and allows you to feel every scene before moving on to the next. The film also explores the importance of humor and the need for humor in humanity. This provides great unexpected moments throughout the film. This is one of my favorite films in history. It is so patient in the camera-work and performances. It feels like more than an interpretation. It feels like a reality or at least a possibility. This is a rare achievement. It is an uncategorizable experience, a great work of art, and a film of astonishing depth. It is one of the few that reaches the true depth of the soul. it does not only confirm something that other films have told us. It twists and turns, until the viewer and the film and the characters are all one. An excellent film.

Fascinating but ultimately pointless puzzle of a movie.

[gridoon · 7/10 · 26 June 2003]

"Reversal of Fortune" is a fascinating study of the "relativity" of truth, of the way certain events can be seen and judged from many different perspectives. At the same time, there is a certain pointlessness and even redundancy about a movie whose ultimate message seems to be "you can never know the absolute truth". After all, didn't we all know that before we sat down to watch the movie in the first place? It does keep your interest, make no mistake about that, but it is rather cold and distant (as is, intentionally, Jeremy Irons' performance), and not as emotionally gripping as it should have been. (***)

Money doesn't buy happiness.

[wardkm · 8/10 · 23 October 2000]

This is one of the better dramas based on a true story because it portrays the fact that money doesn't buy happiness. The movie was about the appeal of Claus von Bulow who was convicted of attempting to murder his wife, Sunny. The movie only eluded to Claus's innocence and never revealed the events that actually took place. Although there were speculations about how Sunny fell into her coma, the truth will never be known. The truth is only relative and favorable to the storyteller. The purpose of the appeal was to show that Claus couldn't be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Alan Dershowitz, Claus's appeal lawyer, did this by disproving the theory of the prosecutors. The reason Alan Dershowitz took the case wasn't because he believed Claus was guilty or innocent. He defended Claus because he disagreed with the idea that the wealthy can hire their own prosecutors, which allows them to decide what evidence should be used. Dershowitz hired a team of people to disprove every aspect of the prosecutors theory on how Claus attempted to murder Sunny. In conclusion, this was a good movie because it allows the viewer to convict or acquit Claus according to their speculations.

the film is an adamant advocate in defying our conception of "seeking the truth"

[lasttimeisaw · 7/10 · 7 January 2015]

With its opening long shot panning above numerous estates in Rhode Island, REVERSAL OF FORTUNE inks a plaintive sentiment to this morally ambiguous true story, the case of socialite Sunny von Bülow (Close), who descends into an unexplained brain-dead coma in the 1980, and her current husband, Claus von Bülow (Irons) is charged with attempted murder by an overdose of insulin injection. Against all the odds to his trial, Claus hires Alan Dershowitz (Silver) as his defence and eventually gets away with the indictment while the truth remains a moot point. In real life Sunny died in 2008 after almost 28 years as a human vegetable and Alan would be involved as an appellate adviser in another notorious case of O.J. Simpson.

Adapted by Nicholas Kazan from Dershowitz's 1985 book REVERSAL OF FORTUNE: INSIDE THE VON BÜLOW CASE, the film is directed by Franco-Swiss director Barbet Schroeder as the follow-up of BARFLY (1987), when he firstly took a stab in Hollywood. Overall, the film garners 3 Oscar nominations including BEST DIRECTOR for Schroeder and ADAPTED SCREENPLAY for Kazan, plus a substantial win for Irons in the BEST LEADING ACTOR race. So, let's discuss Irons' performance first, wearing a bald wig, Irons' Claus establishes his ambiguity through his Englishman suaveness (from both his style of intonation and vague slyness in his demeanour) and an outward moral superiority. It is a perfect exemplar of his screen persona, fragilely lithe, intelligently elusive, and poisonously charming. In my book, he completes a more demanding and inspiring work in Cronenberg's DEAD RINGERS (1988, 7/10), but I have no qualm of his victory, however, it is patent that alongside a fertile career-path, he hasn't been invited back for another nomination since, which may partially bespeaks that the academy reckons his win is quite enough to acknowledge his versatility in a generous gesture.

A much more perplexing case here is Glenn Close, who was on a hot streak in the 80s and conquered 5 Oscar nominations in 7 years, is completed snubbed here, one possible reason is the category misplacement, because Close is first-billed, thus she might be considered as a lead, however her screen-time is massively less than Irons and Silver (a very coincidental admixture), but she is superb as the rich woman who has nothing to live for, cannot be satisfied sexually and emotionally by her distant husband, stranded in the shore of aberrant medication, while Close manages to squeeze compassion out of the audience, simultaneously, her Sunny is a monstrous pain-in-the-neck to be around, Close influences great driving force for the film, not the least as the solemn voice-over narrating the story in a flashback structure, which brings about a verisimilitude of an uncanny experience where Sunny is coming back from her vegetative state. She is my current win in supporting actress race if there was any justice for her hallow prestige and consistent caliber.

Ron Silver as Alan himself, represents a more mundane facade on the case - the legal activity, although his supposedly dialectical speech can barely be convincing when one of his student Minnie (a young Felicity Huffman) threats to quit because she thinks Claus is not innocent and they should not defence the perpetrator, since it is impossible to erase the whiff of money-grubbing in the process, so within all his movements, at least one part serves as a justification for a more self-seeking cause, which is the sad reality of the legislative system, not so far away in Satan's service. Performance-wise, Silver and Sciorra (as his fellow college Sarah) are a far cry from the elite group of Irons and Close, in any rate, viewers are not interested in their stories at all.

In hindsight, the film is an adamant advocate in defying our conception of "seeking the truth", truth only exists in those who are personally experienced in the particular event, as for outsiders, for the most part, we cannot get an unmitigated version of truth or whatsoever. Let's just forget the fanciful obsession and instead, try to reconcile with the world in a more pliable perspective, that is the spirit!

terrific performances

[SnoopyStyle · 8/10 · 7 September 2016]

Sunny von Bülow (Glenn Close) lies brain dead and in a coma. She would narrate much of the movie. She is a rich socialite in Newport, Rhode Island. Her husband Claus (Jeremy Irons) is suspected by his step-kids and the maid of attempted murder. He stands to inherit $14 million of her fortune. They recruit a former D.A. to investigate. In 1982, the government uses the privately uncovered evidences to convict Claus. Claus hires Professor Alan Dershowitz (Ron Silver) to be his attorney on the advice of his girlfriend Andrea Reynolds (Christine Baranski) to get a Jew. Dershowitz is uncertain of his innocence but he needs money for the defense of two black kids about to be executed in Alabama. He also rejects what is essentially a privatized prosecution. He gathers a team of former colleges and students. Sarah (Annabella Sciorra) is a former girlfriend. Student Minnie (Felicity Huffman) almost walks out refusing to defend a rich guilty guy. David Marriott (Fisher Stevens) is a sleazy witness with damning testimony.

Both Jeremy Irons and Ron Silver are terrific. Irons never lets on his guilt or innocence. The investigation is compelling. There is clarity in the writing. This is based on Dershowitz's book and therefore the opposition doesn't have much screen time. There is real tension about Claus's trial and his guilt. It's a solid trial movie.

Alan Promoting Alan

[bigverybadtom · 6/10 · 15 March 2014]

The words of this review title happened to be written in pen on the videotape box of this movie that I checked out of the library. Whoever wrote them told no lie.

The movie is based on Alan Dershowtiz's book of the same title, where he takes on the appeal of the attempted murder conviction of socialite Klaus von Bulow, who allegedly tried to murder his wife Sunny through an injection of insulin. Dershowitz tells this to his group of college-age legal helpers, one of whom tries to drop out in disgust, but Dershowitz changes her mind by telling her that the idea is to get the money to continue their pro bono legal quest to help two young black ghetto kids who are also facing criminal charges. Dershowitz also mentions that the state of Rhode Island's judiciary has a corrupt legal system. Also, when they do a test of how liquid coats straws, it suggests that the evidence that von Bulow might have injected Sunny with insulin might not be so real after all.

Jeremy Irons gives a good performance as an icy, haughty aristocrat, both in his scenes with Dershowitz and his legal team and with the flashback scenes with him and Sunny. Also, Dershowitz is shown as haughty and pompous in his own right, even if his heart is supposedly in the right place. And the movie does not make any conclusions as to whether von Bulow was guilty or not; no surprise when Dershowitz's tactic was to cast doubt on the evidence that his client actually made any attempt to kill his wife, even if he had a motive to do so. Indeed, the movie implies that Sunny had mental problems and was probably suicidal.

Dershowitz might have wanted to come across as a hero doing his job. The latter is certainly true, but he has proved no more heroic than any other defense lawyer.

Very Good, Well Casted Movie

[gbheron · 8/10 · 3 November 2001]

"Reversal of Fortune" is based on Alan Dershowitz's book on the two trials of Claus von Bülow, accused of attempting to murder his wife, Sunny, by drug overdose. But instead of killing her, she is left in a deep coma from which she will never arise. This movie is cleverly narrated by the comatose Sunny with the story told in flashback. Also, the movie is non-judgmental, it take no sides on who is telling the truth, even on the point of whether a murder was even attempted. Did he do it or was the overdose an accident? As Sonny herself says in the beginning of the movie, "you tell me".

Everything about this movie works; great performances (helped by great casting), directing, and screenwriting. Nothing is amiss. If it is true that Western movie habits are changing away from mindless action movies, then "Reversal of Fortune" should enjoy a renaissance at the local video store. It deserves it.

Was Irons channeling Boris Karloff?

[bobbobwhite · 6/10 · 6 February 2008]

Even though Jeremy Irons won an Oscar for his odd and removed performance, I swear, if I close my eyes as I "watch" this film, I can listen to him speak and imagine that he was really playing the lead in The Boris Karloff Story. His identical Brit accent to old Boris would surely have won an Oscar, if there was one, for Best Actor's Voice in Playing a Dead Brit Actor Famous For Playing Frankenstein.

Well made film, but didn't care much for the story as written as it distorted Bulow's case(what's new with that in Hollywood?), and he definitely was guilty of despicable murder no matter what the courts said, just as OJ Simpson, Robt. Blake, and Phil Spector were, and they all got off by having very expensive, celebrity lawyers. Bulow was smarter than all 3 of those dopes put together, so any real justice in his case was a joke as he outwitted everyone in his cold and high toned, arm's length manner. In addition, there is no real justice for high profile offenders in celebrity-worshiping America these days. "All the justice that money can buy" is the name of the game in this money crazy country where we worship those who have lots of it more than we ever did God.

Utterly creepy!

[majikstl · 4/10 · 2 December 2001]

When you're finished watching this film you are likely to believe two things: 1) Claus von Bulow got away with the attempted murder of his socialite wife because 2) his lawyer, Alan Dershowitz, is totally amoral. Faced with a client who he obviously believes is probably guilty, Dershowitz resorts to one of the least respected of all legal tactics: blaming the victim. The film - co-written by Dershowitz - degenerates from a rather ordinary legal drama into an endless series of attacks on the character of Sunny von Bulow, who, being in a coma, is hardly in any shape to defend herself. The film aggressively suggests that if Sunny von Bulow didn't cause her own misfortune, she certainly had it coming to her. Such a tactic is dangerous in a courtroom, because it can loose the jury's sympathy. But in a movie, especially one as one-sided and biased as this, it is a safe and even cowardly action. Watching this movie is like being allowed only to hear one side of the case. Anything damaging to Claus von Bulow is mentioned only if Dershowitz can rationalize it away; anything offered in defense of Sunny von Bulow's character (testimony or actions of friends and relatives) is rapidly discredited.

But what moves the film from being merely a nasty, self-serving ego trip for Dershowitz into the realm of the utterly creep and despicable is the cinema trick of having Sunny offer testimony. Though comatose and vegetating in bed, Dershowitz and director Barbet Schroeder put words into Sunny's mouth, making her a totally unwilling voice-over witness in von Bulow's defense. Dershowitz could never get away with such a thing in a court of law, but he obviously has no moral qualms about manipulating history and reality to try to justify his own dubious legal integrity in the court of cinematic public opinion. The villain in Reversal of Fortune is not Claus von Bulow, who, as embodied by Jeremy Irons in a quirky one-note performance, seems to be his own worse enemy. The villain here is Dershowitz (and the legal system he represents) who seems to believe winning - no matter what the cost - is more important than justice and feeding one's own ego is its own reward. The only saving grace in this callous film is that all involved are so shallow and unsympathetic one never really cares about the guilt or innocence of any of them.