The Trial (1993)

Absolutely Brilliant!

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

The book is marvellous and the 1963 Orson Welles film is every bit as good, even if less faithful than this version from 1993. 'The Trial' does follow the book closely in detail, but what makes the book and the previous film so powerful is lost in translation in an adaptation that is perhaps somewhat too faithful.By all means, 'The Trial' is not irredeemable. It looks great, being very beautifully photographed and with settings that are both attractive and atmospheric. It's sensitively scored too, without being too intrusive or low-key. There are also a few good performances, Anthony Hopkins steals the film (even if his screen time is rather brief), Juliet Stevenson is wonderfully authoritative and Jason Robards gives energy.However, Kyle MacLachlan is very bland, the character is not very interesting here but MacLachlan is lacking in screen presence and charisma. The rest of the cast don't stand out.Other big problems are some really leaden pacing that fails to give the film much life and a story that never ignites fire, lacking the crucial darkness, emotional power (emotionally 'The Trial' is incredibly distant) and is too academic, disjointed and not always having cohesion. The script is also dull, awkward and heavy handed. The direction is too staid.In conclusion while following the book closely it's a case that's not really a good thing and it just feels bland. 3/10 Bethany Cox

The original Orson Welles film "The Trial" is a brilliant dark and brooding masterpiece with some of the greatest cinematography of all time.This film is the exact opposite.Joseph K. awakes one morning, to find two strange men in his room, telling him he has been arrested. Joseph is not told what he is charged with, and despite being "arrested," is allowed to remain free and go to work. But despite the strange nature of his arrest, Joseph soon learns that his trial, however odd, is very real, and tries desperately to spare himself from the court's judgement. Shot by a director whose total experience was in TV, this remake comes across as lame made-for-TV rip off of the Welles original.Give this a miss and check out the 1962 classic instead.

This film was OK. The plot went along happily enough, but I thought things were a bit vague as to K's state of mind during the film and the ending seemed anticlimatical. I have not read the book and perhaps this is how it was supposed to be. The silliest thing I noticed about this film is that Anthony Hopkins took up the whole of my DVD cover and then only appeared for around 10 minutes of the about 2 hour film. I find this rather odd and amusing. Otherwise, I thought the film was well acted and had a lovely setting. 6/10

I only wish I had seen this one before the great, claustrophobic masterpiece by Orson Welles. A very good adaptation, and very true to Kafka's story. Some of the issues of human rights seem very fresh in the wake of heightened security stemming from 9/11. Good movie for a dark, lonely night.