Legal Eagles (1986) User Reviews

High Concept, CAA-style!

[britishdominion · 7/10 · 24 August 2003]

Ivan Reitman, fresh off the special effects high of "Ghostbusters" takes on romantic comedy that works in fits and starts in "LEGAL EAGLES".

Robert Redford, with breezy style, is a NYC D.A. who prosecutes at whim. Enter Debra Winger, a scrappy lawyer so desperate, she once chose to put a dog on the stand to make her case. The two fall in love (or about as 80's as it gets - they become partners) in representing an airy client (Daryl Hannah) who may (or may not) have committed a major art fraud/crime.

This is a time-capsule of a film... written by the guys who wrote "Top Gun" and "Dick Tracy", it's a big, over-packaged film that's both romantic comedy, star-vehicle, and glossy, synthetic who-done-it. All the Reitman glitz-and-polish is there (with big setpieces scattered throughout), and the movie is easy on the eyes, especially with Redford's easy, casual performance pulling the viewer along and Reitman's deft comedic touch.

It was also a troubled production to be sure: Bill Murray was once considered for the Winger role, creating a love triangle that would have found Hannah torn between the Sundance Kid and Nick The Lounge Singer - but alas, Murray opted out. In interviews long since the film's release, Winger claims no desire ever to work with Reitman again.

1986's "LEGAL EAGLES" is probably the textbook case of the all-powerful talent agency known as Creative Artists Agency packaging a Real Motion Picture - what industry wags call a "filmed-deal". But is Legal Eagles any good? Sure, I guess. It's competently directed, it makes great use of it's New York City art-world locales, it has a wonderful Elmer Bernstein score, great cinematography by the legendary Laszlo Kovacs and both Winger and Hannah make for delicious eye-candy when pared with Redford. Ultimately, it becomes systematic of what was askew in these "packages": the movie relies solely on the audience goodwill, fine craftsmanship and former successes of its primary players to carry the load. "LEGAL EAGLES" is by no means a failure, but wrapped in such a glossy serving, it's hard to really enjoy anymore than for its quick, empty calories.

I have a soft spot for this film - it's great to see Redford on screen seeming to have such a spirited good time after an absence from movie comedy for a number of years - but after all is said and done, "LEGAL EAGLES" is as enjoyable as a Big Mac, albeit one served on a fine china dinner plate.

PS - the TV version of this film has a curious, bizarre alternate ending which negates the whole court case!

Cast has fun with nonsensical plot

[moonspinner55 · 6/10 · 31 July 2002]

As rival attorneys in New York City, Robert Redford and Debra Winger aren't exactly Tracy and Hepburn (he's too wishy-washy and callow, she's too flighty), but they do get to loosen up a bit from prior roles, creating an amusing give-and-take relationship while defending performance artist Daryl Hannah on murder charges. Plot is so haphazardly constructed that it was re-worked for the TV version and still nobody could figure it out. Redford and Winger get out of a bomb-laden warehouse just in the nick of time, but how they do it will have smart viewers crying foul. There are other problems, not to mention a strange, off-putting show put on by Hannah where she appears to go up in flames, but the charisma of the players is just enough to carry this heavy vehicle to a happy conclusion. The outtakes at the finale are charming, as is Rod Stewart's song "Love Touch". **1/2 from ****

When we serve this community we do it with our pants on!

[sol-kay · 7/10 · 29 June 2005]

**SPOILERS** Even though in the movie "Legal Eagles" Robert Redford as Tom Logan is a top-notch assistant D.A who's a shoo-in to get himself elected as the New York City District Attorney he's also an absent-minded stumble-bum. Who's constantly dropping things around, and on himself,in the home and office as well as always forgetting to take his keys out of his cars ignition when he parks and locks it. Redford or Tom Logan solves that very annoying problem later in the film by smashing in his car's side-widow with a garbage can.

Being picked to prosecute the case against young Chelsea Deardon, Daryl Hannah, in her being indited for the attempted robbery of a painting, from a Mr. Forrester's ,John McMartin, apartment. Chealsea through her defense-attorney Laura Kelly, Debra winger,claimed that the painting by her late dad Sebastian, James Hordle, was left to her by him as a birthday present on the evening that his loft and gallery went up in flames. It's also brought out that that painting, together with scores of other Deardon works, was reportedly destroyed in the fire.

Laura gets Tom to listen to her clients story pointing out how could Chelsea steal something that wasn't supposed to exist? Tom is also amazed that not only does Forrester have the "destroyed" painting but, that according to Chelsea, that the back of the painting has an inscription on it by it's artist dedicating it to her. The next day as both Tom and Laura go to talk to Forrester about these strange inconsistencies their both shocked to hear from him that he's dropping all charges against Chelsea.

Wanting to inspect the painting to see if there's an inscription on the back of it proving that Chelsea's father left it over to her Tom & Laura find out that the painting was just sold to the Taft Gallary which is owned by a former associate of the late Mr. Deardon Victor Taft,Terrence Stamp. What at first looked to be a fraudulent case of art manipulation turns out later to be a case of robbery arson and murder that goes back some 25 years.

There's a genuine chemistry between Robert Redford and Debra Winger in their scenes together without them ever engaging in anything more then discussing the case that their handling. And the gorgeous and leggy, if a bit spaced-out, Daryl Hannah as Chelsea makes you forget what's going on in the film,like she did Tom,whenever she was on the screen or in his bedroom.

We begin to realize later in the film that someone is trying to pin a number of murders, Taft & Forrester, on Chelsea and then with her taking the rap for them get what he's really after: the painting left to her by her dad which is now estimated to be worth millions but who can that person be?

The ending of "Legal Eagles" leaves you a bit confused to what Chelsea really had to do, if anything at all, with the death of Forrester and possibly Taft, who was also her secret lover. Since we assumed up to that point that the case was already solved with the bad guy in the movie ending up in flames and underwater.

Since Chelsea was so unpredictable and unstable you had, like both Tom & Laura, to take whatever she said with not just a grain but an entire truck-load of salt.

A fun mystery/romantic comedy.

[Del-Con · 6 August 1999]

Full of plot holes and expensive excesses, LEGAL EAGLES wouldn't be much without the genuine star power it receives from it's first class cast.

Redford is very charming as the assistant D.A. whose becomes involved with defense lawyer Winger (terrific as always) to solve a case that includes arson, stolen paintings, insurance fraud, and even murder.

The chemistry between Redford and Winger is very much like Spencer and Tracy and is very enjoyable to watch. However, Daryl Hannah steals the show as the slightly off center performance artist who is in the middle of the complex case.

The film's story will not hold up under much thought and the many shots of buildings on fire will only appeal to pyros. Still, this film is fun entertainment and is a must-see if you are a fan of one of the three stars.

I'd rate this a good 6 out of 10.

Well Meaning

[Sarah423 · 7/10 · 12 March 2023]

This is a well-meaning classic from the mid eighties that somehow ended up in our Netflix recommends.

Looking it up, the Ivan Reitman film was supposed to be a comedy thriller.

Not really sure about the comedy parts, though some mild ironies might pass.

However, it is a legal drama and passable as such.

Think if you watched an old Hill Street Blues or original Law and Order--where offerings did focus on cases, but mainly on the interaction of characters there.

Debra Winger (Laura Kelly) and Robert Redford (Tom Logan) carry their weight, as do a number of well known character actors in supporting roles.

Unfortunately, in my opinion at least, Daryl Hannah. (Chelsea Deardon) does not. And the movie is made weaker by her performance.

Was it a passable, well meaning couple of hours? Yes. And great to see faces I remember.

Would I recommend it to friends or watch it again? No.

Enjoyable Timekiller

[dugan49 · 7/10 · 9 December 2020]

While I was watching this movie I was reminded of 70's and 80's tv shows like Hart To Hart and McMillan and Wife. There is a very easy going vibe about Legal Eagles which is both it's good point and it's bad point. Redford and Winger have pretty good chemistry in a lower level Tracy-Hepburn sort of way , which is to say they are somewhere in between those two great stars and Rock Hudson and Susan St James in the McMillan and Wife television series.

Legal Eagles plot is strictly made for tv fare too. There is nothing here we havent seen before in Matlock or Murder She Wrote in terms of plot. So what's good about Legal Eagles ? Robert Redford is a legitimate movie star and he is fine in this movie. And I've always loved Debra Winger , and I wish she would have made more films.

Darryl Hannah plays an oddball artist suspected of murder and she was an interesting counterpoint to the two pretty straitlaced main characters.

Legal Eagles is a satisfactory "date night" type comedy romance with a little thriller thrown in, but nothing more.

The Vidiot Reviews

[capone666 · 6/10 · 31 December 2013]

Legal Eagles

The reason no one dates personal injury lawyers is because they only want to promenade in front of businesses with icy sidewalks.

Luckily, the lawyer in this comedy-thriller is sleeping with a client, not a colleague.

Assistant D.A. Tom (Robert Redford) decides to help attorney Laura (Debra Winger) defend Chelsea (Daryl Hannah) against charges she stole a painting from an art dealer (Terence Stamp).

Adamant her father gave her the painting before his suspicious death - and destruction of his art collection - Chelsea not only convinces Tom but seduces him as well.

But when a dubious cop (Brian Dennehy) uncovers the entire collection intact, it threatens Tom's career and his life.

Crackling with comedic repartee, a fiery May/December romance and an unpredicted adversary, Legal Eagles may be clichéd but it's not without its charms.

Incidentally, if you're going to sleep with anyone in the court system - make it a judge. Yellow Light

vidiotreviews.blogspot.ca

Too lightweight for Redford

[Ralpho · 6/10 · 13 May 2001]

The role of Tom Logan in Legal Eagles is something I could picture Matthew Perry doing, or Michael J. Fox, but it seems too lightweight for Robert Redford. Not that Redford shouldn't do comedy, but formulaic, feel-good, forgettable semi-serious movies like Legal Eagles aren't something he normally choses to do. (Although I could name another: Indecent Proposal.)

For what it is, the movie is well done. But what it is isn't worth the trouble of watching except to learn that it isn't worth watching, or to note how much younger familiar actors were in 1986.

Pitiful

[Maciste_Brother · 2/10 · 26 November 2007]

I saw LEGAL EAGLES when it first came out. I saw it on the first Saturday of its original release. The theater was jam-packed and the crowd was excited. You could actually feel the crowd's buzzing with anticipation for this movie. The stars mainly sold the movie but also the film was made by the same team that made GHOSTBUSTERS. The hype was quite big back then. When the end credits rolled, the crowd was quiet and the buzz was gone. The buzz died halfway into the film as every lame attempt at comedy or romance fell flat with a big thud and everything seemed forced and juvenile. I cannot relate how disappointed the crowd, my friends and I were about it. Some scenes are truly cringe-worthy bad. The flimsy script is as paper thin as the paper is was written on and the entire big budget comedy hangs heavily on the poor thing, incapable of overcoming its many inherent weaknesses.

The actors try to do their best with what they have, with Redford being the sole actor with any charm in this charmless bloated thing. But the worst aspect of this "movie by committee" is Debra Winger's performance. It's so bad that her career never really recovered after it. She was supposed to be this Katherine Hepburn type who fell for Redford's debonair and free-thinking ways and she came across as someone who was perpetually constipated. Redford and Winger have zero chemistry, which doesn't help much for romance comedy. Nothing worked in LEGAL EAGLES, including the ending, which from what I read, is one of several endings the producers filmed and the awful one we saw was decided thanks to the bad taste of test audiences.

There's a reason why this big profile movie only has 3 pages of reviews here at IMDb.

Good Humoured

[gcd70 · 6/10 · 9 June 2010]

Touted as a comedy-thriller, this Ivan Reitman film succeeds thanks to its good humour rather than its suspense.

The plot from Reitman, Jim Cash and Jack Epps Jnr is solid and has a reasonable twist at the end. "Legal Eagles", which has precious little courtroom action, never gets too clever though, and that's a good thing.

Comedy is always the movie's strong point (and director Reitman's), and it is this that the film relies on. Important too is the chemistry that Robert Redford and Debra Winger manage to create. They do a good job at this and their respective performances. Terence Stamp and Brian Dennehy are typecast, but both do well. Daryl Hannah is a natural beauty and looks gorgeous.

Saturday, April 15, 2000 - Video

Too dumb to be funny

[RennieP · 4/10 · 30 January 2006]

"Legal Eagles" is supposed to be a comedy. We're supposed to find the characters played by Robert Redford and Debra Winger to be amusing, their acrimonious relationship to be hilarious, and the way that they end up being partners despite all of the gibes to be romantically satisfying.

The problem is that the movie is too dumb to be taken seriously, and thus too dumb to be funny.

Briefly, the story takes place in New York. Robert Redford is an assistant District Attorney about to be promoted to be the DA. Debra Winger is a defense attorney, and Daryl Hannah is a young woman with emotional problems, and is Debra Winger's client. The plot involves a fire 20 years ago, when Daryl Hannah was eight, a fire that killed her artist father and purportedly destroyed a large number of his paintings. This experience left Daryl Hannah traumatized, but all is not as it seems, and now, 20 years later, Daryl Hannah is first accused of attempted theft and later of murder.

Unfortunately, the plot involves many elements that simply don't make sense. I won't go into detail, but Roger Ebert does a good job of listing four different major things that make the plot completely unbelievable.

As well as the story being dumb I found some of the scenes that were supposed to be funny to be anything but.

For example, Robert Redford is a weekend father to a teenage daughter. At one point his ex-wife threatens to go to court to prevent him from seeing their daughter. Robert Redford makes a telephone call to his ex-wife's home and starts an angry monologue of threats about how he'll take her apart in court. Then he realizes that he's actually talking to his daughter! This mistake is apparently supposed to be hilarious. Ha, ha.

In another scene Robert Redford and Debra Winger are together and see one of the bad guys. Robert Redford takes off on foot to try to catch him. Debra Winger, who doesn't know how to drive a car, feels it necessary for her to jump into Robert Redford's car and try to follow him. She makes a wrong turn and finds herself going the wrong way into traffic on a wide heavily trafficked street. There follows one minute of her frantically dodging cars at the last moment. Very funny. Ha, ha, ha.

This movie could have been a fairly good romantic thriller if they had fixed the plot and not tried to be a comedy. But the dumb plot and the unfunny attempts at comedy make it a complete waste of time.

Rennie Petersen

Subtle in parts, lightweight and easy to watch

[indigitum · 10/10 · 24 May 2004]

You don't get actors like Redford and Winger anymore. The subtleties in their facial expressions, the humanness of their characters are evident in each move they make and each action. In a sense, there is no 'acting', since the storyline, the characters and the flow reach a natural confluence. The only character that makes me feel a bit uncomfortable is Daryl Hannah's Chelsea - the performance artist. Brian Dennehy is also a little underutilised, but the movie is really a swinger for both Winger and Redford who make their attraction and talent as attorneys believable.

I've seen this movie about 5 times over the years and I never get sick of it. Though I know the plot, each time I find myself watching the actors rather than predicting the storyline. Its just great and really, so easy to watch and enjoy. There is humour, old fashioned romance, good IL' bad guys vs good guys, a bit of blood and gore and a lot of fine art thrown in. I highly recommend it!

clashing tones

[SnoopyStyle · 6/10 · 10 December 2016]

Tom Logan (Robert Redford) is on the inside track to be the new District Attorney of New York. He shares custody of his daughter Jennifer. Tough talking defense attorney Laura Kelly (Debra Winger) has a new client in mysterious ingenue Chelsea Deardon (Daryl Hannah) who stole a painting from wealthy Robert Forrester (John McMartin). Her artist father made the painting for her 8th birthday 18 years ago. Most of the paintings were lost in a fire that night along with her father. Forrester suddenly drops his complaint and trades the painting for a Picasso with museum owner Victor Taft (Terence Stamp) in a lopsided trade. The case seems to be closed. Police detective Cavanaugh (Brian Dennehy) gives Laura evidence about the old fire which indicates a conspiracy of fraud and possibly worst.

Daryl Hannah is pretty good. She should be the femme fatale in a noir thriller. Ivan Reitman insists on trying to inject comedy into this and it mostly doesn't work. Neither Redford nor Winger is a comedian. There are no comedians in sight. The poppy music gives it a light tone but it doesn't make it funny. He also has Redford sleep with Hannah. The romantic pairing with Winger gets cold water dumped on it. Despite it all, these are great actors and they deliver compelling characters. Reitman is probably the wrong man to direct this.

Uneven star vehicle

[nbubacz · 3/10 · 7 August 2006]

This isn't a very good movie. The plot is not held together very well at all. There are ridiculous, supposed action scenes, i.e. escaping from the warehouse with 5 seconds to go in the forklift. The ending is bad because they utilize one of the cheapest wrap up tricks out there, the late-entry bad guy. I cant stand late-entry characters who end up being the main antagonists. T.V. shows do this a lot, I assume due to their time constraints and cookie cutter formula adherence. Thats what this movie reminded me of, a television show, almost like Moonlighting in a different light.

The movie does have good acting; and it hardly couldn't, it has an excellent cast. The good actors were part of the directors problem I think though with making this film. He kept inserting scenes which assumed we loved these actors so much that we wanna see them do all this schmaltzy stuff, like Redford tapping around his apartment or underwear dancing to Fred Astair, come on now! I've always liked Winger too, but once again I think the director thought she was such a vaunted actress (in 1985-1986) that we would be interested in her vigorously ironing clothes or we would find it cute because "she cant drive but she is sure learning fast!". Hannah was annoying, but I think its more that her character was annoying. She was strangely promiscuous, she practice that weird and dated performance art, and she was doing uncool things like showing up uninvited at peoples apartments then walking into their bedrooms while they are changing. She was at the height of her beauty though, its a shame she had to suffer through those awful shoulder pad trench coats, and black leggings under huge sweaters of the eighties. The rest of the supporting cast Stamp, Deheny, and Hill all played their poorly written parts as well as they could.

Not the worst thing out of the eighties, and worth a look at what was a big star vehicle of the time. Watch this film if it comes on and nothing else is.

Birds of the Law

[Chrysanthepop · 24 March 2012]

It's far from perfect but 'Legal Eagles' is quite nostalgic and entertaining. The story is very contrived especially with so many plot holes and the characters aren't fully fleshed out either but it has a very noire style approach and does keep you in suspense. The humour also works quite well. On the technical side it's a decently made film, nothing too flashy which is good. I also liked the presentation of the art world.

No matter what one says about 'Legal Eagles', for me the highlight is easily Robert Redford and a very cute Debra Winger. Both actors are spellbinding, delivering subtle and charming performances. As performers, they just look so comfortable with each other. Their chemistry is amazing and their scenes, especially their on-screen banter, are a delight to watch.

Daryl Hannah's role is sketchy but she looks sizzling and I enjoyed her sequences with Redford and the scene where she demonstrates her art. Brian Dennehy is wasted. Terence Stamp is adequate.

So yes, it's got its flaws but how can you not enjoy it for Redford and Winger?

TV Movie like but w/ top stars

[kenandraf · 7/10 · 16 February 2002]

TV movie style mystery/comedy/drama with great lead actors who do the best they can with the average script/screenplay given to them.Holywood style and not made to be taken seriously,the main attraction of this movie is merely to see ones favorite stars srutt their stuff here.One of Redford'sfew experiments with the mainstream market.The directing is below average and the over all production is average.Like the lead stars a whole lot?Then this one is worth a look......

"Stay behind me and try to look like an attorney."

[classicsoncall · 6/10 · 27 March 2023]

Star power offers viewers an entertaining watch with this film, but it's not to be taken too seriously. The age difference between Robert Redford and Debra Winger is palpable, making the romantic relationship between their characters somewhat questionable, even more so for Redford and Daryl Hannah, although I personally know a woman who would take Redford at any age. The story takes on the dimensions of a caper flick in some regard, as paintings once thought destroyed by fire seem to have surfaced during an investigation by Tom Logan (Redford) and Laura Kelly (Winger). There's mystery and murder afoot as well, as Chelsea Deardon (Hannah) attempts to retrieve a painting from a former lover, and winds up being arrested for his murder! I wouldn't put too much stock in Attorney Logan's opening remarks to a jury about his belief that his client Chelsea is guilty; something like that would not have been allowed to proceed in front of a real courtroom, and almost didn't here when Judge Dawkins (Roscoe Lee Browne) played the contempt card. It all plays out rather favorably for the principals involved, with Logan and Kelly hooking up for good as partners in their own law firm, and Kelly barely raising an eyebrow over her associate's prior dalliance with Ms. Deardon.

Underrated dramatic story mixing a romance between the straight-lace Robert Redford and the snake charmer Debra Wingler at Courthouse!!

[elo-equipamentos · 7/10 · 13 April 2023]

Ivan Reitman in addition of direction also aided to draft the screenplay, as a comic man put some humor in this dramatic comedy stained with crime and mystery, gathering countless elements this picture wasn't properly enjoyed by major audience, nonetheless has its charm with the leading trio casting as Robert Redford, Debra Winger and Daryl Hannah.

All feature is around a successful District Attorney Tom Logan (Robert Redford) due he was so proficient his Boss Bower (Steven Hill) nominee him to replace on New York County DA in next election of year, however when he got involved by the cheaper and nagging attorney Laura Kelly (Debra Winger) in an odd case of missing painting of a late father of the weird girl Chelsea Dearden (Daryl Hannah) who used to behave badly yourself with older men at your way when she wishing for, still by tucked away means that later the viewers will figure out why such demeanor.

After that the easy life of the already unmarried Tom falls apart when he is caught in the bed with the creepy Chelsea by the police in the moment of the arresting her due she committed a murder in last night of a famous painting dealer Victor Taft (Terence Stamp) Tom life now is upside down, he was fired for his Boss Bower, his ex-wife stays outraged and decide sue him for bad behavior in front their teenager daughter, henceforth to overturn all shambles and finish the misunderstanding he has to work as defense attorney together Laura Kelly to prove at Courthouse that Chelsea is framed in that suppose murder and have others bodies along the way that stay explicit the hearsay over such alleged complot early raises by both of the "Legal Eagles"

Aside some holes and overlong the offeringis somewhat is too much underrated, overall is a enough compelling and dramatic story mixing a romance between the straight-lace Robert Redford and the snake charmer Debra Wingler, plus the weirdo character of Daryl Hannah, also the secondary supporting role as the enigmatic Brian Dennehy's character is bight and eye-opening on the final!!

Thanks for reading.

Resume:

First watch: 2023 / Source: DVD / How many: 1 / Rating: 7.25.

Okay I guess

[RNMorton · 7/10 · 17 November 2003]

Redford is a mature Manhattan D.A. who becomes enmeshed in possible theft and murder surrounding Hannah and missing art treasures; Winger is a ditzy attorney who also gets involved. Hannah is beautiful and Redford and Winger play well off each other. The basics are there, but we all would have done better if the plot was simpler and played a little less broadly. 7/10

Lousy courtroom romance

[HotToastyRag · 2/10 · 25 September 2017]

For fans of romantic comedies or legal dramas, you should probably look elsewhere and avoid watching Legal Eagles. Robert Redford and Debra Winger are partners in a law firm who have very different styles in the courtroom. Bob is charming and pandering, and Debra is strict and plays by the rules. When they join forces to defend Daryl Hannah, who's accused of murder, there's no telling what might happen!

Yes, it really is as bad as it sounds. It's not serious enough to stand up against real courtroom dramas, and it's too silly and predictable to stand up against classic romantic comedies. If you liked Laws of Attraction, you might like this one, but I couldn't stand either of them. Yes, Robert Redford is very handsome, but I'm not a fan of either of the actresses, so I wasn't rooting for either side of the love triangle. You've got dozens of other movies to choose from to see his gorgeousness. Do so.

Avoid

[shaneizoid · 2/10 · 17 January 2021]

This is such a dumb movie. It makes zero sense and the acting is so hammy. Avoid.

Romance And Justice

[bkoganbing · 9/10 · 12 December 2008]

I really do love Legal Eagles, it's a film that hearkens back to the stuff that William Powell and Myrna Loy did at MGM. I can see a younger Tracy and Hepburn in this film as well.

Robert Redford is the Jack McCoy of the New York County District Attorney's office and wouldn't you know it, Steven Hill plays the New York County DA here. Hill's thinking of hanging it up, but obviously as fans of Law and Order know, he eventually didn't. He's thinking of promoting Redford as his candidate to succeed him come the next election.

But for budding politico Redford, his life gets real complicated when defense attorney Debra Winger and her client Darryl Hannah enter his life. Hannah is the daughter of a famed artist who was killed in a loft fire where she barely escaped from when she was about 6. Since then she's become something of a wild child.

Hannah steals a picture from art dealer Terrence Stamp that she says is really hers. That starts a chain of events in which she's eventually accused of Stamp's murder. That same night Hannah decides she needs a little tender loving care and who better than the assistant district attorney to give it. The police bust her when she and Redford are in flagrato.

After that Redford decides to see how the other half lives working with Debra Winger on Hannah's defense.

What I liked about Legal Eagles is that it glided nicely from comedy to drama with little effort. The climax at Terrence Stamp's gallery was very well staged and Redford is being a most heroic lawyer.

Also in the cast are Roscoe Lee Browne as the judge at Hannah's trial and Brian Dennehy as a most interesting investigator. It's one of Robert Redford's best films and it's got style and substance.

With Redford, style is a given.

irritating!

[davyd-02237 · 4/10 · 24 March 2020]

Both the female leads, Winger and Hannah are both very irritating individuals which makes this, which should be a serious film about "who killed/murdered" into something slightly above a "slapstick comedy" which isn't clear as to which way it intends to go. Given the cast that's assembled this should have been a lot better movie but is quite worthy of being thrown into a bin, should you buy it on dvd, or "leave" if it should ever appear on freeview - the one we watched was PRE watershed and there is no way given language and content that it should have been. there are better films around than this. Not Mr Redfords best!

Worth a look see for those reminiscent of NYC 60s-80's

[David-4733 · 28 December 2007]

With a stellar cast and mediocre plot, this movie is well executed and the acting skills of the leads raise the movie above it's material on paper. Redfor seems to be enjoying himself and the writers gave each character little human quirks that can't help but make you smile. In one seen, Redford, playing a lawyer is sharing an office with "Kelly" his new partner after he gets caught shaking the sheets with D. Hannahs character and he is moving from chair to chair in the small office finally stating, "I'm a pacer", someone who needs to walk back and forth in order to think clearly.

There is an opening scene with a 60's party that has a Warhol feeling" to it that I enjoyed, as I grew up in those times. And while it plays only a small part in the movie, it brought back a flood of good memories for me. (Anyone remember "The Electric Circus?")

D. Hannah gives a completely 80's reminiscent piece of performance art that is very pych. connected to the wounded character she plays, and if you wait for the credits, you find she played a big part in authoring the piece.

Basically, its the types of movie that is not even in your top ten or twenty, yet you can't help but enjoying it each time you watch it, and you are pleased to see it on the schedule when it is. Kind of a "non-guilty guilty pleasure", I can't help but enjoy the cast, the full of holes plot and poor continuity, (the faux pas of timing and lighting are mentioned in other reviews.) Even Redford's little girl in the movie is one of those kids you have even and enjoy, but can't recall her name. there is an early character role played by Christine Baranski who either got some work done or simply learned how to use her assets better later in her career.

Just watch with an excepting, open mind and you may not only enjoy it, but it may be a cult favorite at some point. *note-my wife is a wall st. attorney and absolutely hates the film as do many other lawyers we know. why? Who knows? Maybe they're strung too tight to let go and enjoy the simple ride.

Those eagles fly high (DVD)

[leplatypus · 4/10 · 26 February 2005]

The movie resolves around a trio of actors, where each one is very characterized. Some might say this setting is too much one-dimensional, but with this handful of excellent actors, the movie comes alive right now and the audience has just to appreciate the teamwork. All the more that, each character shows two opposite traits, so there is really depth in it, and it is fun to see all those people tangled with each other.

So, ladies first: Hannah portrays a false-naïve but real-seductress daughter of a famous painter. She is totally convincing when she does her "performance". And if you are the kind to watch the end-credits, you will learn that she brought actively her creative impulse into it. Then, Winger acts as a willful but melting hearted advocate. At least, Redford is a goofy but strong attorney.

The entire story takes place in New York, in 1986. So, twenty years after, it adds a certain nostalgic flavor to it.

A good piece of art