Critics’ reviews

Presumed Innocent (1990)

8 reviews from 8 publications. Critics’ score 79: 8 positive, 0 mixed, 0 negative.

Back to our review of Presumed Innocent

79
Positive
8
Mixed
0
Negative
0

All eight reviews are favourable, and the praise settles on Alan J. Pakula’s direction and Harrison Ford’s lead. Critics call it a tight, intelligent adaptation of the novel, more restrained than its source, and credit Pakula with keeping a large cast in balance. Ford is singled out again and again for playing the accused prosecutor so quietly that nobody can settle on his guilt, which most reviews take as the film’s chief strength. Scacchi, Bedelia, Julia and Dennehy draw notice for the same ambiguity.

The spread is narrow; nobody dislikes it and nobody raves. Eye for Film finds it slow in places and thinks the ending is signposted too early, and Roger Ebert, the coolest of the eight, admires the handling of wrongful conviction more than the whole. Later writers at Slant and Vulture read more into it, seeing a study of corruption, paranoia and sexual politics where the 1990 notices saw a well-built thriller.

Los Angeles Times
27 July 1990 · Sheila Benson
85*

The film brilliantly captures the novel's essence in an intelligent, complex and enthralling adaptation where all the players seem in a state of grace. Pakula keeps the cast in miraculous balance with Ford delivering a self-effacing tour de force as the bearing beam of the story.

Read the full review →
Variety
31 December 1989 · Variety Staff
85*

Honed to a riveting intensity by Pakula with the tightest script imaginable, it is a demanding, disturbing javelin of a courtroom murder mystery. Ford gives a mature, subtle, lowkey performance that makes it impossible to be sure of his guilt.

Read the full review →
Vulture
7 April 2022 · Bilge Ebiri
85*

The critic lauds the 1990 legal thriller for its gripping adaptation of the novel and Ford's complex performance that leaves viewers uncertain about his character's innocence. Pakula's direction and the film's exploration of paranoia and performance are highlighted as strengths.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
27 July 1990 · Janet Maslin
80*

Pakula has directed an intense, enveloping, gratifyingly thorough screen adaptation that conveys both suspense and underlying sobriety. The film is notably more subdued than the novel, with restraint turned into a slow-burning fuse.

Read the full review →
Empire
1 January 2000 · Ian Nathan
75*

The critic finds it a well-rigged whodunit that is ultimately about the wages of sin rather than political machinations. Pakula's direction is praised for its looming camerawork, long shadows and expert handling of the thriller structure and denouement.

Read the full review →
Slant Magazine
30 July 2015 · Ted Pigeon
75*

The critic praises the film's nuanced portrayal of systemic corruption in the legal system alongside its exploration of sexual politics and power dynamics. Pakula's subtle direction and the performances, especially in quieter scenes, are singled out for creating a more complex view of female agency than typical thrillers of the era.

Read the full review →
RogerEbert.com
27 July 1990 · Roger Ebert
70*

The critic praises the film's subtle handling of a complex legal thriller about a prosecutor accused of murdering his lover, noting how it avoids bogging down in forensic details while building suspense around the core fear of wrongful conviction. Performances by Harrison Ford, Greta Scacchi, Bonnie Bedelia, and supporting actors like Raul Julia and Brian Dennehy are highlighted as cleverly ambiguous and effective.

Read the full review →
Eye for Film
24 July 2012 · Jennie Kermode
75*

The critic finds the film a gripping courtroom drama with classic noir elements, hinging on complex characters and Harrison Ford's conflicted lead performance. She praises its focus on moral innocence and themes but notes it is occasionally slow and the ending overly signposted.

Read the full review →

Ordered by the weight we give each publication, then by score. Scores are normalised to 100; * means inferred from an unrated review. Summaries are ours, not quotations; follow the links for the reviews themselves. How we rate