Take the 2-minute tour ×
Movies & TV Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for movie and tv enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

At the end of the film Fracture (2007), when Beachum prosecutes with new evidences, Crawford is surrounded by defense attorneys from Wooton & Simms, the law firm from which Beachum got a job offer. My question is:

Is the job offer part of Crawford's scheme?

What makes me think like this because of the following theory. Crawford is incredibly rich and he can afford that, he planed for several months before the murder, investigating Beachum's background and by letting Wooton & Simms offer such a dream job to Beachum he can gain some advantages... And Nikki Gardner, Beachum's future boss at Wooton & Simms knows the scheme.

This is not explicitly stated in Wikipedia article.

I got this implication also from Nikki's strange behaviors,

a) She told Beachum not to thank her when Beachum was excited about the luxury/comfy workplace at Wooton & Simms. It seemed she knew in advance that Beachum would lose the case and never had the chance to work at Wooton & Simms.

b) She told Beachum that he had only two weeks before flying to Chigago for a lawsuit (the client being a big corporation), while in normal case transition from criminal law to corporate attorney requires several months, that forced heavy pressures on Beachum, who was afraid to lose the opportunity.

c) She refused to help when Beachum was trying to get a court order to keep Jennifer on life support, and said It has nothing to do with Wooton & Simms. That is not a normal reaction when one is asked to offer help or someone will die.

share|improve this question
2  
Hmm...never thought about that, but definitely an interresting theory. Good question. –  Sonny Burnett Nov 30 '12 at 11:56
1  
Though in particular your three points about Nikki's behavior aren't that strong. a) She could habe just meant that it's a hard Job. b) And indeed it is a hard job with high expectations. c) Well, she's just pretty cold and doesn't care. –  Sonny Burnett Nov 30 '12 at 18:05

1 Answer 1

up vote 3 down vote accepted

I personally think there might be two reasons behind the last scene of the movie.

1) I take your argument very convincing. Crawford was awesome intelligent and careful (no explanation is needed for this statement). He is very rich. So he might have planted all these things in his super plan. The way he switched his gun with Nunallys, it needed thorough background search which he did. Even he played as his own attorney in such a case where attempt to murder is charged. When an intelligent guy like him took so much risk, it is easily understandable how much confidence he had on himself. So adding the factor of lucrative job from Wooton & Simms at the same time when the particular case was on, might have been an addition to the plan. We saw

Beachum is busy, making preparations for his transition from criminal law to corporate attorney for Wooton & Simms.

So Crawford by using his money power got the information that Beachum is the one, who was going to fight him in the court. So to make him inattentive from the case by making him busy for Wooton & Simms might have been a plan.

2) It is my personal opinion. I guess the last scene indicates two important facts.

a) Crawford was confident the first time because the hearing went just like he wanted. The case was spoiled just where he knew it would be (the gun-switching trick). So he even dared to not take any attorney for him. But as soon as everything went out of his super-intellectual plan, he was frightened and he hired the top most law firm Wooton & Simms for saving his life. It depicts the fact without his plan, he was worthless and no less afraid than any normal truly spoiled criminal (rather say Brat).

b) If we see from Beachum's view, the last scene might signify that even after loosing his love for unfolding the truth, he did not stop standing for the truth and that led him to fight with his own ex-employer Wooton & Simms. But he did not hesitate or get fear to stand for the truth. That is the value some times an honest man has to pay in his life.

share|improve this answer
    
+1 great critique. –  kennyzx Nov 30 '12 at 15:47

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.