Hey,  the movie is a farce. This web page in using it at different junctures as a point of departure  for discussing the law and dynamics of divorce in no way implies that multiple viewings of the 2003 release starring George Clooney and Catherine Zita Jones will certify you as a specialist in divorce law. It’s just, with a little help from Divorce Attorney Commentary, informative fun may be had in comparing a farce to the sometimes farcical realities of divorce law. While this piece is a “stand alone” in as much as you can get the gist of the movie and the benefit of my professional insights without seeing the movie, it is highly recommended that you  see the movie. How’s that for homework? 

            One further disclaimer: what is set out as dialogue is sometimes verbatim and other times a paraphrase. Unable to obtain a screenplay, I simply took notes from the video, with liberal use of the remote “stop” and “rewind” buttons.  

            The opening scenes show Hollywood producer Donovan Donley (a pony tailed Geoffrey Rush who is fine and sleazy in this role and whom we see at the very beginning and very end of the movie)  driving home only to discover, first, pool cleaner Ollie Oliver’s van in his driveway, and a little later on Ollie himself (Jack Kyle) in his house with his wife, Bonnie Donley (Stacey Travis). The Donleys don’t have a pool. A very funny and violent brouhaha erupts. The slapstick ends with Donovan shooting at the departing Ollie and Bonnie as they drive away, then dropping his gun to grab a camera and take snap shots of  the pitchfork-like wounds he has just received on his derriere.  

            Cut to opening titles: turn of the century (19th to 20th) valentines-like motif to the background sound of Elvis Parsley's “We’re Caught in a Trap”.  

            In the post-credit opening scene we find a disembodied Miles Massey. (George Clooney plays an amoral, affable, buffoon who succeeds both at wooing the viewer’s affection as well as that of  the Catherine Zita Jones character--Marylin.  He has a great eye for scripts, and this is a good one.) In these initial scenes Miles is  being administered, as it turns out, a teeth-whitening. The opening shot on Clooney emphasizes a skeletal like jaw assembly diffused in blue. In the following shots he is continually talking on a cell phone, first through two scenes in the dentist’s office and then on the road on his way to the office. The dialogue (what Miles is saying into the cell phone) will be discussed a little later on. However,  the jaw/teeth visuals themselves warrant our first:  

            Divorce Attorney Commentary: The Predatory Divorce Attorney is a cliché that works quite well in this movie. The Clooney character is comically so, and the Clooney’s fans can ignore the cliché's negative aspects while still liking the star.    

            So what’s with being predatory as a divorce lawyer? Is that a quality a client should view positively in selecting an attorney? Let me put it this way: “predatory” can mean he/she will generate  beau coup billable hours feeding off of a client’s hostility. Predatory is what you pay for. As for how difficult it is to simulate being predatory, take it from me: it’s easily done.  

            O.K., now the dialogue during these abstract opening scenes:  

            Miles Massey: “She took the kids to Tahoe? If she took the cruise, she sailed around the lake...then she’s in breach. Attach...everything, beach house, auto, stocks, bonds...and the blue screen visuals end with Miles walking into the law offices of Myerson, Massey all the time talking on the cell phone as follows: ...and tell Fred in arbitration we’ve got pictures of his wife with the oral surgeon...”.  He snappily puts his cell phone into his coat pocket as he announces his presence to his receptionist, who had all the time been the one talking to him on the other end of the line. “I’m here. Who’s my first appointment?”  

            Divorce Attorney Commentary: Don’t take much of this dialogue seriously. I could not make heads or tails of it. First there’s talk of kids, then attaching assets because somebody left the state. Does not make sense. While taking the kids across state lines in violation of a court order could trigger dire consequences, an “attachment” is not one of them. Anyway, it’s all to establish a frantic/farcical pace to the character which Clooney maintains well throughout the movie.            

            Miles then walks from the reception area into his office where he meets Bonnie Donley (of the pre-credits brouhaha, the adulterous wife). In the scenes that follows Bonnie Donley retains Miles. The dynamics of retaining a divorce lawyer in Bonnie Donely’s  particular situation are well rendered in a very funny and somewhat authentic manner.  

            Miles: (leaning back in his chair in an early shot) “Yes, your husband did show remarkable foresight in taking those pictures.  And yes, absent a pool, the presence of a pool man would appear to be suspicious”. Miles then launches into a little song and dance: “But who’s the real victim here? Let me suggest...”. Miles then tries to turn things around, and is not so subtle about it. Seeing Bonnie Donley hesitating at some of his more original attempts to mold the facts Miles says, “I’m not on a mission here.” The scene ends with Miles showing a reassured Bonnie Donley out of the office asking to meet with Ollie Oliver (the adulterous pool boy of the brouhaha), no doubt to massage his testimony. Miles ends it by saying: “We need to get together and build a picture of your husband’s net worth...a road map of enemy territory.”  Then Bonnie goes out the door.  

            Divorce Attorney Commentary: The script’s emphasis on the importance of marital misconduct, and the photographic documentation of said misconduct is nonsense from a real world legal point of view. However there is some truth in the emotional dynamics between Miles (attorney) and Bonnie Donley (client) vis a vis, the adultery--the reason it’s splitsville for Donleys. The good divorce attorney will always find out, as soon as politely possible, just why the couple is divorcing. This knowledge, and the deeper the knowledge (who’s on the warpath, who’s feeling guilty) the better, will enable the ethical divorce attorney to better serve his client. Many reasons, trust me, many reasons.  

            What saves dear Miles, so far, from being disbarred is that he is spit balling, not conspiring to perjure “I’m not on a mission here.” Another aspect of the scene that does ring true is the rhythm of the retaining interview: Miles addressing the emotional need of the client to deal with the adultery (although manufacturing  facts is not recommended) and moving on to the nittty gritty, the “road map” of Donovan Donley’s assets.  

            A strong false premise running though out the movie is the importance put on marital misconduct from a legal point of view. Legally speaking, marital misconduct, specifically sexual hijinks, is, in most states, of zippo, nada, niente, no importance. However the movie needs it to be funny so it plays it up. Beyond the farce, in the real world of divorce, marital misconduct can mean plenty depending on how the parties, both misconductor and misconductee, take it.  In the movie Bonnie Donley is not too repentant, and that augers well for her. It also speaks well for Miles, for cutting to the chase and reassuring his client. Gee I wonder why they didn’t put in the signing of the retainer agreement, explanation of fees etc. etc.? They needed me as a consultant.  

            The next scene shows us Miles in court, seated at counsel table with his client Mr. Guttman (George Ivers) and his associate, Wrigley (Paul Adelstein). Guttman is seated between Miles and Wrigley and this adds a comedic double-take as Miles and Wrigley conduct a conversation as if Guttman were not there.  

            Need to interrupt for pertinent commentary. Wrigley is Miles’ associate. We will see Wrigley in a good many scenes to follow. In this comedy Wrigley plays the comic  foil to the Miles character. Clooney and Adelstein work well together. Now, what about having associates in divorces? It all depends on how much firepower you need. What are the stakes? How much money are we talking about? Maybe instead of an associate, Guttman’s accountant, or, even, bookkeeper, would have done the trick.  

            Miles is confiding to Wrigley, all the while the court proceeding is going on, not to mention they are talking around and through the client.  

            Miles: Everybody is willing to compromise; the institution of marriage is based on compromise Then, the entire process finds equilibrium based on the skill of the individual lawyers and then both parties go home with their share of the staple factory (Guttman, their client, owns a staple factory.)  

            Wrigley: That’s life.  

            Miles: That’s death. Ultimate destruction of the opponent, that’s what it’s all about.  

            Then, Miles and Wrigley are rudely interrupted from their philosophical discussion by the Judge who tells Miles it’s time for his cross examination of Mrs. Guttman. The scene ends with Miles asking Mrs. Guttman about her relationship with the tennis instructor “Goliath”. 

                                                                    Next

QUICK DENVER DIVORCE LAWYER LINKS
Home - Divorce Lawyer in Denver Colorado Specializing in Divorce Law Mediation
Child Support - Divorce attorney and criminal defense lawyer in Denver Colorado 
Custody - Divorce mediation law, criminal law, children custody, alimony,property division
Alimony - Divorce lawyers, divorce attorney in denver colorado
Property Division - Criminal lawyer in denver, drunk driving dui lawyer, colorado defense attorney
Taxes - Expert divorce lawyer, attorney, complex law on tax matters
Discovery - Marriage divorce,settlement agreement, divorce decree,matrimonial law
A Divorce Lawyer's take on the movie; Intolerable Cruelty