Though it happened years ago, the infamous case of the old woman who spilled McDonald's coffee on her lap and was awarded millions in damages remains a cultural joke. It is also a reference point used to explain a supposedly popular American pastime of going to court as a path to getting rich quickly. Starting from the flip side of the dramatic headlines, Hot Coffee provides a journey through a legal system that is incrementally being subsumed by corporate interests on a daily basis.
First time filmmaker Susan Saladoff took 25 years worth of experience as a trial lawyer and created a multi-layered statement in the hopes of encouraging everyone to fight for, and support, the continuation of what she saw as an eroding civil justice system. Breaking down legal terms that are used everyday in political maneuvering, such as tort reform and manditory arbitration, she profoundly demonstrates the effects these words have on ordinary lives by revealing the very human stories of people irreparably damaged by the inability to seek redress for what used to be their inalienable rights.
From the McDonald's starting point, which is an eye-opener in itself, Hot Coffee goes on to focus on exploring our diminishing freedoms through charismatic individuals with sympathetic stories. Mississippi judge Oliver Diaz became the source of a popular John Grisham novel after being the target for a smear campaign when it was realized he would probably not rule in favor of business interests. Jamie Leigh Jones, a previous Halliburton employee, lobbies for the right to name her rapists in court after being housed in an all-male barracks rather than with the promised women peers on a tour in Iraq. A family shares the practical implications of having a cap on damages, wishing they could hold a medical practice accountable for the resultant disability of one of their twin sons rather than depend on the state's taxpayers for his
care.
Chaptered using the catch phrases that have been so well-marketed to us as examples of "frivolous lawsuits", we learn a great deal more about what is at stake, and the development of slogans that have intimidated us into voting to restrict our own rights. The deterioration of accessibility to courts is then translated into explaining how the economics play out from the altered state and federal practices that have been manipulated over the past few decades.
Hot Coffee is simply a film that everyone should see. Even if its elements only provoke debate, that would still be a beneficial outcome, for which we owe Saladoff a tremendous debt. It succinctly provides accessible information of how things are, and concisely forshadows the dangers that lie ahead. It not only illuminates complicated functions of the legal system, but provides scrutiny of all information sources. While there is definitely an agenda and bias upon which the film is based, so much is clearly composed that every point of view will get something new out of watching it.
Reviewed as part of the 2011 Sundance Film Festival.
First time filmmaker Susan Saladoff took 25 years worth of experience as a trial lawyer and created a multi-layered statement in the hopes of encouraging everyone to fight for, and support, the continuation of what she saw as an eroding civil justice system. Breaking down legal terms that are used everyday in political maneuvering, such as tort reform and manditory arbitration, she profoundly demonstrates the effects these words have on ordinary lives by revealing the very human stories of people irreparably damaged by the inability to seek redress for what used to be their inalienable rights.
From the McDonald's starting point, which is an eye-opener in itself, Hot Coffee goes on to focus on exploring our diminishing freedoms through charismatic individuals with sympathetic stories. Mississippi judge Oliver Diaz became the source of a popular John Grisham novel after being the target for a smear campaign when it was realized he would probably not rule in favor of business interests. Jamie Leigh Jones, a previous Halliburton employee, lobbies for the right to name her rapists in court after being housed in an all-male barracks rather than with the promised women peers on a tour in Iraq. A family shares the practical implications of having a cap on damages, wishing they could hold a medical practice accountable for the resultant disability of one of their twin sons rather than depend on the state's taxpayers for his
care.
Chaptered using the catch phrases that have been so well-marketed to us as examples of "frivolous lawsuits", we learn a great deal more about what is at stake, and the development of slogans that have intimidated us into voting to restrict our own rights. The deterioration of accessibility to courts is then translated into explaining how the economics play out from the altered state and federal practices that have been manipulated over the past few decades.
Hot Coffee is simply a film that everyone should see. Even if its elements only provoke debate, that would still be a beneficial outcome, for which we owe Saladoff a tremendous debt. It succinctly provides accessible information of how things are, and concisely forshadows the dangers that lie ahead. It not only illuminates complicated functions of the legal system, but provides scrutiny of all information sources. While there is definitely an agenda and bias upon which the film is based, so much is clearly composed that every point of view will get something new out of watching it.
Reviewed as part of the 2011 Sundance Film Festival.
