I write this from a distance of 31 years after the fact. Time colors ones perspective. Anthony Hopkins is one of my all time favorite actors and I hated to see him as one of the doctors who experimented horrifically on Jewish patients. Nevertheless, it is a part designed for at least an Emmy nomination and I feel that Hopkins deserved one. Is it remotely possible that he was deliberately overlooked BECAUSE of the part he played? Perhaps. I would liked to have given the film a higher rating but feel it was sufficiently flawed to justify the 7 I gave it. Here are my reasons for doing so. 1. Abe Cady was an SOB throughout most of Part 1. His father dies and a single visit to bury his father in Israel changes his entire persona virtually overnight. It does not ring true. 2. Samantha Cady is the good guy in this and she is totally abandoned by her husband, son and the filmmakers; a fate she does not deserve. It is as if she were put in the film simply to produce a son who deserts his mother and is destined to die as punishment for Abe's early transgressions. 3. The important parts of the film are the trial sequences, a fair portion of which was devoted to exposing Jewish atrocities which had nothing to do with Cady's charges against Adam Kelno. 4. Unless I am mistaken, there was a point where Chief Justice Gilroy (Jack Hawkins) allows testimony subject to later connection which connection was never made. 5. I fail to understand why the Polish woman(?) revealed to Abe Cady the name of the man she loved who was in possession of a record that would destroy Kelno. 6. Unless I am mistaken, David Shawcross, Cady's lawyer played by Dan O'Herlihy, is only made aware of those records at the final moment in the trial and yet, is suddenly so thoroughly familiar with it that he is able to destroy Kelno's credibility point by point in the most dramatic sequence in the film. I suspect that if I had read the Leon Uris book, I would have given the film an even lower rating.
Review of QB VII
