The Grisham formula

Preparing to adapt John Grisham’s “Runaway Jury” to the screen, director Gary Fleder took a cue from veteran screenwriter William Goldman. The first time he read the novel, he highlighted crucial passages. He then repeated the task, using a different color. The material that emerged two-tone would constitute the skeleton of his film.

“By the end, I’d highlighted half of the book -- way too much,” Fleder recalled. “Grisham creates a high-class problem: too many great characters, plots and subplots. Hitting each beat would have resulted in a six- to eight-hour movie.”

By most accounts, a Grisham novel is an ace collaborator in film adaptations -- a leg up for writers and directors alike. “Runaway Jury,” due out Oct. 17, is the eighth feature film based on Grisham’s work -- placing the author ahead of Tom Clancy (four) but behind Michael Crichton (12) and the prodigious Stephen King (27). Between 1993 and 1996, “The Firm,” “The Pelican Brief,” “The Client” and “A Time to Kill” took in nearly $500 million in the U.S. and Canada and, for the most part, struck a chord with critics. Though “The Chamber,” “The Rainmaker” and “The Gingerbread Man” fared less well commercially, problems with these pictures went beyond the source material.

“There was a feeding frenzy to make everything ‘Grisham’ -- not always wise, in retrospect,” says David Gernert, the author’s agent. “John took a deep breath and now he’s back.”

Why did Hollywood shell out $8 million for the rights to “Runaway Jury,” in which a couple (John Cusack, Rachel Weisz) try to manipulate the jury in a gun company suit? What sets the Mississippi lawyer-turned-bestselling novelist apart? Creative folks who’ve worked on this and previous adaptations make their case.

A good yarn

Robert Towne (co-writer of “The Firm”): Grisham’s books are laid out in ways that lend themselves to big American movies -- meaning they’re full of plot and subplots. We learned long ago that you need a “meanwhile back on the ranch,” something to cut to, such as the letters of transit in “Casablanca.” Our movies are commercially successful because there’s always something going on.

Akiva Goldsman (co-writer of “The Client,” writer of “A Time to Kill”): John gives you a phenomenal story engine. His plots start with tremendous velocity -- a kid in a car watching a man kill himself or a little girl kidnapped by rednecks -- which carries you far. Then he creates a wide panorama -- life and death, good vs. evil, hope and redemption -- that attracts some wonderful performers. And once a studio lays out so much for a book, it’s more likely to spend top dollar for a writer and stars.

Cross examination

Some critics say that Grisham books are like flypaper, entangling but superficial. Movies made from them, more than most, reflect the sensibility of the director. The unapologetically commercial Joel Schumacher (“A Time to Kill,” “The Client,”) was a good fit, they suggest, while alternative, quirky directors such as Robert Altman (“The Gingerbread Man”), are not. And his complicated plots demand strong organizational skills to make sense.

Logical structure

Sydney Pollack: (director of “The Firm”): You know how a husband or wife corrects a mate who gets up to tell a story at a party? That would never happen to Grisham. He’s a natural storyteller with an instinct for unfolding information in the right order, handing it out in a way that works.

Cross examination

Some say that Grisham is better at intriguing premises than endings, which were changed in “The Client” and “The Firm,” for example. What’s satisfying on the page may not play well with moviegoers who seek catharsis, resolution, a positive twist. “The Firm” originally concluded with the young, ambitious lawyer (Tom Cruise) as corrupt as those he’d been fighting because he’d taken the money and run. The filmmakers had him wind up as he began -- with nothing, but his soul intact.

Larger-than-life characters

Goldsman: John’s character architecture is sound, fleshed out, larger than life. Still, screenwriters like me have a tendency to make them more peculiar and flamboyant. You have to compress them because we’re with them for less time. And, without access to internal monologues, they have to be more distinct to reflect their inner life.

Towne: There are more complicated characters in life and fiction than Grisham’s, but that’s good when you’re dealing with a complex plot. You don’t want a character whose internal drama interferes with the external course of events.

David Levien (co-writer, with Brian Koppelman, Rick Cleveland, and Matthew Chapman, of “Runaway Jury”): Grisham’s characters have clear motives and act in concert with them. That’s why the action isn’t confusing. Our movie is an exception. Because the motives of our protagonists aren’t spelled out until later, you don’t know if you should root for them.

Cross examination

Grisham characters are often plot devices, requiring emotional shading on the screen, critics have said. Stars cast in those roles -- Dustin Hoffman, Susan Sarandon, even supporting players such as Gary Busey - -- bring their personalities and a kind of shorthand and, usually, that’s enough.

Empowering the underdog

Fleder: Grisham’s stories are often David and Goliath tales suggesting that the smaller guy can, with a little luck and a lot of hard work, bring down the bad guy. Audiences hate ‘smug,’ personified in our film by Gene Hackman and the head of the gun company. When people are so devoid of conscience, there’s huge payoff in bringing them down.

Cross examination:

Brian Koppelman (co-writer of “Runaway Jury”): John’s heroes aren’t perfect. In “The Firm,” Tom Cruise’s character cheats on his wife. In “A Time to Kill,” Samuel Jackson’s character kills two guys who raped his daughter. They’re people with whom we can identify, coming up against an inhuman force. There are moments when they become heroic, better than themselves.

Legal eagles

Fleder: Grisham makes use of the mystique of lawyers, the new power brokers -- gladiators in Armani. With Alan Dershowitz, Gerry Spence on the Larry King show, there’s a clear obsession with the law. And because Grisham, himself, is a lawyer, you feel like he’s taking you behind the scenes, somewhere you haven’t been before.

Pollack: Courtroom stories -- “The Caine Mutiny,” “The Verdict” -- have always been a sensational form for film. Courtroom scenes are mini-thrillers and, in the past 15 years, lawyers have come to the fore as everyone’s favorite villains.

Cross examination

Despite some memorable courtroom scenes, Grisham movies have fewer of them than you’d think, filmmakers say. It’s courtroom as chorus, or destination, Goldsman says--a place where political issues and the human condition play out.

Contemporary edge

Fleder: Grisham is skilled at provoking people, making them think about issues such as foster care abuse, insurance fraud, the death penalty. Because they’re abstract, he sets up people who support them as very effective targets.

Cross examination:

Pollack: Movies don’t work because of the ‘idea.’ You can’t get caught up in a message. It’s got to be there through inference in the truth of the situation and people’s behavior.

Fleder: Sometimes a topic can become dated. We were asked to change the focus from tobacco litigation to guns because that ground had already been covered in [Michael Mann’s] “The Insider” and the news.

Fanatic following

Pollack: It’s a blessing and a curse to have the Grisham name. You have an automatic launch for the film, name recognition and wanna-see, but also a lot of people saying “show me.” I got migraines because, everywhere I went, someone was reading the book. Leaving things out, combining and inventing characters would make a lot of people angry, I knew. I said at the time that I’d have to wear a steel jockstrap to the premiere. It was a lose-lose situation.

Cross examination

Fleder: On one Web site, a Grisham fan said I should have cast Rod Steiger in a certain role -- even though he’s dead. There will always be those who have shot, edited and scored the film in advance. Adapting someone as popular as Grisham is a high-wire act ... but you’ve got the best of safety nets.

*

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX)

A case of success

Adapting John Grisham’s work to the big screen has become a perennial -- and profitable -- Hollywood task. Below, four of the eight legal thrillers inspired by his stories:

*

‘THE FIRM’ (1993): Hal Holbrook and Gene Hackman. The filmmakers changed the ending.

*

‘PELICAN BRIEF’ (1993): Denzel Washington as a reporter; Julia Roberts as a law student.

*

‘A TIME TO KILL’ (1996): Matthew McConaughey as a lawyer representing Samuel L. Jackson.

*

‘THE CLIENT’ (1994): Susan Sarandon counsels a boy on the run from the Mob.