Hacker Cinema
My Cousin Vinny
1992 · Film · 119 min
Directed by Jonathan Lynn
Two carefree pals traveling through rural Alabama on their way back to college are mistakenly arrested and charged with murder. Fortunately, one of them has a cousin who's a lawyer - Vincent Gambini, a former auto mechanic from Brooklyn who has just passed his bar exam after his sixth try. When he arrives with his leather-clad girlfriend to try his first case, it's a real shock - for him and the Deep South!
12 positive1 negative7 neutralfrom 20 commenters
Where to watch
No streaming data for this title.
20 comments on Hacker News
Most Canadians and Americans I'm guessing takes their cues from movies like My Cousin Vinny when they think Mississippi and probably have never ventured through it. I have. It is a very safe and clean city. There are ton of engineers and professionals out there making equal or more than what creme of the creme in Canada take home after taxes (another major point besides the exchange rate that puts Canadians behind America).
This is downtown Jackson, it looks to be in far better shape than many Canadian cities: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQkKjiYu-qU
My point was to make that distinction between an masterpiece and an epic while still showing that Andor holds up against some of the most celebrated epics ever created. Comparing it to My Cousin Vinny is ridiculous. You should be comparing it to other works in the same form, other epic hero's journeys.
Was your gripe about superfluous scenes, where you mentioned the forest planet, a reference to the first few episodes of season 2? That forest plant is Yavin IV, the plant where the rebels eventually build their first base, and those rebels are some of the first recruits to the rebel army. I believe those scenes were intended to show how the rebellion lacked leadership and how Andor and others had to step up to provide that leadership.
And if that doesn't come up, mention that your favorite movie is My Cousin Vinny.
While there are only a few movies that I have seen in their entirety several times (5+); there are several scenes from certain movies that I have probably seen more than a dozen times.
1) Court scene from 'My Cousin Vinny' 2) Court scene from 'A Few Good Men' 3) Last 20 minutes from 'The Shining' 4) Escape sequence from 'Shawshank Redemption'
Ok, I waited to be downvoted :) now let me repeat: this is uneducated post, almost if not all statements here are incorrect, it's a personal opinion, but not facts. Literally everything could and should be disregarded here - "with the exception of 'thank you'" (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0104952/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1).
My Cousin Vinny did it. Honestly I don't think VFX has ever truly helped a comedy.
Imagine what that movie could have been with cheap gratuitous CGI. Instead of Vinny getting covered in real mud, you could have slow motion closeups of glossy mud drops with fluid simulation flying through the air, the camera spinning around the mud in three dimensions before it cakes Vinny. But would such a visual spectacle make the movie funnier? I don't think so.
And quite frankly, She Hulk would look a lot better if they simply found a buff actress and painted her green.
I’m not necessarily disagreeing with your list, even though some of those are mediocre at best, but yeah I did mean per year, and limited to Hollywood (Parasite for instance not counting). And no, ok, I will also straight up disagree with the second Knives out Movie which I thought was absolute trash. A perfect example of poor storytelling and the form over substance of modern cinema.
But just taking say 1992 you have Last of the Mohicans, The Unforgiven, My Cousin Vinny, Malcolm X, Bad Lieutenant, Scent of a Woman, Reservoir Dogs, Dracula, Chaplin.
And then a bunch of fun schlomp like Arizona Dream, Basic Instinct, Sister Act, Army of Darkness, Home Alone 2, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, The Mighty Ducks, Wayne’s World.
These are all undoubtedly great movies.
And then another huge bunch of watchable stuff easily comparable to some of your mentions like Watcher or High Life.
And 1992 is not an outlier.
In 1993 you have Jurrasic Park, Groundhog Day, Whats Eating Gilbert Grape, Scindlers List, Meanace 2 Society, Alive, Dazed and Confused, Falling Down, In The Name of The Father, True Romance, Demolition Man, Carlitos Way, The Secret Garden, Philadelphia, A Perfect Workd, Cool Runnings, Short Cuts.
In 1991 Silence of The Lambs, Ternimator 2, JFK, Point Break, Thelma and Louise, Boyz in the Hood, The Doors, My Own Private Idaho, Barton Fink, The Fisher King, Naked Lunch.
In 1990 Goodfellas, Hunt for Red October, Total Recall, Edward Scissorhands, Home Alone, Godfather 3, Dances with Wolves, Tremors, Back to the Future 3, Awakenings, The Witches, Wild at Heart, Jacobs Ladder, Nikita, Slacker, Millers Crossing.
And the quality difference is massive too, not just somewhat better. Like just Millers Crossing is miles better than anything that has been made in the last 5 years, and I’m picking at random.
In 1994 Shawshank Redemption, Pulp Fiction, Forrest Gump, The Lion King, Speed, Ace Ventura, Dumb and Dumber, Stargate, Natural Born Killers, The Crow, Clercs, Maverick, Ed Wood, In the Mouth of Madness, Interview With The Vampire.
I could go on.
And this is not even talking about how the 80s is a better decade for cinema, or how the 70s is the peak of the power of the author with far more experimental, artistic, and substantial productions.
Has quality declined? Yes. Massively. Humongously. Stupendously.
Most "tech" shows or hacker scenes are akin to the police procedurals, courtroom dramas, and medical shows that generally don't bear much relationship with what it's like day-to-day for cops, lawyers, or hospital workers. (Hence shows/films like The Wire and Reno 911, My Cousin Vinny and Suits, St. Elsewhere and Scrubs stand out.)
As a founder of a venture-backed startup with first-to-market tech that went through an accelerator in Palo Alto in the 2010s, Silicon Valley is basically entirely accurate. Actually tamer and more restrained than reality in many regards, at least anecdotally.
Note that in the special case of My Cousin Vinny, Mona was introduced as a last-minute rebuttal expert witness, so the opposing counsel did not have prior opportunity to vet the expert., and moreover, was the defense counsel's fiance, so the judge granted the prosecution additional leeway in questioning her.
However, the actual attempt to disqualify her was pretty standard, and generally something many lawyers would attempt to do with experts who are either new to the expert witnessing game or have been expert witnessing for so long that they no longer actively practice the underlying occupation that originally gave rise to their expertise. (This is actually how many expert witnesses discover their calling as a witness: they get called as an expert as a routine part of their day job, discover how easy it is, and after talking to the lawyers discover how lucrative it can be.)
Despite being a comedy, My Cousin Vinny is actually one of the most accurate courtroom movies ever made.
Popular Mechanics (and Science in 2nd place) were the best and most impactful tech magazines ever. Every issue answered your already existing questions about how a, b, or c works. It inspired and drove me to learn anything and everything I could about engineering, science, computers, logic, physics, etc. Not all of which I use on a daily basis, but it taught me to understand that tools, widgets and inventions are really the secret to making big and valuable things happen. It taught me to live and believe perhaps to a fault the Einstein quote "Strive not to be a success, rather strive to be of value." The feelings of receiving the latest PM magazine (and saving it until a Saturday morning to read and absorb from cover to cover, then again, and again to happy exhaustion) is an excitement and enthusiasm I doubt I'll ever experience again. Understanding how the rear differential worked originally, and then the limited slip differential upgrade, not only makes My Cousin Vinny one of the best movies of all time one of the best movies of all time, it makes you understand how awesome it is to understand. How is a torque converter different from a clutch? What is the difference bt super-charged and turbo? Why is super-charged better than turbo? Why is cool air better than warmer air in an internal combustion engine in the first place? What is lift? What are the three axes of rotation in flight? What happens to airflow and the airfoil surfaces when the speed of sound is achieved? If you aren't curious and need to know these things, you will probably never be an expert in your chosen sphere. Everything has an analogy, relationships, life, death, business, family. It all starts by understanding how things and people work.
Anyway, Pop Mec was the best ever. Miss it more than I can say.
The experience I had, which was pretty cool (although the case overall was very very depressing) in that we the jury were allowed to anonymously submit questions for the judge to ask the witnesses as well."They answer any question put to them." definitely did not apply to all of them. There were many, painful to watch, who at best gave half answers. I'd say the expert witness in the movie "my cousin Vinny" who testifies that the tire marks between the two cars are identical and that it is possible for both cars to have made the tire marks, while knowing that it was literally impossible for the defendants car to make the marks on the road, is very very close to what I saw experts do. In my case it was dumber, though. We had experts talking about how far a driver can see to recognize that a pedestrian is walking across a road and all of his citations were referencing daylight illumination. Thankfully, us jurors were able ask questions like "All of your citations are for daylight illumination. You know this case is about an accident at 3am and the streetlights were broken. What's the distance in that case?" And they would answer that question appropriately, but I didn't consider it impeccable character that they had acted all the while up to that point like the numbers they were giving were for the conditions of the case. And yes, they would always say they were familiar with the conditions of the case before answering any questions, so I generally felt is was lying by omission.
> not to mention a fan favorite movie "My Cousin Vinny" teaches every American that giving $1 to a lawyer creates client-attorney privilege.
Yes, but in this case, you aren't paying the lawyers, you're paying the bills that the lawyer is charging their clients, the VC. Essentially, it's a reimbursement where you are paying for the VC's A/C privilege.
If my company is going to pay your legal fees, then they work for me, not you [sic] and I will reserve the right to fire them
This the most logical comment on this thread. I can't believe people accept paying a VC's legal bills during a negotiation. VC's are in the business of doing deals, and have their own legal retainers to work on those deals - not to mention a fan favorite movie "My Cousin Vinny" teaches every American that giving $1 to a lawyer creates client-attorney privilege.
It's amazing that without being sued (and then losing on appeal in court), people are willing to pay out of pocket for a lawyer to actively work against them in what could be one of the most important deals of a founder's life.
My Cousin Vinny.
My sister and my brother-in-law are both lawyers. They love this movie. Their professors all love this movie. And from earlier this week: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13885659
> Really, the "hacker's complaint" is no different than lawyers complaining about, well, every courtroom drama ever.
Except, oddly enough, My Cousin Vinny, which lawyers apparently love [1]. The fact that I can name one movie known for this probably proves your general point, though.
[1] http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/entertainment/movies/New-Jerseys-US-Attorney-praises-accuracy-of-My-Cousin-Vinny.html
I'd agree that the US housing and derivatives markets are in a much better position than in 2007-2008. Atleast people who are getting mortgages now have some form of documentation, and risk manages are being asked to do their jobs.
The crisis now is that, and this is just my opinion, low rates are here to stay. with the amount of money in the system, people are being priced out of homes and as time goes on the amount by which they are priced out in the big cities is only going to grow.
As an aside...
I'm not a lawyer but I've heard people say My cousin Vinny is the most accurate court room movie ever. In a similar vein, I'd nominate the Big Short as one of the more accurate wall street movies ever made.
It showed the lone wolf who not only saw the coming crash, this was far and away the easiest part, but figured out how to profit form it by getting the banks to write him a CDS.
The two smart kids working out of their garage that were smart enough to succeed despite all their mistakes.
The hedge fund who did an incredible amount of due diligence, going to properties, knocking on doors, talking to people inside the industry to put together the pieces that no one else could.
The wall street sales guy who sold the CDS knowing that it might bankrupt his company but figured he'd make a killing on his commissions long before that happened.
And the most accurate part of the movie was that it showed the anguish that each of these people went through. They'd seen something no one else had, been right about it, had the event happen and even then everyone else continued to plug their ears and pretend nothing was going on while they continued to bleed money each month. It really did a good job of showing that you can be right about everything and still not make money if the rest of the market continues to act insane.
In 2007 there really was a sense that people knew things were way out of hand but everyone was thinking, "If I can just get one or two more years on the bonus cycle, I'll be able to get out". To be fair, this type of thinking probably ins't going away anytime soon.
A common refrain you hear from law enforcement is "ignorance of the law is no protection from breaking it."
But what if it was?
As Harvey Silverglate details in his book, "3 Felonies a Day,[1]" it is absurdly easy to accidentally commit a federal crime and serve prison time. The idea behind vindictive punishment is to make it so bad that you won't commit a crime, but if people aren't aware of the liabilities, how can people truly know their risk? Often intent has to be proven, but if it's in the interest of the prosecutor and their career to get a conviction, they'll get a conviction.
I think to reduce the "arrest/convict, ask questions later" approach is to give every officer and prosecutor a publicly available scorecard that shows their record of rightful arrests and convictions versus wrongful ones, as well as excessive punishment sought and applied in wrongful cases.
There is a scene at the end of the hilarious murder trial film, My Cousin Vinny, when the defense's expert witness completely shatters the prosecution's case, and the prosecutor immediately moves to dismiss all charges. I wonder if that would happen today?
1. http://www.threefeloniesaday.com/Youtoo/tabid/86/Default.aspx
> I'm not a fan of the defendant here, but I am a fan of holding the authorities to the rules. You know it's their job to uphold the law.
Yes, evidence is inadmissible based on how it is obtained. However, there are rules and procedures for how you get evidence excluded from a trial. This is why you pay good money for good lawyers: they know the rules for excluding evidence. I recommend watching the 1992 moive "My Cousin Vinny".
Oh, don't be such a martyr. Sometimes the fault is your own. In this case, your description of the course of events displays a good understanding of what happened, and yet you present it in a way that is quite deceptive. If you want a better response, try being more even-handed.
> In any case, he confessed to what was stated, and despite the spin now that it was a false confession, in earlier versions of reports about this he freely admitted that he said what he said...but that he purportedly followed it up later by an lol that made it all okay.
This reminds me of a courtroom scene in My Cousin Vinny. Upon being told that he was being charged for the murder of the sheriff, one of the main characters exclaims in disbelief, "What?! I shot the sheriff?!" And then in trial, the prosecutor asks him, "Did you not tell police, 'I shot the sheriff'?" That movie was a comedy, but you're seriously trying to make this argument. You're acting like a silly parody of a prosecutor. Agreeing upon the words used does not mean this guy "confessed."
And yes, the fact that it wasn't actually a threat does make it OK. Why wouldn't it? What interest does the law have in punishing people who aren't actually issuing threats? Should Alan Rickman be afraid of punishment for all the villainous lines he's delivered on camera?
The second paper references the Sokal Affair, as a matter of fact - the authors of the paper are from the (obviously fake) "Sokal Institute of Technology, Pune". :)
In fact, it references verbatim dialogues from "My Cousin Vinny", "Sholay" (a superhit Bollywood film), the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, the author's wife and her movie-review website and whole lot of other nonsense. :(