>
> > I hope you're talking about the 1997 version and not the brilliant 1962 classic. The latter is currently ranked as the 27th highest rated movie in the IMDb and was nominated for Best Picture -- so I'm not so sure we can, in fact, all agree. :-) I haven't seen the 1997 version, though, so you may be quite right about that.
>
>
> I haven't seen the '97 version either, and I'm not in any big hurry TO see it. . . I don't see how anyone could top Peck's Atticus.
>

Actually, the one that I'm talking about is the Black-and-White one produced a LONG time ago with a very low budget. It was horrible. First of all Atticus did NOTHING in the entire movie except sit in a chair and read the paper and say about 7 lines in the court room. Apparently, the person who did the movie (I already returned it to the library) thouht that the entire trial wasn't very important. I disagree. I think that the trial is the MOST important thing. Either way, I am quite sure that this movie isn't the same as either of the ones mentioned above.

-Ka"I should see if I can find that 1962 one"z!