| Erin Brockovich | |
|---|---|
.jpg) Theatrical release poster | |
| Directed by | Steven Soderbergh |
| Written by | Susannah Grant |
| Produced by | |
| Starring | |
| Cinematography | Ed Lachman |
| Edited by | Anne V. Coates |
| Music by | Thomas Newman |
Production companies | |
| Distributed by |
|
Release dates |
|
Running time | 130 minutes |
| Country | United States |
| Language | English |
| Budget | $52 million |
| Box office | $256.3 million |
Erin Brockovich is a 2000 Americanbiographicallegal drama film directed bySteven Soderbergh and written bySusannah Grant.[3] The film is a dramatization of the true story ofErin Brockovich, portrayed byJulia Roberts, who initiated a legal case against thePacific Gas and Electric Company over its culpability for theHinkley groundwater contamination incident.Erin Brockovich premiered inLos Angeles on March 14, 2000, and was released theatrically in the United States byUniversal Pictures on March 17, 2000, and internationally byColumbia Pictures. It emerged as a critical and commercial success, grossing $256.3 million worldwide.
The film received five nominations at the73rd Academy Awards, includingBest Picture,Best Director, andBest Supporting Actor (Albert Finney). Roberts won Best Actress at theAcademy Awards,BAFTA Awards, theCritics Choice Awards, theGolden Globes, and theSAG Awards. Additionally, the film won theCritics' Choice Movie Award for Best Director (for Soderbergh, also forTraffic) and theSAG Award for Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Supporting Role (Finney).
In 1993,Erin Brockovich is an unemployed single mother of three living inHinkley, California. After being injured in a car crash with a doctor, she files a lawsuit. Her lawyer,Ed Masry, expects to win, but Erin's explosive courtroom behavior undercross-examination loses her the case, and Ed cannot return her phone calls afterwards. One day, he arrives at work to find her in the office, apparently working. She says he told her things would work out, but they did not, and that she needed a job. Sympathizing with Erin, Ed gets her a paid job at the office.
Erin is given files for a real estate case where thePacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) is offering to purchase the home of Donna Jensen, a fellow Hinkley resident. Erin is surprised to see medical records in the file and visits Donna, who explains that she had kept all her PG&E correspondence together. Donna appreciates PG&E's help: she has had several tumors, and her husband hasHodgkin's lymphoma, but PG&E has always supplied a doctor at their own expense. Erin asks why they would do that, and Donna replies, "Because of the chromium". Erin begins digging into the case and finds evidence that the groundwater in Hinkley is seriously contaminated with carcinogenichexavalent chromium, but PG&E has been telling Hinkley residents that they use a safer form of chromium. After several days away from the office doing this research, she is fired by Ed until he realizes she has been working the entire time and sees what she has found, and rehires her.
Erin continues her research and, over time, visits many of the community's residents and wins their trust. She finds many cases of tumors and other medical problems in Hinkley. PG&E's doctors have treated everyone and think the cluster of cases is just a coincidence, unrelated to the "safe" chromium. The Jensens' claim for compensation grows into a major lawsuit, but the direct evidence only relates to PG&E's Hinkley plant, not to corporate management.
Knowing that PG&E could slow any settlement for years through delays and appeals, Ed takes the opportunity to arrange for disposition by binding arbitration, but a large majority of the plaintiffs must agree to this. Erin returns to Hinkley and persuades all 634 plaintiffs to go along. While she is there, a man named Charles Embry approaches her to say that he and his cousin were PG&E employees, but his cousin recently died from the poison. The man says he was tasked with destroying documents at PG&E, but "as it turns out," he "wasn't a very good employee".
Embry gives Erin the documents, which include a 1966 memo proving corporate headquarters knew the water was contaminated with hexavalent chromium, did nothing about it, and advised the Hinkley operation to keep this secret. The judge orders PG&E to pay a $333 million settlement to be distributed among the plaintiffs.
In the aftermath, Ed hands Erin her bonus payment for the case but warns her he has changed the amount. She explodes into a complaint that she deserves more respect, but is astonished to find that he has increased it to $2 million.
The idea for the film came to be when executive producer Carla Santos Shamberg happened to learn aboutErin Brockovich's story due to sharing a chiropractor with her.[4] Santos Shamberg invited Brockovich over to her house to share her story. Of their meeting, Santos Shamberg recalled: "I couldn't believe it. It seemed incredible that this twice-divorced woman with three young children, who had no money, no resources, and no formal education, had single-handedly put thiscase together. I thought she seemed like the perfect role model for the new millennium."[5]
Brockovich sold the film rights to her story in 1997 and the film began development atJersey Films.[4] Producers courtedCallie Khouri[6] andPaul Attanasio[7] to write the script, but after they passed, screenwriterSusannah Grant was hired. Grant, who was looking to do a "story about a kick-ass broad", secured a meeting with Brockovich in person.[4] Grant spent a year following Brockovich and her kids around while writing the screenplay.[8] To ensure the script's accuracy, Grant said she spent weeks going over the trial transcripts, Hinkley water board records, and notes made by Brockovich during the investigation.[4]
Grant and the producers were in agreement that they did not want to do a traditionalcourtroom drama where institutional corruption would be the heart of the story. Said Grant of the script: "I came to believe that the spine of the story would be stronger if it was an emotional spine rather than an informational spine. So I really structured it [around] Erin and Ed's relationship. Structurally, it's a love story. It's not a romantic love, obviously, but it is an interpersonal love story. That was going to give me the most freedom. There's a scene where she's explaining the degree of malfeasance on PG&E's part, and all of that is in there, but what she's really doing in that scene is proving to Ed her worth and that he should be stepping up and meeting her where she is."[6]
After three big-name directors passed on helming the film, Jersey Films approachedSteven Soderbergh, who already had a relationship with the production company due to his 1998 filmOut of Sight.[4] Soderbergh was selected to direct because he was known for being a good director of women. "I knew he would treat this character with a lot of respect and not make her silly. He did it withJennifer Lopez [inOut of Sight] andAndie MacDowell [inSex, Lies, and Videotape]," said Santos Shamberg.[4] Said Soderbergh: "It's rare to find human-sized heroes, and I was just captivated by [Erin] and her relationship with Ed and the fact that it was a story about people who made certain sacrifices and stood on certain principles without being a screed."[4] Soderbergh was also drawn to the project for the opportunity to direct a film in which the female protagonist is in every scene in the film, something he had never done before.[9]
Santos Shamberg picturedJulia Roberts in the lead role from the outset, but producers thought her casting would be a long shot. However, the script was slipped to Roberts' agent and Roberts expressed enthusiasm in taking on the lead role and working with Soderbergh.[4][9] In doing the film, Roberts became the first actress at that time to be paid $20 million.[10]
The film was shot in 1999 over eleven weeks, of which five took place inVentura, California.[11]Richard LaGravenese did an uncredited script polish.[12][6][13]
Brockovich herself appears in the film as a waitress, whileEdward Masry appears as a diner patron sitting behind her.[4] A judge who delivered a key ruling in the PG&E case was played by the actual judge.[4]
The scene where a PG&E attorney is afraid to drink from a glass of water after Brockovich and Masry inform her that it came from Hinkley wells was altered for dramatic effect, but did actually take place during a trial.[4]
A scene that was cut from the final version showed Erin becoming sick from the toxins, which happened in real life. Soderbergh excised the scene as he "didn't want people to think that this was going to turn into one of those movies where the protagonist gets terminally ill. It was a tough call, because Erin really did get sick and was hospitalized for a while."[14]
Erin Brockovich performed well with test audiences but executives at Universal Pictures were worried that audiences would be turned off by the title character's use of profane language.[15]
Erin Brockovich was released in 2,848 theaters on March 17, 2000, and grossed $28.1 million on its opening weekend. It had the second-highest March opening weekend upon release, afterLiar Liar. This was also the second-highest opening weekend for aJulia Roberts film, behindRunaway Bride.[16] The film reached the number one spot during its first weekend, beatingMission to Mars andFinal Destination.[17] It made $18.5 million while declining by 34% for its second weekend while outgrossingRomeo Must Die,Here on Earth andWhatever It Takes.[18][19] Then,Erin Brockovich collected $13.8 million in its third weekend, defeatingThe Road to El Dorado,The Skulls andHigh Fidelity.[20] Overall, it spent a total of three weeks as the number one film until it was dethroned byRules of Engagement.[21] The film went on to make $125.6 million in North America, making it the tenth highest-grossing film domestically for the year 2000.[22] It grossed $130.7 million internationally for a worldwide total of $256.3 million.[23]
On review websiteRotten Tomatoes,Erin Brockovich holds an approval rating of 87% based on 192 reviews. The critics consensus reads, "Taking full advantage of Julia Roberts's considerable talent and appeal,Erin Brockovich overcomes a few character and plot issues to deliver a smart, thoughtful, and funny legal drama."[24] OnMetacritic, the film has a weighted score of 73 out of 100 based on 36 critics, indicating "generally favorable reviews".[25] Audiences polled byCinemaScore gave the film an average grade of "A" on an A+ to F scale.[26]
In his review forThe New York Observer,Andrew Sarris wrote, "We get the best of independent cinema and the best of mainstream cinema all in one package.Erin Brockovich, likeWonder Boys right before it, makes the year 2000 seem increasingly promising for movies".[27]Newsweek'sDavid Ansen began his review with, "Julia Roberts is flat-out terrific inErin Brockovich." Furthermore, he wrote, "Roberts has wasted her effervescence on many paltry projects, but she hits the jackpot this time. Erin, single mother of three, a former MissWichita who improbably rallies a community to take on a multi-billion-dollar corporation, is the richest role of her career, simultaneously showing off her comic, dramatic and romantic chops".[28]Rolling Stone'sPeter Travers wrote, "Roberts shows the emotional toll on Erin as she tries to stay responsible to her children and to a job that has provided her with a first taste of self-esteem".[29] Robert Philpot ofFort Worth Star-Telegram gave it a three-and-a-half out of four rating, describing it as "a movie that uses a wicked sense of humor to examine serious themes. It's the kind ofDavid-vs.-Goliath story told inThe Insider andA Civil Action, but it drops the self-importance of those movies and replaces it with a refreshingly feisty attitude".[30] In his review forEntertainment Weekly,Owen Gleiberman gave the film a "B+" rating and wrote, "It's a delight to watch Roberts, with her flirtatious sparkle and undertow of melancholy, ricochet off Finney's wonderfully jaded, dry-as-beef-jerky performance as the beleaguered career attorney who knows too much about the loopholes of his profession to have much faith left in it".[31]Sight & Sound's Andrew O'Hehir wrote, "Perhaps the best thing about this relaxed and supremely engaging film (for my money the best work either the director or his star has ever done) is that even its near-fairytale resolution doesn't offer a magical transformation".[32] Donald Munro ofFresno Bee gave it a "B+" rating and said, "We've indulged in the bash-the-big-bad-corporation genre before with such upstanding films asSilkwood,Norma Rae andA Civil Action -- but never have we had such rollicking fun doing it".[33] In her review forThe Village Voice,Amy Taubin wrote, "What's pretty original about the picture is that it focuses an investigative drama based on a true story around a comic performance".[34]
However, film criticRoger Ebert gave the film a two-star review, writing, "There is obviously a story here, butErin Brockovich doesn't make it compelling. The film lacks focus and energy, the character development is facile and thin".[35] In his review forThe New York Times,A.O. Scott wrote, "After proving, for about 40 minutes, what a marvelous actress she can be, Ms. Roberts spends the next 90 content to be a movie star. As the movie drags on, her performance swells to bursting with moral vanity and phony populism".[36]Time'sRichard Corliss found the film to be "slick, grating and false. We bet it makes a bundle".[37]
Writing about the film for its twentieth anniversary, critic Scott Tobias wrote inThe Guardian, "With this film andTraffic the same year, Soderbergh would prove to be a master at connecting the dots without making it seem like an information dump. InErin Brockovich, Roberts is the spoonful of sugar that makes the medicine go down: as we learn about different types of chromium, the range of medical abnormalities, and the ins and outs of real estate documents and toxicology reports, she's ripping some poor suit with invective or using her body as a diversionary tactic. It never feels difficult to sort through the facts – and, more crucially, the emotional stakes of the case are never lost in them. That's Brockovich's gift. And that's Roberts', too."[38]
Julia Roberts became the first actress to win anAcademy Award,BAFTA Award,Critics' Choice Movie Award,Golden Globe Award,National Board of Review Award, andScreen Actors Guild Award for a single performance.[39]
Steven Soderbergh received dual nominations forBest Director that year for bothErin Brockovich andTraffic, winning the award for the latter.[40] In 2021, members ofWriters Guild of America West (WGAW) andWriters Guild of America, East (WGAE) voted the film's screenplay 78th in WGA’s 101 Greatest Screenplays of the 21st Century (so far).[41][42]
American Film Institute recognition:
The film was released on VHS and DVD on August 15, 2000.[83]
On her website, Brockovich says the film is "probably 98% accurate".[84] While the general facts of the story are accurate, there are some minor discrepancies between actual events and the movie, as well as a number of controversial and disputed issues more fundamental to the case. In the film, Erin Brockovich appears to deliberately use her cleavage to seduce the water board attendant to allow her to access the documents. Brockovich has acknowledged that her cleavage may have had an influence, but denies consciously trying to influence individuals in this way.[85] In the film, Ed Masry represents Erin Brockovich in the car crash case. In reality, it was his law partner, Jim Vititoe.[86] Brockovich had never been Miss Wichita; she had been Miss Pacific Coast. According to Brockovich, this detail was deliberately changed by Soderbergh as he thought it was "cute" to have her be beauty queen of the region from which she came.[85] The "not so good employee" who met Brockovich in the bar was Chuck Ebersohl. He told Erin about the documents that he and Lillian Melendez had been tasked by PG&E to destroy.[87]
George Halaby, played byAaron Eckhart in the film, along with Brockovich's ex-husband Shawn Brown, alleged that she had an affair with Masry. They tried to extort $310,000 out of them by threatening to go public about the affair.[88] Halaby was arrested and the lawyer John Jeffrey Reiner was suspended from practicing, convicted of extortion, and later disbarred.[88][89][5]
