I feel that there is a real untapped well when it comes to thrillers starring Harrison Ford, in the vein of Michael Douglas' 80s/90s run. I only really noticed this when looking at how Ford was a casting choice for Basic Instinct, Fatal Attraction and just about the rest of Douglas’s films of the period, before noticing that Douglas was a leading choice for the four films we’re going to look at today. The key difference for me is that if Douglas was in The Fugitive, there would be the overhanging possibility behind the eyes that Douglas did actually kill his wife. With Ford there is no question, there is a supreme everyman honest quality to him, that can be darkened and can be tempted, but is always from a deeply warm place. In the decade following the final Indiana Jones and Star Wars films, Ford starred in two exceptional thriller masterpieces, one great legal thriller and a solid Hitchcock thriller. Let’s take a moment to talk about them, which bar one, I feel are all painfully underrated.

Witness (1985)
Director: Peter Weir

Credit

Our first film is the drama/thriller Witness from 1985, directed by Peter Weir, prior to his other classic films such as Dead Poets Society and The Truman Show. The film finds Ford as John Book, a Philadelphia detective brought into the world of the Amish following a small Amish boy bearing witness to a cop on cop killing, unearthing a wealth of corruption in Book’s force. Book takes up in the small Amish village, to protect the boy, Samuel, and his mother, Rachel, played wonderfully by Kelly McGillis. Although the drama elements of the film hold great power and although the detective and thriller aspects of the plot hold great tension, the true core of the film is the sexual and romantic tension found between Rachel and John, with Ford and McGillis sharing an incomparable amount of chemistry that leads to some truly excruciating scenes of flirting and long stares. The screenplay by William Kelley and Pamela Wallace has often been touted as a teaching example for budding screenwriters, emulating a perfect structure for both a romance film and a detective thriller. Danny Glover, Josef Sommer and Angus MacInnes are all suitably menacing as the bent cops up against Book, leading to a conclusion greatly influenced by the "one against many" ending of the cowboy classic High Noon. A conclusion of truly great drama and pressure, culminating in a stellar confrontation scene with a corn covered Ford giving us the best that his brutal tone can offer, even more effecting in comparison to the touchingly sweet flirtations that we viewed earlier in the film. Despite the Amish community actively refusing to take part in any aspect of the film, the Amish plot is delivered with great sincerity, realism and caution. The Amish are realistic characters whose antiquated ways are explained and given many instances in the film’s running time, with needed exposition always being delivered with an eye on the possible tedium that could incur. Lukas Haas as the young Samuel is brilliant and perfectly encapsulates the naivety and power of the young child, giving great dimension to a character that could have so easily been a nothing part and nothing more than a MacGuffin, a warm prop even. Weir’s incredible touch is evident all over the film and throughout he makes example of his great talent in the medium of film, giving equal importance to the largest gun-fights and to the smallest human moments. The film is simultaneously of the micro and macro and is wonderful all the same.

Presumed Innocent (1990)
Director: Alan J. Pakula

Credit

Adapted from the Scot Turow absolute smash hit bestseller by screenwriting legend Frank Pierson (Cool Hand Luke, Dog Day Afternoon), and directed by one of the greats of the 70s Alan J. Pakula (All The President’s Men, Klute, The Parallex View) and starring a seemingly never-ending abundance of great actors in lead and supporting role, Presumed Innocent has an awful lot going for it. Yet many feel it misses its mark, with people usually pointing to the ending as a point of contention. I do not share in this opinion and find the film to be a fine piece of work highlighting the greatest talents of all the great talent within it. Starting with Pakula, crafting at once a certain and thrilling courtroom drama and a personal sexually charged story of obsession. Ford portrays here Rusty Sabitch, a more vulnerable character than we’ve seen him play before, completely consumed by a jealous obsession that’s tearing him apart, whilst also dealing with the current legal ramifications of that matter, when the woman he was having an affair turns up brutally murdered with him as the chief suspect. The film was produced by another incredible figure in the world of film, Sydney Pollack, who bought the rights for the book and originally considered himself to direct. I feel that the feel of a Pollack thriller/drama is still present in the DNA of the film, but that Pakula often elevates what was by all accounts a rather trashy piece of fiction. The supporting cast offers great turn after great turn; Raul Julia is cunning and relentlessly charming as Sandy Stern, Ford’s lawyer. With Brian Denehy offering a combination of mentoring warmth and a great human villainy. Paul Winfield and John Spencer offer moments of comedy, whilst also bring real moments of grit to outside characters. Our two female leads in the film both do wonderful work; with Bonnie Bedelia, who you’ll most likely remember as John MacLaine’s wife in the Die Hard series giving a great human warmth to a character that could very easily come off as an unbelievable and passive figure, with her final monologue really getting to the heart of what could have simply been a ‘ta-da’ moment. Greta Sacchi is our victim here but lives on beyond the grave to devastating effect, offering a brutally sexy femme fatale, who is most importantly very believable when it comes to the questioning of whether or not so many men could fall head over heels for her. With Sacchi as Polhemus, there is simply no question. 

Credit

Much has been made about the ending of the film and how the film maybe suffered on its release from the fact that at the time every man and his dog had read the paperback and knew the twist. Now I had never read the novel, nor knew anything about the film’s plot before watching it – however I do have to say, that I guessed the ending almost immediately. I bring this up not in some snobby way to boast, because I really do think it’s quite obvious. However I feel it doesn’t take as much away from the viewing experience as one might suggest; after all' the many minor twists and turns of the film took me for a loop almost every time, making the watch a thorough enjoyment. As with the best twists, they should impact the plot and impact the drama of the film, rather than just being a cheap subversion of expectations. Although predictable I do think that the ending still works and is wholly justified in the plot we’ve seen throughout, which is often where many lesser twists fall flat on their faces. I feel that Presumed Innocent is a taut thriller with great characters and interactions and an overall interesting mystery at the heart of it. An all in all great film in the vein of the 80s/90s courtroom drama – a very specific subgenre indeed.
Frantic (1988) 
Director: Roman Polanski

Credit

This late 80s thriller is another example of the trend of adding sexuality, profanity and violence into the old Hitchcock formula. This trend brought varied results, with some feeling that these elements were forced; however, Frantic I feel has too little of these elements and would be supremely bettered by a little more sexuality, a little more violence and little more dark realism punctuating it’s story of an innocent man caught up in a political matter by pure chance. A plot that’s pure Hitchcock. Ford stars here as Dr. Richard Walker, the first Dr. Richard that’ll make an appearance on the list. The film touches on a loss of innocence for the character and these are truly it’s best moments, caught up in a world of drugs and illegal couriering. Roger Ebert once commented on how the film reminds us “of how consuming a good thriller can be” and I second this stance, with the integral mystery of Frantic being one that does completely involve it’s audience and leads us down many unexpected paths. The pace of the film does have a major second act issue and I have to second Ford’s own witty comment when he referred to the title as misleading, proffering the term “moderately disturbed” over Frantic. It is reported that the film also lost 15 minutes of its running time from studio demands, I can’t really imagine how the plot could have been stretched further however. The casting of Ford is again perfect here, with Kevin Costner, William Hurt and Nick Nolte all being considered for the leading role, I just can’t think of anybody better than Ford for it. The uncredited work of screenwriting legend and known Hollywood script doctor Robert Towne isn’t really noticeable here, and feels like the product before a re-write. All in all though the film is a more than solid thriller with a great turn from Ford, and some great work from its director Roman Polanski in its chief set pieces and construction of tension. But perhaps the least recommendable film out of these four.

The Fugitive (1993)
Director: Andrew Davis

Credit

Perhaps the best movie on this list is our last, the absolute ever-rewatchable 1993 action thriller "man on the run" classic, The Fugitive. Based on the classic 60s series of the same name, the film follows Ford as Doctor Richard Kimble wrongly accused of the murder of his wife. Taking the chance of a freak accident to become a fugitive and find the real killer of his wife, all the while being pursued by Samuel Gerard, played by an incredible Tommy Lee Jones in an Oscar winning role (best supporting actor). Ford is just superb in the film, giving us exactly the right amounts of anger, deep loss and pain, whilst all the while keeping a firm head on his shoulders making the goal of finding the one-armed man that he knows took his wife’s life all the more present and urgent, with us never not understanding wholly the stake of what we are dealing with. Although Ford is truly sublime, the man who steals the show here is Jones. Giving simply one of the finest supporting performances of all time. Jones best facet to the character, and this is from the script as well, is his duty to the job and how over the course of the film as he grows to understand Kimble’s innocence that he duels with this duty and his mild compassion for the man. The men in Gerard’s team also fill out the film nicely, with Joe Pantoiliano, Daniel Roebuck, L. Scott Caldwell and Tom Wood all giving great colour to the roles that could have very easily faded into the background with Jones in the foreground. 

Credit

We get short scenes with big stars such as Julianne Moore and Jane Lynch. Moore originally being a love interest for Kimble, ultimately left on the cutting room floor for the better, as I have always felt that having Kimble fall for another woman whilst fighting to find his wife’s murderer would have completely jeopardised the emotional weight of Kimble’s journey and actions. In our two villains we have polar opposites. Andreas Katsulas as Sykes, the one armed man is gritty and realistic and perfectly fits the workman-esque killer that he’s portraying, whereas Jeroen Krabbe as Dr. Charles Nichols hams it up just the right amount, offering a quality of James Mason in North by Northwest, that adds a real villainy to the role. The direction from Andrew Davis is genuinely excellent and propels this film to an almost breakneck pace for long stretches, maintaining this quality of intensity even in the more reserved scenes of investigation. But in the scenes of great action and suspense, Davis highlights an extreme talent in the craft of building set pieces and draining out every possible morsel of anticipation and tension. Unfortunately Davis didn’t go on to direct any other great films, with A Perfect Murder being the only real exception and that’s more so a guilty pleasure for Michael Douglas fans, than it actually is a great film. It certainly is nowhere near the quality of this truly excellent film, with all time performances from Ford and certainly from Jones.

As aforementioned, I have always felt that there was untapped potential in this field and I feel these four films highlight my point. And one could even throw What Lies Beneath in there too, and the more said about that perfect film the better. But I feel that in that film he is playing a very different type of role, a no less incredible one, and perhaps even a better one. But I feel as if that’s a discussion for another article. So wait in antici...pation my dear readers.

-       -   Thomas Carruthers