Imagine two Hollywood legends, Paul Newman and Robert Redford, whose on-screen magic in just two films made them icons of American cinema—yet behind the scenes, a fascinating twist of fate turned one into a star and the other into a ghosting act! This story isn't just about rivalry; it's a peek into the unpredictable world of movie-making, where egos clash and opportunities slip away. But here's where it gets controversial—could Redford's choices have cost him an Oscar nod, or was it all part of the game? Stick around to uncover the drama and decide for yourself.
20th Century Studios
Few partnerships in film history capture the public's imagination quite like the duo of Paul Newman and Robert Redford. It's even more impressive when you consider they only collaborated on two movies together. Their hits, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid and The Sting, are forever linked with incredible on-screen synergy, and off-screen, they were genuine pals, even living as neighbors in Connecticut. Tragically, plans for a third film, A Walk in the Woods, fizzled out after Newman's death in 2008—Redford later took the lead opposite Nick Nolte. Surprisingly, these titans rarely vied for the same parts, but there was one notable instance where Newman filled a void left by Redford, scooping up an Oscar nomination in the process.
That pivotal role belonged to Frank Galvin, a struggling alcoholic lawyer who battles the Catholic Church in Sidney Lumet's gripping legal drama The Verdict. Adapted from Barry Reed's 1980 novel, the film features a screenplay by David Mamet, who was just dipping his toes into cinema after the sizzling remake of The Postman Always Rings Twice. A slew of A-list actors, including William Holden, Dustin Hoffman, and Cary Grant, eyed the compelling lead, but Robert Redford jumped in when the studio nixed Mamet's draft and brought in Jay Presson Allen for rewrites.
Fresh off his sole competitive Oscar win for Ordinary People, Redford wielded significant influence. He pushed for more tweaks from director James Bridges to make the protagonist less abrasive and more approachable. However, the producers grew frustrated with the star's attempts to transform Galvin into a 'Boy Scout,' his no-shows on set, and secretive meetings with his frequent collaborator Sydney Pollack after Bridges quit. And this is the part most people miss—these behind-the-scenes tensions led to Redford being let go, paving the way for Paul Newman to step in.
What unfolds in The Verdict?
20th Century Studios
In The Verdict, Paul Newman portrays Frank Galvin, a down-and-out Boston attorney who's already down on his luck before his big case even starts. Once a brilliant, motivated lawyer with a bright future, he's now a divorced boozer whose days revolve around scavenging clients at wakes and wasting time on pinball machines, neglecting his paperwork. His downward spiral halts when his former mentor, Mickey Morrissey (played by Jack Warden), out of compassion, hands him what seems like an easy win: a medical malpractice lawsuit against two top doctors at a Catholic hospital, who negligently left a young woman in a coma. The church hierarchy is eager to settle quietly with cash to smooth things over.
Galvin's simple task is to grab the check, pocket his share, and ease the family's burden. But a spark of long-buried integrity ignites, prompting him to press forward with the trial. This pits him against the hospital's sharp defense lawyer, Ed Concannon (James Mason), who assembles a powerhouse team. Galvin soon second-guesses himself; battling low self-esteem, a prejudiced judge, a missing key witness, and a weak replacement who gets torn apart. Yet, true to classic courtroom thrillers, he unearths a last-minute surprise witness—will their evidence sway the jury?
Lumet often explored themes of justice in his work, and The Verdict echoes his earlier masterpiece 12 Angry Men. In both, the legal framework is portrayed as a massive, cumbersome system that's functional at its core, but its success hinges on the expertise and drive of the individuals operating it. Mamet's script, though, injects a sharper cynicism about how wealth and influence can tilt court outcomes, crafting an understated tale of an underdog's fight with Newman delivering a standout performance.
Why The Verdict shines even brighter with Paul Newman at the helm
20th Century Studios
With Sidney Lumet directing, Paul Newman reviewed both versions of The Verdict's script and opted for David Mamet's grittier take. This choice resulted in a profound, introspective movie centered on Newman's restrained yet powerful portrayal. Newman excelled at depicting flawed characters—from ruthless anti-heroes like the title role in Hud to the delightfully shady Reggie Dunlop in Slap Shot—and he poured his talent into Frank Galvin, a worn-out, liquor-soaked failure. A less skilled actor might have exaggerated the drama, but Newman avoids flashy theatrics; he authentically infuses Galvin with deep exhaustion and hopelessness, transforming him into a chronic underperformer who treats wins with a quiet gasp, as if each success lightens an emotional load.
Robert Redford, for all his charm and star power, was more of a blockbuster idol than a nuanced performer. It's hard to picture him injecting the same depth into the role. In fact, his prior attempts to smooth out Galvin's rough spots while attached to the project suggest The Verdict could have morphed into something tonally different—perhaps more polished but less raw. Newman, on the other hand, embraced the character's darker sides, even advocating for a scene where Galvin violently strikes a deceitful lover who turns out to be aligned with the opposition. It's a subtly captivating turn, earning him his sixth Best Actor Oscar nod, though he lost to Ben Kingsley in Gandhi. Newman later won an Honorary Oscar in 1986 and finally clinched a competitive one by reprising Fast Eddie Felson in The Color of Money. That was a solid role, sure, but embodying Frank Galvin felt even more worthy to many fans.
But let's stir the pot: Was Redford's exit a blessing in disguise for the film, or did it rob him of a career-defining moment? Some might argue Newman's casting elevated The Verdict to classic status, while others could say Redford's input might have made it more commercially appealing. What do you think—did Redford ghost the role for the better, or should he have stuck it out? Share your take in the comments and let's debate!
