TonyMontana96 An unimportant, lousy justice system drama, that has no insight into its subject matter, nor does it showcase any actual justice, it's merely a dull bore, that will be forgotten come tomorrow. The first half an hour is decent, showing the scum committing there crimes, and showing there court trial, but after all that is devolves into this ten middle aged, good citizens sitting round a table and rambling on for the next hour, and that I cannot fathom, why anyone would label this as good is beyond me, because it's a justice film that doesn't actually show much in terms of justice, and the only real violence comes in the last ten minutes, and I was falling asleep by then because the picture was dreadfully paced, it's sluggish, dreary and rather disappointing. Sure there will be worse films, but this is a film that could have been memorable, worthwhile and entertaining, and instead goes down as forgettable and bland.Michael Douglas is good as Judge Stephen Hardin, Yaphet Kotto play's honest Detective Harry Lowes very well and Hal Holbrook (Magnum Force) is effortlessly engaging as Judge Benjamin Caulfield, an important member of the secret society and friend of Hardin. The rest of the cast are pretty good to, making it obvious that the reason the film doesn't work is due to the writing and the narrative, Peter Hyams's direction may have been decent but he also helped write the screenplay, himself and Rodrick Taylor have made a mess of it, unsure on what film they actually wanted to make by including a ridiculous plot point that sees Steven changing his mind about being a part of this society, in the last ten minutes he runs to their secret hideout to inform two child murderers that they are in danger, these scumbags beat him up and probably would have killed him, had he not got a kick in, and headed for the exit which ends in more stupidity.I have no idea what they were thinking with the ending, it's a train-wreck of sorts, that not only lacks sense but lacks an inventive approach and feels heavily forced, most likely thrown in the mix when Hyams realized the picture lacked action full stop, and I did not expect a full on action picture, but I wanted to see some form of justice, a good narrative and insightful dialogue, but after thirty minutes all you get is dull, uninspired material that is so boring, you're tempted to sleep through the remainder of the film. The Star Chamber is forgettable, boring stuff that completely wastes an intriguing premise, by dwelling too much on pointless dialogue, and uninteresting plot devices.

utgard14 Young judge Michael Douglas is frustrated with having to let scumbag criminals go on legal technicalities. Soon he's approached by his friend Hal Holbrook about joining a group of judges that meet in secret and decide to dole out vigilante justice to criminals who the legal system failed to prosecute.Mature, thought-provoking thriller with an excellent first half but man does it fall apart in the end. The basic problem is that the entire first half of the movie is spent building up to Douglas joining this group. So a lot of time is spent on making us emotionally invested in WHY this group is necessary so we're on board with Douglas. But then, almost immediately after joining, the movie pulls the rug out from under itself and Douglas regrets his decision. Then we get a pedestrian climax involving a chase and shootout in a warehouse. All of that passion shown towards caring about the victims in the first half is tossed out in favor of the movie suddenly caring more about some dirtbag drug dealers who are clearly guilty of a lot of terrible crimes but maybe not this particular one they're to be executed for. Sorry but emotionally it's a tough sell.The cast is terrific, with wonderful character actors in roles big and small throughout. The writing in the first half is also really good. But boy, the way it falls apart and so abruptly is such a downer. I'm still giving it a decent score of 7 because when it's good, it's great, but be forewarned that it's a movie that chickens out on its own premise.

GUENOT PHILIPPE I am amazingly surprised that no user has pointed it out. Nearly every one realized that STAR CHAMBER was very similar to MAGNUM FORCE. Correct. Every one speaks of Hal Holbrook. OK. But no one tells that Holbrook played in MAGNUM FORCE too, and in a very similar character as this one. One of the lead of a vigilante police force who wanted to wipe all criminals out. Are they blind or what? Besides, I must admit that I prefer Ted Post's most famous feature, starring Clint Eastwood. Peter Hyams gives here a correct film, but he has done much better. See CAPRICORNE ONE, for instance.I will finish this comment in pointing out that this kind of topic was very common in the late seventies and early eighties.

Nicholas Rhodes Although the ending of the film is stupid, frustrating and illogical, the rest of this film is in fact pretty good, though it should be mentioned that some of the scenes are difficult to take. Whereas in Europe, justice systems seem more preoccupied with the rights of the criminal and couldn't care less about those of the victim, it seems to me that in the USA they have a more correct sense of right and wrong and probably apportion blame more justly, though of course, no system in the world is perfect. That said, as the film demonstrates, there would appear to be slip-ups even in the American system, and what better than the star chamber to right the wrongs committed by the justice system, murderers let off on technicalities etc etc. This gives the viewer a feeling of satisfaction .... that there is at least one continent in the world where criminals are really made to pay for their crimes. It's all the more surprising then, that a film which gives the impression of supporting this method, as I do, should suddenly at the last minute, want to take the bleeding-heart-liberal defense of the criminal ? What sane person could actually wish that scum such as Monk and Coom continue living instead of being eliminated ? To the film's credit they are actually assassinated by the hit man, but one get's the feeling, rightly or wrongly, that the film's director would have us believe that this is not the way of dealing with criminals, but without proposing a viable alternative solution. So much for the liberal politics of the film, which I find totally obnoxious, but on a cinematic level, it's pretty good and exciting stuff. I found the DVD here recently in Europe, and have watched it several times - although the ending is a real pain in the neck, the rest of the film is definitely worth watching.