My Cousin Vinny 1992

Box Office

$11M

Runtime

120 min

Language(s)

English

English

In this sidesplitting crime comedy, unlikely hero Vinny, a green but determined New York lawyer, must navigate a fish-out-of-water situation in rural Alabama when his teenage cousin Bill and friend Stan find themselves accused of murder. With zero courtroom experience, Vinny must use wit and determination to save the day and prove himself as a capable advocate.

In this sidesplitting crime comedy, unlikely hero Vinny, a green but determined New York lawyer, must navigate a fish-out-of-water situation in rural Alabama when his teenage cousin Bill and friend Stan find themselves accused of murder. With zero courtroom experience, Vinny must use wit and determination to save the day and prove himself as a capable advocate.

Does My Cousin Vinny have end credit scenes?

No!

My Cousin Vinny does not have end credit scenes.

Ratings


Metacritic

68

Metascore

7.8

User Score

Rotten Tomatoes
review

%

TOMATOMETER

review

0%

User Score

IMDb

7.6 /10

IMDb Rating

TMDB

75

%

User Score

Movie Quiz


My Cousin Vinny Quiz: Test your knowledge on the hilarious courtroom antics and unforgettable moments of 'My Cousin Vinny'.

Who is Bill's cousin and the defense attorney in the movie?

Plot Summary


As Bill Gambini (Ralph Macchio) and Stan Rothenstein (Mitchell Whitfield) navigated the rural roads of Beechum County, Alabama, their urban sensibilities took a backseat to the laid-back charm of small-town life. However, their brief respite from city streets was disrupted when they failed to pay for a can of tuna at a local convenience store, leaving the clerk fatally wounded and themselves in the crosshairs of suspicion.

As the sheriff, Farley (Bruce McGill), investigated the scene, Billy and Stan found themselves detained on account of their resemblance to the would-be murderers. Despite their insistence that they were merely shoplifting, Billy’s frustration boiled over when he mistakenly confessed to shooting the clerk, unwittingly incriminating himself in the process. His friend Stan was charged as an accessory, leaving the pair in a precarious situation.

Desperate for legal representation, Bill turned to his cousin, Vincent LaGuardia “Vinny” Gambini (Joe Pesci), a personal injury lawyer from Brooklyn with a reputation for tenacity and a penchant for getting results. Vinny’s fiancé, Mona Lisa Vito (Marisa Tomei), accompanied him on the journey south, providing emotional support as he navigated unfamiliar territory.

Upon arrival, Vinny faced an uphill battle, his lack of trial experience and unorthodox methods clashing with the stoic demeanor of Judge Chamberlain Haller (Fred Gwynne). Despite initially fooling the judge into believing he was experienced enough to take on the case, Vinny’s inexperience became apparent as he struggled to grasp basic court procedures. His abrasive attitude towards the judge only exacerbated the situation, earning him a night in jail for contempt of court.

As the trial progressed, Vinny’s clients grew increasingly frustrated with his lack of preparation and failure to cross-examine witnesses. The district attorney, Jim Trotter III (Lane Smith), presented an air-tight case that seemed destined to lead to a conviction. Vinny’s own antics only added fuel to the fire, leaving his clients questioning his ability to secure their freedom.

As the trial unfolds, Vinny’s lackluster performance at the hearing comes back to haunt him, prompting Stan to reconsider his representation and instead opt for John Gibbons (Austin Pendleton), the public defender. Billy remains skeptical, however, and decides to pay a visit to Vinny, expressing his doubts about their chances of success. Vinny, desperate to prove himself, shares with Billy the intricacies of Trotter’s case, revealing that it hinges on circumstantial evidence rather than concrete proof. He illustrates this point by executing a simple card trick, cleverly demonstrating how easily one can be misled, just as they risk being fooled by the flimsy evidence against their cousin.

The trial commences with Vinny taking the stand to defend his cousin, while Gibbons represents Stan. Despite some initial missteps – including donning an ill-fitting secondhand tuxedo to court after his suit becomes mud-stained and dozing off during Trotter’s opening statement – Vinny makes up for his inexperience with a tenacious questioning style that leaves the opposition stumbling.

Gibbons, meanwhile, struggles with a debilitating stammer that hinders his ability to effectively present his case. Vinny seizes this opportunity, deftly discrediting the first witness through relentless cross-examination. The man’s testimony is eventually reduced to tatters, as he confesses that even he can’t recall the details accurately – it seems he was too distracted by his morning grits.

Billy’s faith in Vinny is rewarded, and Stan begins to see their defense attorney in a new light, ultimately firing Gibbons from the case. Vinny’s subsequent cross-examinations of the remaining eyewitnesses are similarly effective and respectful, as he expertly exposes inconsistencies and biases. He proves that an elderly woman with poor vision couldn’t have seen what she claimed, and another witness is forced to admit that his own line of sight was compromised by a dirty window, rusty screen, and surrounding foliage.

However, just as Vinny appears poised for victory, Trotter springs a surprise witness: George Wilbur (James Rebhorn), an FBI analyst who testifies that the tire marks left at the crime scene are identical to those found on Billy’s Buick Skylark – even down to the specific Michelin tire model. With only a brief recess to prepare his response and feeling stumped, Vinny lashes out at Lisa, belittling her wide-angle photographs of the tire tracks as useless. She storms off in disgust, leaving Vinny alone and frustrated.

But it’s during this momentary lapse that Vinny has an epiphany – realizing that Lisa’s photographs may hold the key to unraveling the case. With newfound determination, he sets out to uncover the truth, his earlier frustrations forgotten in the face of a fresh opportunity for redemption.

As Vinny seeks to bolster his discovery with expert testimony, he turns to Lisa, a automotive aficionado, to authenticate the photograph’s tire marks. Initially requested by Vinny to investigate stolen vehicle records for the local sheriff, Lisa is subsequently summoned to court as a rebuttal witness against Wilbur. Under Trotter’s scrutiny during voir dire proceedings, Lisa demonstrates her extensive knowledge of automobiles, effortlessly defusing his attempts to discredit her with clever questioning. Satisfied with her testimony, Trotter grants her permission to take the stand.

As Vinny interrogates Lisa, she arrives at the same conclusion regarding the tire marks and testifies accordingly. The tire tracks at the crime scene, she asserts, could not have been left by Billy’s 1964 Buick Skylark, which lacked the Positraction suspension and differential system that would have produced the two flat and even tire streaks depicted in the photograph. Instead, Lisa posits that the actual vehicle responsible for the tire marks was a 1963 Pontiac Tempest, similar in size and body style to Billy’s car, equipped with the same Positraction feature, and available with the same color paint scheme due to their shared General Motors lineage. Vinny and Lisa share a moment of triumph, seemingly resolving their earlier disagreement. Meanwhile, Trotter and Wilbur engage in an tense and silent conversation until the judge’s sudden interruption, prompting Vinny to recall the FBI analyst who corroborates Lisa’s testimony.

Vinny’s next move is to summon Sheriff Farley, the records request submitter. The sheriff testifies that two men resembling Billy and Stan were recently apprehended in Georgia for driving a stolen 1963 Pontiac Tempest equipped with the same Michelin tires as Billy’s vehicle and in possession of a .357 caliber pistol, matching the caliber used to kill the clerk. In response, Trotter respectfully moves to dismiss all charges.

Throughout the narrative, Vinny and Judge Haller engage in a game of cat-and-mouse over Vinny’s qualifications. Initially, Haller discovers that despite Vinny’s claims of having tried “quite a few” murder cases, there exists no record of anybody named Vincent Gambini attempting any case in New York State. Vinny then reveals that he had his name changed during a previous career as a stage actor and continued to use the same moniker when establishing his law practice.

As the tension surrounding Vinny’s testimony reaches a boiling point, he resorts to an audacious gambit: recommending the esteemed New York attorney Jerry Gallo (although, unbeknownst to him, fate has already conspired against his plan). When Lisa later reveals that Gallo had indeed met his untimely demise just days prior, Vinny’s quick thinking is put to the test as he attempts to deflect Haller’s skepticism with a hasty correction - “Callo”, he claims, was the intended name all along. But it takes Lisa’s intervention and a phone call from Judge Malloy, a respected mentor from Vinny’s past in New York, to finally quell the doubts surrounding Vinny’s credibility.

With his reputation salvaged, Haller is left with no choice but to eat his words and acknowledge Vinny’s impressive litigation skills. As the dust settles, Vinny and Lisa hit the road together, their banter shifting from courtroom strategy to wedding plans - a lighthearted reprieve from the drama that has unfolded in their midst.

© 2024 What's After the Movie?. All rights reserved.