Aaron Sorkin wrote and directed. Good cast. It lands on Netflix on October 16th, just in time for the election.
The Trial of the Chicago 7 on Netflix
|by Anonymous||reply 42||Last Tuesday at 11:45 AM|
Those photos are not promising. Everything looks like a stereotype, a re-imagining of "the 60s aesthetic". How much you wanna bet all the protest scenes involving people running from tear gas are in gauzy slow motion. Having said that, can't wait to watch new movie!
|by Anonymous||reply 1||07/22/2020|
Hah, R1, at least the scenes were actually shot in Grant Park in Chicago and not LA.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||07/22/2020|
|by Anonymous||reply 3||09/13/2020|
Who plays the asshole, self-hating Jew judge?
|by Anonymous||reply 4||09/13/2020|
Sacha Baron Cohen as Abbie Hoffman
Eddie Redmayne as Tom Hayden
Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Richard Schultz
Mark Rylance as William Kunstler
Jeremy Strong as Jerry Rubin
Yahya Abdul-Mateen II as Bobby Seale
Alex Sharp as Rennie Davis
Michael Keaton as Ramsey Clark
Frank Langella as Julius Hoffman
Kelvin Harrison Jr. as Fred Hampton
John Carroll Lynch as David Dellinger
|by Anonymous||reply 5||09/13/2020|
Two threads? YIPPEE!
|by Anonymous||reply 6||09/13/2020|
The reviews are excellent
|by Anonymous||reply 7||09/25/2020|
|by Anonymous||reply 8||09/25/2020|
Not really interested anymore, in the stories boomers tel themselves about how great they were. That's what the fucking 80s were for.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||09/25/2020|
Except these aren't boomer stories, r9. Jerry Rubin and Abbie Hoffman were born in 1938 and 1936 respectively.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||09/25/2020|
I started it tonight but it’s too dry. It’s just not very filmy.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||10/16/2020|
It's like a bad parody of a "serious political film." I had to turn it off.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||10/16/2020|
More English people playing American people.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||10/16/2020|
OMG, this is going to be great! Abbie Hoffman used to follow up each day with a video of him using a blackboard to show how stupid the trial was and the judge's many violations of the Constitution.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||10/16/2020|
I watched it today and thought it was really good. Sacha especially.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||10/16/2020|
Good, not great movie. Good acting, especially Frank Langella. Typical Sorkin drama. High energy, high emotion, literate writing, liberal bent.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||10/16/2020|
I’m almost through it. I agree with the sentiment above about it being good, not great. But very timely and certainly a welcome movie for those with any interest in the state of our nation. Rylance will get a Best Actor nomination and Langella will get Supporting.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||10/17/2020|
How could they butch up Eddie Redmayne? He is so not convincing.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||10/17/2020|
I'm watching it now and finding it thrilling. I love this stuff. I think Strong is so endearing as Rubin, but Mark Rylance is simply fantastic as Kunstler, as the last man with any common sense. His trade offs with Langella's judge are so goddamn funny. Also, the actor from Watchmen who's playing Bobby Seales is really impressive in this.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||10/17/2020|
I did not recognize Sasha Baron Cohen, well done to him. I wish they would stop casting Eddie Redmayne as American. His voice is so forced and out-of-breath, add any accent on top and he sounds like he has a cold.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||10/17/2020|
I really liked it. I've not been a big fan of Sorkin. I thought this was really well done with the exception a few corny Spielberg moments. I agree that Mark Rylance was amazing. I also thought Sascha was really good as was the rest of the cast.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||10/17/2020|
I see Jews and British people.
|by Anonymous||reply 22||10/17/2020|
[quote]It's like a bad parody of a "serious political film." I had to turn it off.
I endured it and quite endured it, but this is not Sorkin's best by a long shot. It's contrived. Good performances across the board, and I did have a few, "Hell yeah!" moments but it's not as searing as his other work.
|by Anonymous||reply 23||10/17/2020|
[quote]I see Jews and British people.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||10/17/2020|
I think SBCohen will get nominated too.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||Last Sunday at 11:45 AM|
R13, yeah, and not convincingly. I struggled to picture Eddie Redmayne, the Eton-educated, Cambridge History of Art graduate as a disenfranchised revolutionary. It was hard and his acting didn't make it any better.
|by Anonymous||reply 26||Last Sunday at 1:45 PM|
Loved it. The reality at the time was so insane that Sorkin really didn't need to change much. The judge was a biased nut job.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||Last Sunday at 2:06 PM|
That was Mark Rylance? I had no idea while I was watching. Truly excellent acting. I think this is one of Sorkin's best screenplays yet. I'm a huge fan of his work. SB Cohen and Jeremy Strong were wonderful. Strong provided the few moments of humor. Eddie Redmayne did a good job from my perspective, but then I don't know what Tom Hadyn is like in real life. I also find Redmayne to be likable in general.
|by Anonymous||reply 28||Last Sunday at 7:08 PM|
The Chicago 7 through the eyes of the West Wing with Sorkin's painful dialogue. I might watch it as a joke.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||Last Sunday at 8:06 PM|
I liked it until the "a-ha!" moment when Hoffman says something like "I've never been on trial for my thoughts before." Intent is an element in a lot of crimes, including inciting a riot, so that argument fell flat for me.
|by Anonymous||reply 30||Last Monday at 2:15 PM|
Huge number watching it:
|by Anonymous||reply 31||Last Monday at 3:20 PM|
Loved Rylance, Langella and Michael Keaton. Three terrific pieces of casting.
Did Hayden really read all five thousand names as part of his statement?
|by Anonymous||reply 32||Last Monday at 3:26 PM|
I don’t understand the posters who didn’t recognize Rylance and Cohen. That’s exactly what they look like. There weren’t Prosthetics or anything like that.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||Last Monday at 11:29 PM|
"I liked it until the "a-ha!" moment when Hoffman says something like "I've never been on trial for my thoughts before." Intent is an element in a lot of crimes, including inciting a riot, so that argument fell flat for me."
I thought the Ruben character said it. In any case, how many times was Ruben and/or Hoffman on trial for intent?
|by Anonymous||reply 34||Last Tuesday at 12:30 AM|
Cohen wasn't consistent with his accent. That was really noticeable. I have never gotten the appeal of Eddie Redmayne.
|by Anonymous||reply 35||Last Tuesday at 3:21 AM|
I usually like Sorkin but trying to wedge the actual events into Sorkin-world took the piece in weird places.
The trial was really dramatic, so you wonder why so much (like the prosecutor's sympathy for the defendants and the female undercover agent) had to be added. And also why so many dramatic events were soft sold. (Bobby Seale was bound and gagged for a few days, not for five minutes as the film presents it.)
The actors were great, but that screenplay was just terrible.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||Last Tuesday at 4:05 AM|
And Ramsey Clark appearing in the courtroom? Why not have LBJ and Nixon testify as well?
|by Anonymous||reply 37||Last Tuesday at 4:05 AM|
When Bobby Seale came to Connecticut for his trial I was in High School there. The Black Panthers came into our school-I don’t remember why-but I clearly remember a teacher shielding my friend and I in the hallway as they passed. I do remember there was no violence.
|by Anonymous||reply 38||Last Tuesday at 4:32 AM|
Is that Max Adler as the bear biker in the OP's post?
|by Anonymous||reply 39||Last Tuesday at 4:38 AM|
Was William Hurt in this?
Enjoyed the film despite not knowing anything about the history of the case but left with more questions along the lines of "surely it didn't happen like THAT?".
Disappointed they didn't include "Married Jane Fonda" in the list of Tom Hayden's post trial accomplishments
If this does get Oscar noms I'd love see Baron Cohen for Best Actor and Langella for Best Supporting. Nothing for Mark Rylance as he's an Israel obsessed Corbyn supporter who felt the need to tell Jews he knows more about antisemitism than they do.
|by Anonymous||reply 40||Last Tuesday at 4:43 AM|
R37...uhhh...Ramsey Clark WAS a witness at the trial in 1969. Why are you questioning this?
R40, William Hurt was scheduled to play John Mitchell but he dropped out a week before he was supposed to work.
|by Anonymous||reply 41||Last Tuesday at 8:10 AM|
R41, I see that Ramsey Clark did take the stand in his voir dire. I had always thought this was done in chambers.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||Last Tuesday at 11:45 AM|