The Trial of the Chicago 7

A history lesson for high school students led by a vain teacher who likes to show how he can popularize an interpretation even at the cost of losing the essentials. It's a courtroom sitcom that still balances on the edge of a caricature. The connection between the court proceedings and the events during the demonstration is laborious in terms of the directing, and the screenplay, despite having a good rhythm, sometimes feels like its showing off. The acting is satisfactory and it's not boring, but for me it doesn't have any deeper impact beyond decent fun, with a somewhat clumsy ambition to become a society-wide event. (22/10/2020)

Courtroom sitcom. A serious topic, but one that is desperately sterile, slow, plodding, and devoid of drama. How this can be such a critically acclaimed hit in the US to the point that it’s supposed to be an instant classic is beyond me. I understand the portrayal of a legendary trial that is such a sensitive subject for the US, but from a cinematic standpoint, it's too much to fall asleep to after 30 minutes. (16/05/2021)

Netflix's burning iron is a Best Picture of the Year and Oscar contender and I'm rooting for it! Aaron Sorkin serves up a tense and controversial trial about a demonstration in Chicago where blood flowed in the streets, and it's one of the best courtroom dramas of the last few years. The acting is absolutely top-notch and every actor gets a chance to shine (Sacha Baron Cohen, Yahya Abdul-Mateen II, Michael Keaton, Eddie Redmayne and Mark Rylance are all impeccable). The film has a very oppressive atmosphere, is emotionally charged, nicely paced and I found myself holding my breath during the courtroom scenes. A very good film in every respect, I have nothing to fault it. Story*****, Action>No, Humor***, Violence**, Entertainment*****, Music****, Visuals****, Atmosphere*****, Suspense****. 9/10. (16/10/2020)

"The whole world is watching." The Trial of the Chicago 7 benefits in particular from an excellent cast and a real-life story. Although the film is mostly set in a courtroom and consists mainly of courtroom dialogue, accusations, objections, testimony, etc., it does not come across as unnecessarily verbose and boring; on the contrary, it thrills through verbal shootouts and confrontations between the various characters, which it manages to do until the very end. Of the actors, Sacha Baron Cohen, Frank Langella, Mark Rylance and, in a smaller role, Michael Keaton were the best, but , the other actors also played their parts in a convincing manner. The film skillfully blends period footage with Aaron Sorkin's reconstruction of the actual case, and engagingly highlights the age-old struggle between ordinary honest people and a politically amoral system. (17/04/2021)

There are three to four major fundamental scenes where Sorkin's typical continuous flow of words goes silent and the power of the message is fully taken over by the image. And I can't shake the feeling that if Spielberg had shot it (as he originally intended to do more than a decade ago), then it's exactly these scenes that would have made memorable moments. As it stands, however, they are too wishy-washy and without the intended emotional impact. Otherwise, there are no drawbacks; it is another trademark-quality Sorkin movie with all of the good and bad that goes with it. Perhaps it's just an unusually small amount of movement for Sorkin (apart from the opening), which is largely due to the setting. Stunning acting, the depiction of the characters tends somewhat toward caricature, a furious pace, polished dialogue, a refined reality with obvious yet unexpressed overlaps.... Simply put, another Sorkin movie. (17/10/2020)