“The Whole Word is watching!”
The Trial of the Chicago 7 is a powerful and masterfully made court room drama. This was one of my most anticipated films of the year and I went into this with pretty high expectations. I’m a huge fan of The Social Network so I knew that I would most likely end up loving this film. I was honestly surprised at how fantastic this turned out to be, also I did not expect to give this a 5 star rating at all. The plot is great it’s a dramatic and powerful story. It’s sad that this story is very politically relevant although the events happened over 50 years ago.
I can’t help but love a good court room drama and this is the modern court room drama format at it’s finest. From beginning to end themes/emotions such as loyalty, racism, corruption, and frustration are expertly presented. The pacing is great my eyes where glued to the screen the whole time there wasn’t a single moment where it feels boring or slow mainly because such an engaging story is being told.
The acting is fantastic Sacha Baron Cohen, Eddie Redmayne, and Jermey Strong give fantastic performances. Alex Sharp, Mark Rylance, Frank Langella, John Carol Lynch, Yahya Abdul-Mateen, and Jason Gordon-Levitt give great performances as well. This film seriously has a cast stacked with talent and passion. Sacha Baron Cohen steals every scene he is in and probably give the best performance of the cast though. The direction is very good from Aaron Sorkin although he is a lot better of a screen writer than he is a director his direction skills are still pretty impressive. Sorkin’s script is truly phenomenal as well.
Sorkin crafts once again a masterpiece of a screenplay. It’s a swift and incredibly intelligent script with tons of one day to be iconic pieces of dialogue. The cinematography is really good but nothing memorable or unique. The editing is phenomenal this film has some of the swiftest and smoothest editing in recent years. In terms of the Oscars I feel this will sweep most of the big categories. This will no doubt get nominated for Best Picture, Best Actor: Sacha Baron Cohen, Best Editing, and Best Original Screenplay. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if this wins Best Picture and Original Screenplay. The ending is an emotional and uplifting ending that leaves you in awe of what you just watched. Overall The Trial of the Chicago 7 is a dramatic and intense film that is definitely the best film of 2020 so far.
(9 out of 10)
This is an excellent example of using a great cast to make a good movie into a great movie.
This movie was my most anticipated one in 2020 and it did not disappoint , it was one hell of a ride.
The court drama is led by a strong cast that will win every major ensemble award , the performances are great all around , it's hard to pick a favourite really , everyone of them had that moment in the movie where it's their time to shine from the defendants to the lawyer and judge , it was brilliant .
Aaron Sorkin once again wrote a phenomenal screenplay that tells the stroy of the chicago 7 boys who were charged for intiating a riot againt the police in Chicago , it's told through the eyes of every character and their believes and what really went down in the events prior to the riot which lead to a phenomenal editing for the movie . You never get bored and as the movie progresses as it depends heavy on the dialogue you remain glued to what's happening in an entertaining manner .
Strong Oscar contender and one of the best movies of the year
I really enjoyed this movie. A great cast and amazing acting. I was lucky to see it in a theater before the Netflix release. If you like law suit drama's then this is a movie for you. Based upon true events with real footage in it
Very well made, up until that ending anyway.
It's not a bad conclusion, but man is it cringe-inducing. It seems they were going for an end to match 'A Few Good Men', which was also written by Aaron Sorkin of course. From the overly uplifting score, to the slow clap, to the freeze-frame. Per Esquire, the scene is not even how it went down IRL either. I'm all for 'Hollywood endings', just less of the cheese please.
The rest of 'The Trial of the Chicago 7' is, though, very good. Sacha Baron Cohen (Abbie) is the greatest performer, the role is mostly comedic - which he nails - but even in the more serious moments he is terrific. Jeremy Strong (Jerry) is notable alongside him, also. Eddie Redmayne, Yahya Abdul-Mateen II, Frank Langella, Mark Rylance and Joseph Gordon-Levitt merit props, too.
I did enjoy how it portrays the (true) story, one that is very interesting no doubt. Overall, I had a pleasant time watching this - though I'd rate it a tad higher if not for that (not negative, just a bit lame) ending.
I was really enjoying this movie but I gotta say that I found the final minutes, when Tom starts reading the names and the piano notes start playing and then the orchestral music swells up while the people stand up, to be on the cheesy side, to be honest.
The Trial of the Chicago 7 is like a Disney cartoon of the Lindsay Lohan trial: it's an interesting Hollywood production, though I would've preferred less of a fantasy and a film closer to reality.
After 5 minutes of research online, I discovered that the most inspirational parts of the film never happened, and this deflated the buoyant feeling I had while watching it. Oh well, it had a good cast.
A mellowed out Sorkin – for the better, perhaps.
I was waiting long time for this movie to come and finally I managed to watch it. I do not regret!
This movie shows another example of American law system, trying to find people guilty just to close the case. Cast is great. No unnecessary scenes. Reasonably long movie, I personally hardly watch more then 2h movie but this one was a pleasure to watch.
This movie reminded me a lot of Spotlight in that at least once every five minutes I would mutter something like "that didn't happen" or "our government can't really do this". But it did happen and you see the same kinds of bad actors in America today. Anyway, I can't remember the last time that a story was told so well. Despite the fact that there was months of trial to sift through the movie told the story without confusing the audience or getting caught up in the minutia. Finally, the acting is absolutely sensational. I don't think I saw a better movie in 2020.
follow me at https://IHATEBadMovies.com or facebook IHATEBadMovies
Woah, very impressed with this. I enjoyed the build of suspense up to the ending in the courtroom.
This was so over the top I had to read up about it and sure enough this is more or less fiction from start to end. Great acting but that's about it in my book and very close yo a lower grade.
The Oscar's jury will probably love it though, political messages trumps quality.
A great cast giving good performances with a solid Aaron Sorkin script.
Great, gripping and captivating movie! Amazing cast and direction. The editing was seamless between all the different viewpoints and the switching between the cast and original footage of the riots was poignant. I wasn't expecting to be hooked right from the beginning but it was surprisingly adrenaline-pumping for a court room movie.
There were a few embellishments in the movie, some to exaggerate (Jerry Rubin being seduced by a female undercover agent) and some to understate ( Bobby Seale's treatment was far worse than what was portrayed), some events were switched around as well for better storytelling purposes. Regardless, Aaron Sorkin managed to capture the restlessness and agitation of the environment during the trails and the utter injustice of it all which is the crux of the matter.
Overall, I enjoyed watching it and would definitely recommend it to friends. Personally, I think it is also a very apt movie for these times where I'm sure many of the younger generation can relate to the dissent and the desire for change.
Very important piece of history I wasn't even aware of!
I found it quite fast-paced for a 2h+ court-room drama. Enough funny moments to make it a bit lighter to watch, amazing actors. The ending gave me chills.
The Trial of The Chicago 7 shows the most interesting and artistic way to tell real events. This movie is emotional and emotive, but also has explosive moments that will force you to re-watch de movie. An thrilling and beautiful script, matched with an decent storytelling.
i probably would like a documentary more. this show felt like bit too much. Some scenes seems unnecessarily epic ykwim?
An important film for Americans to watch, revealing much about the police and justice system. The dialogue is at times excellent. The film didn't blow me away but the truth behind the story makes it all fascinating. I would rewatch one day down the line.
First of all, I would not suggest watching this after watching JUDAS AND THE BLACK MESSIAH, even though their timelines intersect at the death of Fred Hampton. The first is an exceptional historical drama, important in its scope, this one is more entertainment and frivolous in its tone, which might be why Sacha Baton Cohen’s cavalier portrayal of his character garnered an Oscar nomination (people thought it was a comedy). The serious actors fought against the tide and grounded the film but, and maybe this is a hallmark of our times, it felt as if the subject matter was purposely lightened to hold an audience. I think it cheapened the subject. I give this film a 7 (cheap knockoff) out of 10. [Pop Drama]
the cinematography was wild, the ensemble was amazing. A thoroughly enjoyable movie.
I have not seen all the nominated films, but I will venture to say that this film has the best cast of all the Oscar nominees. And that it has won the SAG award tells me that my impression is not so wrong. Each of the actors gives a wonderful performance: Alex Sharp, Jeremy Strong, John Carroll Lynch, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Frank Langella; Mark Rylance and Eddie Redmayne fascinated me; but Sacha Baron Cohen - awesome! Aaron Sorkin is a great screenwriter who knows how to connect with the audience in intricate plots, and this movie is no exception. And although as a director he does not have much experience, here he manages to put together all the elements very well to create a film that maintains interest from the beginning to the end. The introduction of the film, prior to the presentation of the title, is one of the best beginnings I have seen lately. I highly recommend it, and this is one of the films that I would have liked to see on the big screen, with all the cinematic experience, but it couldn't be.
Political trials do not have to arise directly from legislation, but from the political power of the rulers. "Give me a man and there will be a paragraph."
It's quite heavy-handed and pretty formulaic but a great watch nevertheless. Will lead you on an emotional journey whilst being really informative all the while (for a non-American who had never heard of this trial). I'm really enjoying this wave of fuck the system movies coming from big-budget Hollywood at the moment, whatever shape they take.
Decent movie with an excellenct cast. I think Mark Rylance stole the show here, but Frank Langella also took that extra step as Judge Hoffman. The story, I feel the law suit was a bit overdramatic, but I guess that's also what makes the movie more interesting. I don't see this winning an Oscar though.
the world is indeed watching
Both shocking and entertaining, this is an excellent film, that once again showcases the injustices of the criminal justice system.
What an amazing cast, what an amazing court drama story and how relevant it is with is happening right now to remember what happened in the past
Brilliant movie with some great perfomances and very tense.7.7/10
Aaron Sorkin has not lost his touch and remains in shape, I have never seen a more biased judge
THE WACPINE OF 'THE TRIAL OF THE CHICAGO 7'
WRITING: 8
ATMOSPHERE: 8
CHARACTERS: 9
PRODUCTION: 8
INTRIGUE: 9
NOVELTY: 6
ENJOYMENT: 8
The Good:
Aaron Sorkin's script focuses on the flashy trial of the Chicago 7, effectively making this a courtroom drama. The pre-credits sequence provides exposition though, for those uninitiated in the historical event this film is based on and provides all the information you need to understand what is going on.
In a style true to Sorkin, the script is filled with sharp dialogue, believably delivered by the actors. Sorkin has a knack of writing dialogue that is realistic and above all enjoyable. And while most of the movie is predictable and linear, there are some delicious twists towards the end that put everything in a new light.
What makes this film interesting from the eyes of a Scandinavian viewer is the way the US judicial system works. I don’t know how well the film follows the actual trial, but the way the film depicts the events is fascinating, enjoyable and filled with tension.
With increasing intensity, the trial turns more and more dramatic, showing all of the downsides of the US court system. This film is surprisingly tense even for those who know nothing about the historical event.
We don't learn a lot about the characters, but the growing tension between them and their different beliefs and motives still works very well.
A great script, an interesting historical event and colourful personalities wouldn't alone make a film like this enjoyable. Luckily, great performances help bring dialogue and characters to life. Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Yahya Abdul-Mateen II and Eddie Redmayne stand out in particular.
Sorkin's direction keeps the film dynamically interesting, with the trial sequences cutting back and forth between interrogations and other scenes from an earlier point in time to slowly tell the entire story, piece by piece. The quick cutting prevents the film from turning stale.
Frank Langella as the judge is immensely enjoyable to watch. He makes a great impact even though I feel nothing but contempt for the character. Mark Rylance forms a great counter-force against him.
Combining archival footage with dramatized recreations works surprisingly well to show how the demonstration turned horribly wrong.
Even for a non-American like me, with no personal feelings towards the Vietnam War, that ending is incredibly powerful and emotional.
The Bad:
The scenes outside the courtroom seem a lot messier and less interesting. Somehow they brake from the momentum of the courtroom scenes.
The Ugly:
That egg catch was pretty fab (and fake).
WACPINE RATING: 8.0 / 10 = 4 stars
Such a great ensemble cast. Such a good movie.
Can't add anything to the other comments here. Superb movie. 10/10
Like others have mentioned, this is a really good movie, with an incredible cast. I've heard about the 1968 Chicago Democratic National Convention, and protesters clash with the police/National Guard, but I never heard of this event. I'm glad I was able to learn something, but also be thoroughly entertained.
[Netflix] Sorkin has created an excellent trial movie, a perfect container for his nimble, mathematical dialogue, perfectly designed to conduct the scenes. It is nice to watch a movie reminiscent of Pakula or Pollack political cinema, but with a speech that is clearly focused on today. However, the concession at the end is surprising, of that propagandist scene that seems to be taken from a bad after-dinner movie.
Did I miss something...?
Fantastic actors doing some fine acting. An interesting and true-life event... with something missing in the ending.
I enjoyed it right up until the final 20 minutes. I lost all sympathy and therefore the ending fell flat.
7.25/10
A great movie - although I ask myself how they could get convicted if the trial really happened in the way described in this movie.
I think this is the first movie with Sacha Baron Cohen I watched to the end...
this was.. incredible. and mind blowingly upsetting. five stars
Review by Andrew BloomVIP 9BlockedParentSpoilers2021-02-21T06:59:44Z
[7.9/10] It’s hard to think of a film more timely than The Trial of the Chicago 7. The film covers the legal definition of the incitement of a riot, internecine conflicts within movements and communities that pit pragmatism against principle, the threat of police violence especially against people of color, governmental bodies in a time of transition, and the ability of our institutions both legal and cultural to respond to the crises of the moment.
It’s also a piece of slick Hollywood entertainment. Whatever the thorny issues at play in the trial of the eight (eventually, as the title promises, seven) demonstrators at the 1968 Democratic National Convention, this film packages them neatly and digestibly for a popular audience.
That’s not a knock, by the way. If you’ve seen other Awards-friendly historical dramas, particularly ones set in and around a courtroom, then The Trial of the Chicago 7 will look pretty familiar. It dutifully sets up the societal tumult of the 1960s, dramatizes the conflicts of the time through historical figures made larger than life and impossibly articulate, and finagles plenty of opportunities for camera-ready drama. There’s nothing the movie does that’s especially new.
But what it does, it does well. It’s well-acted, well-written, and all-around well-made. What’s more, it’s funny. Maybe that’s why I’m more willing to cut it a little slack over similarly traditional Oscar movies. As much as The Trial of the Chicago 7 hits the usual beats of adapting a historical event and Making an Important Statement:tm:, it’s not afraid to throw in some levity to help the medicine go down and take itself a little less seriously than it might. That means smart remarks, real life disruptive but humorous antics, and the occasional moment of self-aware absurdity about the whole thing.
That comes with the style of writer-director Aaron Sorkin, of The West Wing and The Social Network fame. The movie carries the strengths and weaknesses and tics of his signature style. The characters all speak in a showy but sharp patter, with lots of back-and-forth, multi-player conversations that allow the writer to pack in plenty of clever jibes, pointed recriminations, and faux-profound statements that sound just good enough to pass muster.
That’s the thing about Sorkin. He’s a deeply cheesy (and sometimes trite) storyteller, but he’s so good at the form, particularly on a scene-to-scene basis, that he makes you forget or ignore that. It’s a hell of a trick, one The Trial of the Chicago Seven uses to full advantage. Sorkin and company assemble a who’s who of talented actors, load them up with witty repartee, and let the film roll merrily along on the strength of those two elements alone.
But the movie also reflects his usual blind spots and favorite tropes as well. For one thing, there’s few female characters in the piece; they have drastically less to do than their male counterparts, and the moments they do get hinge on their sexuality in some way shape or form. It is also, true to Sorkin’s predilections, a movie centered on how taking a moral stand is both the right and effective thing to do, with that stand almost always taking the form of delivering some bit of stirring oratory, occasionally paired with a dramatic gesture.
Again, I’m not knocking the latter part of that. It’s a simplistic view of politics and life, but also crowd-pleasing and easy for audiences to process in a story for cinema. At times, you can see the strings, feeling how history’s bent to serve the needs of the good guys scrapping with one another but coming to appreciate each other’s passions or talent, or the opposing prosecutor turning out to be a man of principle as well just doing his job, or how the racial dimension of all of this is firmly present and yet made to fit familiar narratives. But all of this does the job Sorkin intends to do in crafting an accessible, if didactic, piece of prestige filmmaking.
The resulting film contends, in talk-y splendor, that those protestors were railroaded by a Nixon-appointed Attorney General with a personal axe to grind and a power-tripping judge riddled with bias. It maintains that they were standing up for a just cause and were unfairly antagonized by law enforcement and authority figures writ large. While the main figures dicker about tactics and respectability, the film suggests that their efforts to end the Vietnam War, to effect change and justice and equality in this country, were noble, regardless of polite society’s view of them as little more than an unruly threat culminating in a riot in a Chicago park.
The smartest move Sorkin makes in dramatizing that riot is a structural one. He dances around the key events of the film until it’s time for them to be dramatically experienced in the third act. He jumps between the incipient lead-up and the aftermath of those riots, creating a sense of anticipation for the unseen center of gravity between them. In plenty of scenes, editor Alam Baumgarten cuts between trial testimony and stand-up comedy and flashbacks that help put these events into context and guide the audience through the emotions and intensity of a given sequence.
It’s slick filmmaking and screenwriting, adopting a non-linear approach and frame story that let’s Sorkin parcel out the important details of these events when he needs them dramatically. There’s times when this feels like his version of 12 Angry Men, but the stylistic flourishes and cross-cutting story structure give it some additional flair beyond Sorkin’s usual bubbly banter.
That banter is more in favor of revealing character than giving his characters arcs, or otherwise put in service of major players announcing the point rather than letting it arrive organically. But whether through stylistic embellishment or ping-ponging chatter, The Trial of the Chicago 7 holds your attention throughout, provides plenty of actors their Oscar reels, and imparts its message of mutual understanding, righteous causes, and injustice allowed to reign.
The timing of it is fortuitous, but the slick presentation is deliberate. It’s the latter that’s likely to land the film plenty of awards attention, but the latter that’s going to give the film value once this moment of extreme salience has passed. I don’t know how close Sorkin’s film hews to history; I suspect not terribly closely. I don’t know how faithful or deep his morals are here; I suspect not very. But I do know how, taken solely as a piece of filmmaking, The Trial of the Chicago 7 hits its marks better than the usual Awards season historical drama, and that’s worth recognizing too.