Discussion in 'Entertainment Forum' started by iCarly Rae Jepsen, Sep 13, 2020.
very much so Yes
Fully expect this to rule. It's been in the works for so long, going back to Spielberg directing and Will Smith starring.
Excellent performances in this, made my fucking blood boil
Great acting, horrible ahistorical politics
Funniest part of the movie was them shitting on Allen Ginsburg. This one was a close second
The ending with
the whole courtroom clapping during the names and the big swelling music while the judge comically slams his gavel and call for order was so tonally jarring. Felt like the end of a comedy when the camp kids finally beat the mean counselor or whatever.
I’m not super familiar with the trial/everyone involved and reading up on it since has definitely soured the movie a bit. Still think it’s worth a watch for the acting.
Yeah here’s a little article on just how inaccurate a lot of it was, for anyone who’s curious — What’s Fact and What’s Fiction in The Trial of the Chicago 7
Normally I wouldn’t care much about historical dramatization, but some of the additions and omissions were laughably bad. Which is made even more frustrating by the fact that the real events *were* plenty crazy and interesting enough as they were!
Doesn’t Sorkin has a history of shit like this lol
oh boy haha
It was entertaining at least.
this was okay. entertaining at least. he trips over himself and gets in his own way so much as a director though.
I'll repeat here what I wrote on letterboxd: "i liked this for the most part but oof that ending made me want to kill myself"
A lot of people commented on how Gary Oldman was way too old to play Herman Mankiewicz, but nearly 50 Sacha Baron Cohen playing Abbie Hoffman, who was in his early thirties, is too bizarre.
Just finished this. Thought it was really good.
won best picture at SAG
Aren’t SAG awards only given for actor performances
sorry, going off what deadline wrote
It’s technically “best cast in a motion picture”, but it’s their equivalent of Best Picture. You weren’t wrong.
This winning really sucks though because it means the movie has support from the actors, the biggest branch of the Academy and obviously it overlaps with SAG a ton. That can make the difference sometimes. Which is not great!
it’s worth noting they’ve had a 50% predictive record the last decade, with a number of chicago 7 esque movies chosen that didn’t win the oscar in the past
watched last night. DEEPLY average
I bought a book version of the actual trial transcript the other day, and what immediately stuck out to me is that the defense’s case is probably 2/3 of it. Extremely weird of Sorkin to have the movie defense’s case amount to just a failed attempt to have Ramsey Clark speak and then Hoffman taking Hayden’s place.
This was okay. Not as bad as I would have expected from what I've read. Mostly entertaining but only occasionally interesting. Needed more of the Bobby Seale story. That's when it was most engaging, but it ends up feeling like a footnote here.
I'm a little puzzled by people praising the performances. Outside of Mark Rylance and Yahya Abdul Mateen everyone else was either just there or incredibly distracting. What was going on with Sacha Baron Cohen's accent in this?