The Trial of the Chicago 7

This delicately written, acted and edited conversational movie about positive values and a bad system of power is surprising due to its rather banal and, for Sorkin, unexpectedly theatrical climax. For me, the highlight of the film remains the first long, one-shot scene in the courtroom, followed by static shots of those present standing at attention after the judge steps into the courtroom. (27.10.2020)

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)

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)

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 acting is so good, I'd gladly watch it all over again this minute. And amazingly its Cohen who carried it for me, despite the fact that I’m not exactly a fan. Whether he was joking or being serious, I totally believed that this is exactly the kind of person that existed back then. Having seen the whole thing, I rate the script as successful, but I guess I won't be the only one who wasn't hooked at first. Once the courtroom opened, the powerful, at times sad, at times funny trial began, with the aforementioned cast delivering a beautiful, at times heartbreaking, performance. Still, I feel that their performances could have been "pieced together" a little better for the viewer. A strong 4 stars. (28.08.2021)

A top notch courtroom drama, perfectly cast, excellently acted. It grabs you and doesn’t let go. Sorkin’s polished dialogs, purposeful messages and hard-hitting lines flow naturally and the picture as a whole builds up nicely to a great climax. What a ride. (21.10.2020)

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)

One of those films that's so elaborate it's simply a joy to watch, although there is “just" talking for two hours. The script is almost at the level of 12 Angry Men, and through a story from the 1960s it tells clearly enough about the present, the monologues and dialogues are refined, the tension rises only when someone is silent, or when someone interrupts someone's speech. Aaron Sorkin was able to write and shoot a great film, with a cast that has most importantly the perfect Sacha Baron Cohen and Mark Rylance, but the other actors are certainly good as well. It's also a big treat thanks to Daniel Pemberton's music. (18.10.2020)

In this case I’d like to be more sober, The Trial of the Chicago 7 is a very good historical reflection that says a lot about its stormy era, but it doesn’t work at all as an inspirational story, in the last half hour, in fact, it has nothing left to talk about – and a compositionally strong climax should be par for the course for a screenwriter of Sorkin’s calibre. Anyway, the court retrospective is watchable and never gets boring, but it’s missing a dramatic impulse that will keep the curiosity and the emotions until the very last scene, something the creators try hard to do. It relies too much on the well known shadow of the evil Nixon, whose minions coldheartedly look for scapegoats, leaving aside specific personal conflicts or completely ignoring the development of the conflicted characters (Joseph Gordon-Levitt is introduced as a prosecutor who will play an important role, but the opposite is true, and for the rest of the story he’s nothing but an “antagonist” lawyer whose heart is in the right place, but whose potential conflict leads only a pretty sentimental final gesture). The actors are great, though (especially Rylance, Cohen and Langella) and the narration has a substance that’s almost too addictive to say that this is not a good, proper piece of work that you shouldn’t miss – if it wasn’t so blatantly simplifying and manipulative, it would be a fundamental film (the one we could have got if Spielberg had made it thirteen years ago). I can’t give it more than 70%, even if I wanted. (19.10.2020)

"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)

What really impressed me was how this issue was treated in the film. Yet again, I witnessed how American "democracy" works in practice. I did not doubt for a moment that a poetic (or rather creative) license was used many times but given Mr. Hoover's long-term work and the nice tradition of McCarthyism, I don’t care. Mark Rylance was brilliant again. (30.11.2020)

Sorkin makes his presence strongly known right in the opening, again relying on his unmistakable punchiness in dialogue, which it has to be said is still just as impressive as ever. Despite its length and courtroom drama format, the whole film is incredibly brisk and the acting is very strong – special mention must go to the excellent Mark Rylance and Michael Keaton's small, big role. All of The Trial of the Chicago 7 in Sorkin's portrayal feels more like a tribute to a group of courageous idealists who decided to stand up to political subversion. Despite their own objective transgressions, this group of eccentric hippies had essentially noble intentions, as Sorkin's film indicates. It's probably worth mentioning that some of the moments could have done with a stronger directorial hand, but as a whole it works really well and for me it's one of the standout films of the year. (28.10.2020)