A chicagói 7-ek tárgyalása

Finoman megírt, eljátszott és megszerkesztett beszélgetés a jó értékekről és a rossz hatalmi rendszerről, amely egy meglehetősen banális és Sorkin esetében váratlanul patetikus csúcsponttal lep meg. A film csúcspontja számomra továbbra is az első hosszú egyfelvonásos felvétel a tárgyalóteremben marad, amelyet statikus felvételek követnek a jelenlévőkről, akik vigyázzban állnak, amikor a bíró belép a tárgyalóterembe. (2020.10.27)

What I will not lie to you, something has finally appeared on Netflix that is immediately shining in red numbers, it doesn't smell of flop, and it plays with the idea of being nominated for this year's Oscars. In addition, over three thousand people rated it here in less than a month, and superlatives were not spared here. I was quite looking forward to it. The result, however, is more or less average. The subject matter is strongly American. It took me a long time to understand what was actually happening in the movie. I, unaware of American history around 1968, had no idea how significant the trial in Chicago was. However, like the user Dzeyna or Enšpígl, I have a feeling that the American trial has already been filmed a thousand times better. However, the performances are clearly the movie's asset. Sacha Baron Cohen, Eddie Redmayne, Mark Rylance, and Frank Langella shine here. Even that beautiful, typically Hollywood ending really appealed to me. But that's all. I expected better, much better. (2020.11.08)

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. (2020.10.22)

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. (2020.10.16)

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. (2020.10.17)