The Trial Of The Chicago 7 review – A day democracy refused to be tempted by fake politics

In one of his most famous private statements, “Aaron Sorkin” emphasized that there is no story that would be difficult for any scriptwriter to draw a pen on, as it may often be a mirror of reality and an eye on the event and the current scenes and what precedes it and what may come next on the one hand. Another, and that is why there is no such thing as limited creativity and the ability to manage the correct context for any idea to be presented on the screen.

This saying, if managed in the form of advice, is one of the best things that was said to motivate young people and those with a renewed mind to work in the film industry, but if it indicates something else (which may concern everyone here), it reflects the nature of the “Aaron Sorkin” film school. Which specializes in presenting works inspired by real events, “Sorkin” who has keen eyes on history, and knows many and many details of it without any trouble in choosing or difficulty in finding his story in it.

“Sorkin” was able to harvest the product of his adventures in these difficult and burdensome challenges at the level of the event and the story with great public appreciation and critical acclaim. jobs “bang large rampage against the academic class after one of the most famous crimes and lethargy that can not believe her mind or absorbed by one, here in the movie the Trial of the Chicago 7   complements the same vein and guides for the fans at home and one of the best films presented to the platform” Netflix, ”achieving the same praise and appreciation he receives, regardless of whether he appears as a writer or even a director, as he is recent.

“Aaron Sorkin” goes back in time, specifically the 1960s, when the world witnessed one of the most important historical turning points and a long armed struggle that lasted for many years, namely the “Vietnam War”, and how chaos reigned across “America” ​​as a whole, and the shouts of opponents came to denounce the crowds leading to a war Mysterious, they do not know anything about it, in the movie The Trial Of the Chicago 7, “Aaron Sorkin” portrays how democracy refused to obey death, hearing and obedience without any dialogue or causes, and it started its steps under one banner, and one goal is to stop this series of bloodshed and dispel these lies American propaganda, which was in the end a crushing defeat for it, and a crushing failure of its miserable attempts to suppress the freedom of expression of rightness of opinion.

The story of the movie The Trial Of the Chicago 7

The events of the movie The Trial Of the Chicago 7 take place in the Democratic National Convention that was held in 1968, and it was the scene of riots and protests against America’s involvement in the Vietnam War, where seven individuals are accused, namely Tom Hayden, Abby Hoffman, Jerry Robin, David Dillinger, Renee Davis, John Frewens and Lee Weiner plotted to cross state borders and incite violence during the conference, but in the presence of attorney William Konstler (Mark Relance) leading the defense against the prosecution team Thomas Foran (J.C. MacKenzie) and Richard Schultz (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) a trial ensued.

The majority lasted for several days, forcing the Chicago sevens to defend themselves and their values ​​in the face of a strong sovereign regime that worked against them and made every effort to bring down their cause and everything they sought after.

The Trial Of The Chicago 7 review

“Aaron Sorkin” scenario dealt with a definition of the characters in a way that is not detailed but presented each one of them in a scenic image that is easy to access to the minds of each one of them and his priorities in the case for which he fights and fights. A great deal of space in the film in an ideal way stemmed from the judicious selection of appropriate materials within the original record of the event and succeeded in inheriting the message and content of the film with complete transparency. Not only that, but with a smooth montage and proper positioning of the flashback scenes, Sorkin was able to find a balance between the past and the present whose events take place in succession, and also to ensure the stability of the fast rhythm of work and interesting at the same time, which is also impressive for each scene in the movie The Trial Of The Chicago 7 The great importance and absence of what may not be useful to the work in any way. Sorkin gave the film a special appeal that made there actual contact with every event and context that takes place inside the courtroom and inside the demonstrators’ gatherings, which ensured great pleasure and an accurate understanding of the significance of the idea that makes it difficult for the academy not to award “Sorkin” his second Oscar in the adapted scenario because it is from Injustice not to honor this veteran creator for his script arts and his ability to make a film from the least idea and the most difficult to implement and convey the visual form, and most importantly, his success in reflecting the nature and atmosphere of the film and what it symbolizes on the current reality, which makes him insult him in the historical document that narrates the story of a struggle against corruption Pervasive in power and its despicable endeavor to silence the voices of the voiceless.

Perhaps the greatest praise will be on the script only, but “Sorkin” has also succeeded in his task as a director. He may not be inclined to use certain techniques on the level of image presentation, but at least he succeeds in focusing the camera on his characters and their interactions with each other.

The easy navigation from scene to scene and their organization between flashback and main shots through montage ensures mastery in everything. This is a summary of all the positives mentioned by “Aaron Sorkin”

Which is without a doubt a true reference for the always-watched cinema, which knows its way to the story suitable for presenting cinematically.

There is no acting performance that can be called disappointing, but it can lead to a classification of those who are most able to reach the hearts of the viewer, there are two specifically who should be given the appropriate space of praise and appreciation

The first is “Sacha Baron Cohen”, who returns again to show his talent for good deeds after he stepped back from some “Porat” and did not provide the thing that was mentioned as being good at all, a perfect improvisation of the character of “Abby Hoffman” and his sarcasm and his ability to rally people behind him in his dialogue style. And his revolutionary rhetoric and frivolous appearance does not indicate that he is a political activist, but it proves the opposite

Is it possible for Sasha to receive some recognition in the Oscars, which the coming days will show, and if the film season this year is missing his identity, stagnant and stagnant under the influence of Corona disease.

The second is the distinguished “Mark Relance” in the role of the lawyer “Konstler” known for his extreme contempt for the court and its rude tyrant “Hoffman, who brilliantly played his role” Frank Angela “, the secret of the success of” Reliance “lies in the release of emotions and appropriate facial expressions that go along with provocations. Hoffmann, ”and the trial escalated in intensity

This is reinforced by his previous Oscar win for his role in the movie “Bridge of Spice” for this reason precisely. Also, the efforts of the rest such as “Yahya Abdul-Matin”, “Eddie Redmayne”, “Michael Keaton”, “Jeremy Strong”, “John Carroll Lynch” cannot be denied. And “Joseph Jordan-Levitt”, besides the aforementioned duo, they are considered one of the most important positive signs of the film that should be condemned with credit to “Aaron Sorkin”.

In conclusion, “Aaron Sorkin” managed to save the remainder of 2020 by presenting a new masterpiece through which he will reward everyone who waits for a new work bearing his name as an author and director at the same time. It was and still is a dark page in the entire history of “America”, and a disaster for anyone who realizes that what happened at that time was a particular mistake.