Handing Aaron Sorkin (“The West Wing,” “The Social Network”) the task of writing a film set almost entirely within a courtroom is one of the easiest bets in all of Hollywood. His unique writing style and penchant for satisfying, almost rhythmic dialogue can make even the most dire situations fun to watch, as it allows any scenario to boil down to the basic concept of watching great actors deliver great dialogue.
After his directorial debut with 2017’s “Molly’s Game”, Sorkin is yet again directing his own script for the long in development “Trial of the Chicago 7”, which is, surprise, a film about the trial of the Chicago 7. For those unaware, the night of the democratic national convention in 1968 a riot broke out involving the Chicago police and a group of anti-Vietnam war protestors. The trial involved 8 high profile protestors and leaders charged with inciting the riots.
Sorkin takes a handful of lesser known actors, Alex Sharp (“How to Talk to Girls at Parties,” “The Hustle”), Noah Robbins (“The Assistant”), Daniel Flaherty (“November Criminals,” “The Meyerowitz Stories”), and throws them in with some true dramatic heavyweights like John Carroll Lynch (“The Founder,” “Zodiac”), Jeremy Strong (“The Big Short,” “Selma”), Yahya Abdul-Mateen II (“Aquaman,” “Watchmen (2019)”), and Frank Langella (“Frost/Nixon,” “Good Night, and Good Luck”) and ends up creating a powder keg of an ensemble that feels as close to a filmed play as one can get without actually becoming a filmed play. To say each and every actor is excellent seems like oversimplifying things, but it says a lot about their talent and Sorkin’s direction that even amongst the across the board excellent cast, there are standouts.
Joseph Gordon-Levitt (“Inception,” “50/50”) as federal prosecutor Richard Schultz is certainly the most morally grey character in the film, serving somewhat as an audience surrogate and leveraging Levitt’s everyman charms with his extreme talent. Mark Rylance (“Bridge of Spies,” “Ready Player One”) is making an easy case for his second academy award as defense attorney William Kunstler. His fatherly charms that have been so expertly utilized by filmmakers like Spielberg are on full display, but not discounting the aged, exhausted nature of being an older peace fighter, forced to watch the younger generation butt heads with his generation and fail. Even a brief appearance by Michael Keaton (“Birdman,” “Spotlight”) is plenty of time to remind audiences why he’s still one of the best actors working today.
Yet the film absolutely belongs to Sacha Baron Cohen (“Borat,” “Les Misérables”) and Eddie Redmayne (“Les Misérables,” “The Theory of Everything”). These two will likely compete for awards as much as they are at each other’s throats in the film. Cohen’s more comedic and lighthearted character clashes with Redmayne’s more straight-laced one, and the sheer talent on display when they’re acting off each other is incredible.
Though their confrontations aren’t just a great example of two actors, it’s the thesis statement for the entire film. On one hand, Cohen’s Abbie Hoffman is clearly a stoner and a hippie, a “free love” kind of protestor, cracking jokes and giving a “fuck you” to authority at any moment. Redmayne’s Tom Hayden, on the other hand, is calmer and more put together, understanding that bureaucracy is a part of protesting and the negatives to completely off-putting authority figures.
Sorkin gives each of them, and by extension the two perspectives on how to start revolution, the time necessary to breath and show the positives and negatives inherent in both sides. This, coupled with the blatant displays of corruption on the side of the judiciary system and from Langella’s Judge Julius Hoffman, might remind viewers of the films made in the 80’s and 90’s about the U.S. saving other countries from their corrupt governments.
It gets blunt by the end of things, but Sorkin uses this bluntness intelligently. The third act is full of some very on the nose lines and even an event so metaphorical that it borders on cheesy. However, the film’s serious treatment of the events never falters, and given the severity and timely nature of these events compared to modern day, a bit of bluntness is not just appreciated, but welcomed and earned.
While Sorkin doesn’t stick to exact historical specifics, like his previous works, he makes changes to ensure the most effective dramatic portrayal of the events possible. It’s worth noting this because there are easy things to nitpick in terms of the treatment of certain characters and the amount of screen time they get in the overall story. They get exactly what’s necessary for Sorkin to effectively make their story a bullet point in his retelling and makes sure to give them their due diligence.
This is easily his best film since The Social Network because it finally feels like he’s making a film with something to say again. While his past few works, “Steve Jobs,” “Molly’s Game,” “The Newsroom,” “Moneyball,” haven’t been bad, they’ve felt as though Sorkin was focused on characters instead of making a statement as he so often did earlier in his career. It also helps that this film is better paced and edited overall than his directorial debut, “Molly’s Game,” toning down some of the more hyperactive editing and focusing the story on the events rather than one sole person.
It’s a perfect balance, setting some fantastic performances and characterizations, against a film that clearly has something to say and is going to say it come hell or high water. The film feels sharp and timely, but it doesn’t cheapen any of the dramatic work being done. It never feels like a film that was made because of current events, rather just history repeating itself and Sorkin capitalizing on it in subtle ways.
“Trial of the Chicago 7” may be too blunt for some, might mix historical facts too much for others, and it might just be too spiteful for the rest. But it can’t be denied that this is a powerhouse of a film on nearly every level. The acting, editing, script, direction, each piece of it comes together to form a whole that has something to say and knows exactly how its going to say it. 5/5
No comments:
Post a Comment