Aaron Sorkin is way too good a writer to be forced to work with such a mediocre director as Aaron Sorkin

20 minutes in i realized this was a 2+ hour courtroom drama and groaned out loud. why didn’t anyone warn me the trial of the chicago 7 was about a trial

This review may contain spoilers. I can handle the truth.

take a shot every time you hear a line of dialogue that aaron sorkin probably jerked off to after he wrote it

objection.

successions stans omggg y’all are gonna FREAK

*credits roll*
me: well that was awful
jeremy strong, crying: what?
me: i said lawful. lots of law

it almost feels wrong to see eddie redmayne in normal clothes instead of period dramas costumes

I hope they have Netflix in Kazakhstan because this is the only time they’ll ever get to see Borat put on trial.

has about as much of sorkin's sanctimonious speechifying and centrist respectability debates as you'll likely expect of it but the material itself carries an urgency he's been unsuccessfully chasing after for years that overpowers even his own political sympathies. or maybe the courtroom drama is just the perfect venue for his style of quippy, rhetorical writing; he certainly relishes every opportunity to make this an actor's exercise in historical theater. or maybe i just really miss the mid-budget courtroom drama in general. either way, this is the best thing that's had sorkin's name on it in nearly a decade.

also watched w the fam

Very easy to take in making it funny and insightful what something that happened in history. I did have a problems with some characters were portrayed everyone involved did a great job

honestly YES

Excellent courtroom docudrama bolstered by strong performances all around and by Sorkin keeping his dialectical predilections in check

Entertaining, compelling, well-acted Oscar bait, but watching Sorkin collapse into full-on self parody by the film’s final moments was truly a sight to see. Just in awe at the respect this man has for our institutions.

Not too bad

The greatest historical inaccuracy is that Tom Hayden is played by a semi-attractive man

Is it Oscar bait? Yes. But did I enjoy watching it? Yes!

A bit late on this one... but yet another knockout Sorkin script, and an even better-directed film than Molly's Game.

The film with the best ensemble cast this year. A couple of the actors are just "fine" like Redmayne and Gordon-Levitt.

But we're probably looking at this getting 3 Supporting Actor nominations --- Yahya Abdul Mateen II, Sacha Baron Cohen, and a more open third spot that will probably be Mark Rylance. But Frank Langella also blew me away.

Sorkin does a great job of keeping the energy high, spreading dialogue and action among the main characters, and, possibly to a fault, re-writing history to make it more cinematic!

But he has a lot of passion for this material, and it shows.

This movie was a slow burn but I appreciated it. History repeats itself though, don’t it.

Sounds weird, but this is a halfway fun courtroom drama. Has some funny parts, it never feels too serious or weighed down like some dramas can be. 

Frank Langella has a really punchable face.

My dad really liked this. He enthusiastically watched it for a second time. This has maybe the most absurdly cheesy ending to any Oscar bait I’ve ever seen and afterward my dad said “Aaron Sorkin makes good movies.” I don’t necessarily disagree but this is not one. The ending literally felt like a fake movie that would be featured in another movie where the joke is it’s making fun of Hollywood Oscar bait. I actually cannot believe it exists. 

Good parts: Yahya Abdul-Mateen deserved a better movie, I actually kinda liked Eddie Redmayne for once, uhhh Mark Rylance’s hair??? Michael Keaton popping up halfway through for a glorified cameo?? Classic case of a watchable movie that literally no one will remember after next year’s Oscars.