|
Post by roverpup on Oct 19, 2020 23:05:22 GMT
I don't have any real problem with the ending since it was a reenactment of something that actually did occur in the trial (just not at the sentencing). That dramatic rearrangement is justified IMO for effect and to drive home a thematic point. I read an article about how if anything the actual trial was even wilder than the movie version and if memory serves me correctly the whole affair caused a sensation in the news to an unbelievable amount of attention.
Very little of it didn't really happen.
And as for too broadly drawn lines of good guys vs. bad guys... to me they seemed to do the proper amount of shading where it was needed. The "good guys" were shown as flawed characters and the government officials weren't cardboard cutouts in totality (there were a number of scenes of the character played by JG-L in which that seemed very balanced to me).
It makes me wonder, that in some far off future time, when the Trump era is depicted on film, if people won't be accusing writers of lacking subtlety when portraying The Orange Man - when the truth is that he will be presented in all his actual cartoonish horror and it just seems like a shallow depiction. John Mitchell et al WERE that shallow and horrifying.
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Oct 20, 2020 0:00:28 GMT
I was interested in JG-L character because he is portrayed as someone who is trapped in that situation and who until certain degree is sympathetic to the protagonist's troubles. Well, the guy is actually the only one who is still alive and he already watched the movie. He called it a "fantasy" and it's very critical of the heroes of the movie. He still think they were violent provocateurs that wanted to destabilize the government. He is critical of what happened with Bobby Seale but he thinks it was a stunt and a trap planned by the accused and that the judge was forced to take that decision which made it falsely (according to him) look like a racist. So in real life, he is actually slightly less sympathetic that his character in the film.
I haven't checked it but I don't doubt Tom Hayden read the name of the dead soldiers as he does at the end of the movie but the way it was shot it's very Dead Poet Society! Why not making the scene a little more discreet or credible. The judge gagged one accused and arrested another one but just helpless screamed like a vulnerable old man when Hayden refused to obey him?! Also it's suggested that almost everyone there was on their side. Even the young prosecutor who clearly wasn't! If that feel good make believe scene would had happened, I don't doubt the jury would had been also on their side but they actually weren't. Actually I think it would had been interesting if they had showed how Conservatives looked them and trying to explain why they originally lost the case. IMHO that's why the film is about plain good vs evil. Frank Langella put some humanity to the role and you can feel his doubts and even fear after he does what he did to Seale but I sincerely think that was the actor not the script and much less the director. The prosecutor has humanity but the real guy was much more complex than the young smart guy making his job meanwhile questioning his own side that it's presented in the movie and the rest of the "bad guys" are just cartoons.
|
|
|
Post by mllemass on Oct 21, 2020 3:35:36 GMT
I just watched it, and it was terrific. I knew nothing about anything that was going on, but I still enjoyed it and certainly learned a lot!
The actors were good, but they were way too old to be playing men in their early thirties! Their American accents were believable, though.
I wondered if Tom Hayden is the same Tom Hayden who was married to Jane Fonda, and he is!
|
|