Why the "Trial of the Chicago Seven" is very relevant

On October 16, a film by one of the best screenwriters of our time was released on the streaming service Netflix. Aaron Sorkin is famous for his work on such films as "The Social Network" and "Steve Jobs", the series "The West Wing" and many other great projects. In 2017, he made his first directorial appearance in The Big Game, and has remained silent since then.

But in fact, Sorkin wrote the script for "Trial of the Chicago Seven" back in 2007, initially assuming that the picture would be directed by Steven Spielberg. But the work dragged on, and the screenwriter himself took up directing.

And now we can say that hardly anyone could make a film better than this author. Aaron Sorkin did more than just retell real events. With a great cast, he turned the court drama into a very lively and emotional story that is important even decades later.

Real events relevant to this day

In 1968, during the convention of the US Democratic Party in Chicago, protests erupted. Thousands of people demanded an end to the Vietnam War and democratic reforms. Clashes began with the police, in which dozens of participants from both sides were injured. The organization of the riots was accused of the very "Chicago Seven" - the leaders of the groups who allegedly organized the protests. At first, one of the leaders of the "Black Panthers" - dark-skinned radicals, was tried with them.

It would seem that a film on a similar topic can only attract US residents and those who are interested in history. Moreover, a large part is devoted not to the protests themselves, but to the court.

But it is in 2020 that the picture looks dauntingly relevant. After all, it is about a showcase political process, the outcome of which is a foregone conclusion.

In the course of the proceedings, all the vulgarity of such courts is revealed. Participants and even their lawyers are not allowed to clearly express their position and arguments. Bobby Seal from Black Panthers (Yahya Abdul-Matin II) is left without a defender at all. The judge invites the other participants' attorney William Kunstler (Mark Rylance) to deal with his charges simply because he is sitting next to him.

Shot from the movie "The Trial of the Chicago Seven"

In some moments I even want to accuse the author of being too grotesque. The judge seems too biased and downright stupid, forgetting even the names of the defendants and lawyers. And here it should be remembered that Sorkin created the plot based on real materials.

But even more directly and harshly "The Trial of the Chicago Seven" hits the current events, telling through the lips of the participants about the protests themselves. This is another confirmation of how the authorities personally set citizens up for clashes only in order to violently suppress them later. The police themselves order the crowd to head to the park, and there they are met by other servants of the law, armed with batons and tear gas.

And, perhaps, if six law enforcement officers had not lashed out to beat one teenager for climbing on a lantern, the cruelty could have been avoided.

All of this is too reminiscent of the events of 2020. And this makes the "Trial of the Chicago Seven" seem just scary. After all, nothing has changed in 50 years.

The intensity of emotions in a chamber setting

In most cases, court dramas look like puzzles: if the plot is structured correctly, it is interesting to observe the vicissitudes of the process and learn something about their participants. But rare directors manage to involve the viewer emotionally.

Keep in mind, however, that it was Aaron Sorkin, along with David Fincher, who made the history of Facebook the main movie of the past decade. And he and Danny Boyle turned the story of Steve Jobs into one of the most touching stories. And if earlier the merits could be attributed to the talent of the directors, now it is obvious that Sorkin the director is no less talented than Sorkin the screenwriter.

To begin with, in the most emotional moments about the protests, he skillfully mixes production and documentary footage, reminding the viewer that this is not about fiction.

And during the court proceedings, a lot of tricks are used, as if Sorkin had spied on all of the same Fincher. The director constantly maintains interest with great editing and parallels. Interrogation in the courtroom is interspersed with flashbacks, and it is filmed as if everything is happening right in front of the jury (and at the same time the audience). And one of the participants in the process can talk about serious events in the form of a stand-up.

And closer to the finale, when the intensity of passions builds up, the director manages to “turn on” even the viewer. It seems to be nothing complicated: editing speeds up, the sound becomes louder, the characters themselves show more emotions. But even if you know and see how it works, the effect does not disappear. This is indeed a film where the trial can be even more emotional than the fights during the protests.

Living people, not masks

The most important thing that Aaron Sorkin avoided was that he did not turn the defendants into exclusively positive martyrs, devoid of shortcomings. After all, too often in the cinema they forget to prescribe the real characters of the characters, leaving them only grotesque features.

It is not in vain that such a cool cast has gathered in "The Trial of the Chicago Seven". And at first, the audience is deceived by showing just the masks. Tom Hayden, played by Eddie Redmayne, seems to be the most organized. Abby Hoffman, played by Sacha Baron Cohen, is your quintessential jester. And John Carroll Lynch as David Dellinger is a symbol of "adult" protests, restrained and wise.

But the deception is precisely that each of the heroes will then partially destroy his type.

The jester will give out the wisest thoughts, and the judicious heroes will scream. This helps to see them as real people: representatives of one group may disagree with each other and argue almost to the point of a fight.

Even the lawyer and the prosecutor are ambiguous. Everyone at some point will go beyond their profession, showing sincere emotions. And it really turns out that the hero of Joseph Gordon-Levitt does not arouse hostility, although he is on the side of the accusation. This is a professional who, however, does not forget about honor.

But the real evil is still present in this film. First of all, this is the incredibly annoying Judge Hoffman. In reality, after the trial, the overwhelming majority of lawyers called him incompetent. In this case, he embodies a bureaucratic machine that does not hear any arguments from reason. And the real talent of the charming actor Frank Langella is that you really want to hate his character.

Hoffman is accompanied by dozens of faceless police officers, FBI agents, officials and other employees of the state apparatus. The very same servants of the law who take off their badges and name badges when they start beating people up. There are so many of them in the film that even the faces are hardly remembered. They are exactly the same in real life.

"The Trial of the Chicago Seven" will surely be included in the list of favorites for the future "Oscars" and other film awards. And this will not be a tribute to the agenda, but a well-deserved recognition. Aaron Sorkin took the events of fifty years ago and turned them into a poignant social story. At the same time, he did not forget to talk about living people who created the future and changed life in the country, without being any special heroes.