'The Trial Of The Chicago 7 (2020)' dramatises a widely known court case concerning the organisers of a protest in late-60s Chicago, which began peacefully but quickly escalated into a skirmish with the police, who supposedly "conspired to incite violence across state lines" and, as such, can each be charged with up to ten years in prison. It was, essentially, a show trial meant to reduce the impact of the supposed cultural revolution, a biased affair meant to railroad the titular defendants - alongside an eighth who is consistently denied his right to counsel. The film is slick, straightforward and to-the-point, pairing its baffling and frustrating sham of a trial with flashbacks and recesses that explore the political reasoning behind its events. It's an engaging, enjoyable experience that does a great job of getting you on the same side as its anti-establishment main characters. Sorkin's smooth-as-butter dialogue is delivered by a bevy of famous faces who each turn in some of their best work. Some of them are sure to crop up in the Academy's list of nominees for best actor and best supporting actor. The only real flaw with the cast is its lack of female members; the few women who appear onscreen have very minor roles. Overall, this is a solid, consistently entertaining courtroom drama. It's rather timely, too. 7/10

Dramatised account of the trial of protesters arrested during the time of the 1968 democratic convention in Chicago.

This is a thrilling and intriguing historical drama with moments of anger and humour in the right places. The plot unfolds in a highly compelling way and the cinematography, editing and pacing all support the storytelling well.

It contains some excellent performances from a great cast, all of whom play clearly defined characters and have excellent screen chemistry. Frank Langella and Mark Rylance for me give superb performances as I felt they did exceptionally well to stand out in a film with so many stars.

One of the positives about a historical drama is that it (hopefully) should prompt people to research more about the subject matter and hopefully this movie has piqued an interest in many people unaware of the events to look back into history and find out more.

Unfortunately, the other side of the coin it's that many people do not take the time to do the above and take what they see in a movie as the gospel truth. This one contains scenes created for dramatic licence which for me can diminish the credibility of something implied as non-fiction.

Aaron Sorkin's script is as sharp and witty as ever, but at times it makes me feel like I am watching actors in a play reciting Sorkin-style dialogue rather than something that actually happened. Also, the the ending feels like it's laced with typical Hollywood dramatics designed to get emotion out of the audience.

This is a very relevant movie in the current political climate. With scenes such as the one showing Bobby Seale bound and gagged in a US courtroom it should prompt plenty of discussion points, especially being released so close to an election.

Aaron Sorkin, the smart-as-a-whip screenwriter, battles it out with Aaron Sorkin, the I-went-to-the-Ron-Howard-school-of-directing director, and hamminess wins the day.

I was actually incredibly entertained by this movie while watching it. It preaches to the liberal progressive choir, of which I'm a card-holding member, and it decides that such things as nuance, subtlety, or even slightly different points of view are unnecessary clap trap and offers us instead the admittedly cathartic experience of a two-hour shout of outrage at our messed up culture. But hoo boy, is this movie pretty ridiculous. Even while I was being entertained by it, I knew I was being shamelessly manipulated, which I could tolerate for a while, but the end of this film, which plays against one of those blaringly self-righteous movie scores, would make even Steven Spielberg cringe.

This movie is as watchable as it is because of the actors, and though there are many fine performances in this ensemble cast, I have to single out Mark Rylance, as the defense attorney for the 7, who deserves an Oscar for trying to make a serious movie out of Sorkin's superficial pap.

Grade: B- (This is one of those movies that feels like an "A" while you're watching it, but sinks lower and lower in your esteem the more you think back on it).