Budget
$10,000,000 (estimated)
Gross US & Canada
$4,073,489
Opening weekend US & Canada
$93,728
Gross worldwide
$7,994,527
Movie reviews
( 26 )
Add reviews
By Leslie 2022-04-08 09:01:13
Overcome all doubts, the truth is there
Unexpectedly, there are still so many doubts about the slaughter of Jews by the Germans in World War II. The film was so heavy that I had to stop in the middle to reconcile it with something to eat and drink. To me, Aspect is by no means a courtroom strategy, it's a depressing strategy. If this film raises even a trivial question, I hope the film can suppress this question with millions of thunder stones. The search for the truth of history should be equivalent to the search for the future...
By Ole 2022-04-08 09:01:13
You can't accuse someone of lying, if they genuinely believe what they're saying. 1. This is just a denial of the slaughter of Jews in World War II, the Nanjing Massacre, and the issue of comfort women in World War II. It has long since risen to a political issue, where the state and the nation cannot be separated. The contradictions of reconciliation have been reconciled...and those of the civil science...
By Velda 2022-04-08 09:01:13
This is a film based on true events, the history of the Jewish Holocaust heroine Deborah Lipstadt and the Holocaust denial David Owen confrontation in a British court. Deborah's book refers to those who distort the facts and deny the objective existence of the Holocaust as "deniers", so Owen sued her in a British court for defamation. For this history faker, Deborah must defend the truth of that history and give those who survived the massacre or were killed a real voice.
In the UK, the...
By Andres 2022-04-07 09:01:06
A Trial Triggered by Western Democracy Farce (Denied Film Review)
The plot of the whole movie is solid. I don't know if I understand it too much or the director just wanted to point out the drawbacks of Western liberal democracy. In one of the paragraphs, the judge will tell the defense lawyer that if this point of view is what he firmly believes is correct, then no matter what the facts are Rightly or wrongly, he didn't lie. At the time, I thought the judge was going to rule that the lunatic won, but it turned out good in the end. Most people think this...
By Marge 2022-04-07 09:01:06
The film is not so much about World War II history as it is purely about British law, how they think logically, identify and adjudicate. The heroine is a writer, researcher, and Jewish, and she is inevitably very emotional in this matter. She feels that questioning the matter itself is inexcusable, and her lawyer, apparently professionally, told her one thing, emotional useless in court, The more emotional , the more vulnerable to attack, it's harder to prove a thing is true than to...
User comments
( 51 )
Add comments
By Pearlie 2022-04-09 09:01:08
The team of lawyers is fantastic! Emotions cannot win, rationality and logic are more...
By Roel 2022-04-09 09:01:08
I just watched a short video this morning of a mountain of relics from the victims of Auschwitz, and I saw the movie tonight. Sometimes the road to defending the truth is extremely difficult, which also reminds me of the behavior of Neon Kingdom tampering with history textbooks, borrowing a sentence from the heroine, "I have nothing to say to the deniers, I only want to protect the survivors and the victims. Those who say that history will eventually be remembered, and your voice will...
By Ernestina 2022-04-09 09:01:08
Maybe the law can be manipulated, but history doesn't dress...
By Concepcion 2022-04-09 09:01:08
The plot is complete, the conflict is sharp, the rhythm is relaxed, and the rational and emotional balance is just right. The trial is not for healing, but for giving the survivors the greatest comfort in a dignified way. Following "The Defender", another time for legal...
By Jackie 2022-04-09 09:01:08
The subject matter is full score, and the movie itself has three...
Deborah Lipstadt: Now, some people are saying that the result of this trial will threaten free speech. I don't accept that. I'm not attacking free speech. On the contrary, I've been defending it against someone who wanted to abuse it. Freedom of speech means you can say whatever you want. What you can't do is lie and expect not to be held accountable for it. Not all opinions are equal. And some things happened, just like we say they do. Slavery happened, the Black Death happened. The Earth is round, the ice caps are melting, and Elvis is not alive.
Richard Rampton: They're a strange thing consciences. Trouble is, what feels best isn't necessarily what works best.
David Irving: [first lines; in a video speaking to a sympathetic audience] I don't see any reason to be tasteful about Auschwitz. I say to you quite tastelessly that more women died on the back seat of Senator Edward Kennedy's car at Chappaquiddick than ever died in a gas chamber at Auschwitz.
[audience laughing and applauding]
Deborah Lipstadt: Holocaust denial rests on four basic assertions. Number 1: That there was never any systematic or organized attempt by the Nazis to kill all of Europe's Jews. Number 2: That the numbers are far fewer than five or six million. Number 3: That there were no gas chambers or specially built extermination facilities. Number 4: That the Holocaust is therefore a myth invented by Jews to get themselves financial compensation and to further the fortunes of the State of Israel. War, the deniers say, is a bloody business. There's nothing special about the Jews, they're not unique in their suffering. They're just everyday casualties of war. What's the fuss?
Deborah Lipstadt: Okay, and here's another question, how do we know the Holocaust happened? Seriously. I'm asking. How do we prove it? Photographic evidence? Not one person in this room or outside it has ever seen a photograph of a Jew inside a gas chamber. You know why? Because the Germans made sure that none were ever taken. So how do we know? How do we *know* that so many were murdered? So what's the proof? Where's the proof? How strong is it?
