For some viewers who are not familiar with the history of this period, this film may need to be watched more than two times to clear up many points that can be paid attention to. After all, a lot of dialogues are often used to connect the plots in the film. These dialogues are arranged by multiple forces for their own business. The planning and logic behind them take a little time to digest, and it even takes a little time to get acquainted with the seven gentlemen and their defense lawyers. face in order to figure out who is who (the tangle of face-blind patients) so there are limited points to remember after reading it for the first time.
1. Divisiveness within the Seven Gentlemen camp: mutual hostility and mutual understanding between Tom Hayden and Abbie Hoffman
1.1 Tom Hayden: The inner pull of the moderate elite and the white left: restraint and radicalism
To some extent the judge was right in his insight - a champion of an existing system whose rebellion is also a rebellion within the existing framework
The only time the radical attitude came from when a close comrade-in-arms and a colleague were brutalized by the police
1.2 Abbie Hoffman: Radical Grassroots Left
History background
"I was really born in the 1960s" - hippie spirit, sharp, reckless adolescence
2. The handling of the role of the judge: the acting is superb, but the character is "bad" and it is a bit face-off
3. Lawyer Bill: The gradual collapse of an orthodox lawyer's belief in the judicial order - what happens when the highest belief in the legal spirit and the firm maintenance of the system of separation of powers disappears
4. The list of readings at the end: fortunately, sublimation and emotional incitement, suspected sloppy and evasive discussion
5. Editing and presentation techniques ("speech montage"?)
View more about The Trial of the Chicago 7 reviews
