Mar 03 2008
Chicago 10
Kara’s Review
- Summarize the plot in one sentence. The trial of the “masterminds” behind the protests coinciding with the 1968 Democratic National Convention.
- Who would you take to see this movie? Explain. Anyone hip enough. I think the typical “indie” movie-goer would be attracted because of the animation interspersed with documentary footage – but that shouldn’t discourage anyone else.
- What impressed you most about this movie? Lots of things. I was worried about the animation, worried the film might be preachy. The animation was actually pretty seamless with the documentary footage. The film appeared to be mostly impartial – there were no overt messages. The music was, as I put it afterwards, bumping. Overall, good choices with regards to the soundtrack and the movie itself was scored well. But, the inclusion of “Kick Out the Jams” on any soundtrack is enough to win me over. The film itself was funny – even when dealing with some very serious issues.
- What disappointed you most about this movie? The voice-acting was not the best for some characters.
- One person involved in the production of the film must be given a prestigious award, and one person must be cast into an active volcano. Who should receive each of these fates and why? Whoever was behind the way they switched from the animation to the footage they had should win an award. It was not nearly as distracting as I thought it would be – it actually worked, which I found impressive. Whoever chose to score the scene of police brutality with “Moonlight Becomes You” in a typical indie movie schtick, Michael Moore-esque sequence should be tossed into the volcano.
- Under what circumstances would you watch this film again? Oh, as usual, I don’t think I would own the film, but it’s certainly one I would seek out to watch again.
Michael’s Review
- Summarize the plot in one sentence. The trial of the Chicago Seven and the events leading up to it are recounted in a documentary format.
- Who would you take to see this movie? Explain. I could see this film having pretty broad appeal — for anyone that doesn’t mind the anti-”establishment” presentation. There’s quite a bit to look at and think about, and the story ought to be interesting to anyone, not just documentary fans. I’d take anybody that doesn’t say “ick” after reading my response to question 1.
- What impressed you most about this movie? The format, definitely the format — a free-wheeling mix of documentary video, grainy 8mm film footage, and CGI animation. I said to Kara as we were leaving that ten minutes into this film I was seriously worried. The weird mix of media initially seemed like a contrivance. But the filmmakers make it work, and work well. The animation stands in for film or video footage that doesn’t exist, yet it has a whimsical stylistic element all its own. I don’t think anything quite like this has ever been done.
- What disappointed you most about this movie? Setting gratuitous police brutality to “Moonlight Becomes You.” Good God, that pissed me off, especially because the rest of the film skirted pretentiousness so deftly.
- One person involved in the production of the film must be given a prestigious award, and one person must be cast into an active volcano. Who should receive each of these fates and why? Director Brett Morgen certainly deserves the award in this case, and I’d say he’s likely to receive a few prestigious awards in real life for this effort. The volcano has to go to whichever casting director was responsible for casting the voice actors. I love Hank Azaria as much as anyone else, but his Abbie Hoffman sounds like every Simpsons character with a Northeastern accent ever. And Roy Scheider, may he rest in peace, sounds so comically evil as Judge Hoffman that it’s difficult not to view the judge as more caricature than historical figure.
- Under what circumstances would you watch this film again? Not much replay value here. I’d watch again with someone who hadn’t seen it, but I wouldn’t buy the DVD or anything.
Ratings
|
95% |
Interesting style doesn’t detract from the content and humor of this movie. |
|
86% |
Unique, entertaining and generally meritorious, but not particularly timely or memorable. |