In this very late 60's irreverent, almost anarchic low-budget film, Brian De Palma defines more of his strange, given Hitchcock-like fascination of voyeurism, and attacks the issues of the day. The most prominent of which, both cringe-inducing and just plain funny, is when he focuses on the black-power movement (a black woman handing out fliers asking white people 'do you know what it's like to be black'), which is something that could only work for that time and place, not before or now.
But one of the key things to the interest in the film is 27 year old Robert De Niro (not his first or last film with the director), who plays this character who sits in a room looking out through his telescope at women in their rooms, setting up phony deals, and in the end basically throwing bombs. Those who have said that De Niro can't act and just is himself in every movie should see this movie, if only out of some minor curiosity. A couple of times in the film it's actually not funny, as when there's a disturbance in a black-power meeting (filmed in a grainer, rougher style than the rest of the film).
In the end it's capped off with a rambling monologue in an interview that tops De Niro's in King of Comedy. It's pretty obvious where De Palma's career would go after this, into slightly more mainstream Hollywood territory, but all of his trademarks are here; the dark, almost nail-biting comedy, the perfectly timed style of voyeurism, and interesting usage of locals. Think if De Palma and De Niro did a Monty Python film, only even more low-budget and in its New York way just as off-the-hinges, and you got Hi, Mom! It also contains an eccentric and funny soundtrack.
imdb comment
4.5 I think the institutions of our democracy are wonderful things
lol 最后30分钟之前还觉得还行啊虽然把特别搞笑的一个trial拍无聊了但是没有chapo说得那么差嘛，然后结尾就被sorkin强行喂屎了。chapo特别不喜欢这个电影是因为主角tom hayden本来支持bernie但是最后转投了clinton吧。🐍
历史上没有哪一次的所谓正义的群体维权事件不会上升为流血和暴力，只能概括为四个字：乌合之众。
没有吸引到我，感觉拍的太正了，剪辑也很令人厌烦，同样题材同种手法的美国电影太多了，没新意。
借古讽今得恰到好处。庭审戏中闪回真实事件场景的剪辑非常有力度。索金的剧本还是那么凌厉。Sacha演得太棒了！只有囧瑟夫毫无存在性完全是个工具人。
是否是在暗示老美民众，他们正在过着跟1968相似的时代？
看看人家
艾伦·索金千呼万唤始出来的历史律政片，再现1968年反越战运动后的那场被预先定罪和操控的审判。拍得十分工整，庭审论辩与过往闪回交叉叙事，台词还是一如既往地凌厉铿锵，可惜视听语言上还是较为呆板，群像有所侧重，部分人物并未塑造得有血有肉，但几位老戏骨的表演很有说服力（科恩、里朗斯、迈克尔·基顿，以及饰演法官的弗兰克·兰格拉）。放在这个时间推出，颇有借古讽今的用意，希望能在关键时刻力挽狂澜吧。（8.0/10）
“永葆热爱，永怀善良，永远温柔”仍然是我们面对残酷最好的武器。
花了这么久，断断续续的，终于看完了。就我而言，俏皮的学生作品，才气和趣味性并重，但本人多关注的一些议题没能延续。开头极佳，后面的剧情编排和台词也和我胃口，但是，属于电影本身的魅力，缺少了一些。
看看人家
网飞虽然搞了很多垃圾流水线类型片，但只要网飞继续支持好导演拍出这样的好片子，网飞就会继续牛逼。
出色而直给的技术水准让人领略文宣终极形态的高级魅力，拍政治审判非常方便地拍成政治电影，都只能是一场行军而非漫游。
小哥聊了一句他在记名字因为和越南阵亡者相比他们这个court fight 就很trivial, 然后一句话 马上进入下一幕了。然后我当然脑子一机灵，我觉得这个大概率就是为了结尾埋伏笔了。i m patting myself on my own back for that
编排完美，歌舞和这种题材太搭了，让人激情昂扬。只有在困境中才能看出一个地方的素质，是否能考虑到尽可能多的情况，关心少数群体，保护动物，人们互相帮助载歌载舞，这才是人性的闪光之处。女机长的独唱更是激励人心。
热火朝天汹涌澎湃的1968反越战嬉皮年！！
相比波兰斯基的我控诉，这片通篇热血直接的反映双方冲突的不可调和，电影很直接很热血，但细细想起来可以发现，通篇完全站在抗议者的一面，编剧或者导演左的十分彻底，所以究竟这是不是真实的历史，所以是一个纪录片还是一个演绎片，才真正决定这个电影的高度
幽默又好看。在充满恐惧与愤怒的几周里，很难得的笑了出来。
叙述方法比较朴实，如树桩生火慢燃，前期烟很浓，等到多线叙事之后，明火熊起，屡屡有爆响，但又一直沉稳不漾。这个剧本经纬密集，看的就是其繁复不乱有风的微观细节，真是以秒来计，操劳两小时的活计。
审判开始后，也许会很容易忘记，这一切是为了谁。丨“我无心搞文化革命，因为那会让我们分心，忽略真正的革命。” “但我们对胜利的定义不同。” 丨Your life is a "fuck-you" to your father. 丨the possessive pronouns and vague noun modifiers 丨不可欺，不操控。在其位，谋其政。不冲突。stay calm, keep cool, when you have a mic. 丨读说明书要成为习惯。读书要读完一本书。自省。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
