Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueJudge Clarence Thomas' nomination to the United States Supreme Court is called into question when Anita Hill, a former colleague, testifies that he sexually harassed her.Judge Clarence Thomas' nomination to the United States Supreme Court is called into question when Anita Hill, a former colleague, testifies that he sexually harassed her.Judge Clarence Thomas' nomination to the United States Supreme Court is called into question when Anita Hill, a former colleague, testifies that he sexually harassed her.
- Nommé pour 2 prix Primetime Emmy
- 3 victoires et 19 nominations au total
Avis en vedette
Good cast, but Kerry Washington was reason the film to shine. Her performance reminded me Julianne Moore as Sarah Palin from 'Game Change'. She won the Emmy Awards for that and now I believe Kerry Washington has a chance to do the same. Apart from her, the story did not look good. It opened so well, followed by strong middle part and then the last act last its charm quickly. Because it was all about one alleging against another and he keeps rejecting them, but that twist I expected never came or its powerful dialogues. Even though it was beautifully made.
The reason the movie staying neutral is might be the actual result of the trial. So they kept balancing the contents throughout the narration, yet the as the viewers, we can understand the guilty feelings from the suspect's face. That's how the film silently gives its own verdict regarding whatever the real one was. One of the best television film, but due to its weak conclusion, the people are dissatisfied. Still, it is a good watch, if you are interested in politics to learn how ugly and at a same time how silly it is.
7/10
This all could have made for a compelling mini-series, or an even longer movie. What is a little disappointing about is that this is probably the best this kind of movie could be, but it's still not quite good enough, or I should say that the detail isn't exactly strong enough. Mostly I found that the depiction of Clarence Thomas not exactly weak but basic: for such a man who I may find reprehensible (from before and during his 25 past years on the court), Wendell Pierce gives Thomas as a person, and character in this story, some dignity, and Anita Wright as Clarence Thomas' wife as well. But what about anything else aside from his indignation and sad faces? What else was/is there to Thomas?
Maybe that just wasn't the focus, and director Fumiyama (of last year's surprise critical hit Dope), wanted to keep it on the politics and especially the media - many figures who you might recognize from CNN and elsewhere in cable news pop up as younger selves - certainly keeps a good eye on that. But what does make an impact and what is certainly good to look past the flaws here, are a) Kerry Washington's performance, which is so unwavering in making Anita Hill a figure of sympathy but also aching empathy, completely stripping anything else except this woman and having to put up being solid in front of the committee. And b) how the story and movie treats the whole aspect of how equal rights were not there in 1991, and may still not be (or, to put it another way, despite the changes the struggle is ongoing), for women in this country.
Like the recent People vs OJ series, we get a story that seems to deal a lot in race - Thomas' "High tech lynching" comment that struck an emotional chord for some but was seen as being disingenuous by others - and yet it's really about how women fit it, or certainly do not, in a world full of men. Images of women and how they talk and react, every little thing that they say, is under the kind of scrutiny here that men just don't have to face, at least not to this level. Confirmation is about the representation of a woman's image in politics, in the media, in the public at large, and what that does when up against a "street fight" as one of the raging white male Republican senators says. You can read a lot into what the hearings, as seen in this story, say about the national public character, and yet it's displayed for us to see in those hearings, and the behind-the-scenes fights and digging for dirt via the Republican senators, as opposed to spelled out all the time.
Confirmation doesn't stretch entirely too far for it to be great, or quite on the level of Recount or Game Change as far as HBO original movies about hot-button/controversial political stories in this country from the modern age, but within what it tries to do, and from the acting from all the players that is never less than convincing (Kinnear, who plays a rather unsympathetic Senator Biden, who screwed up things in the hearing just as far as scheduling people to testify, is one of those), it works. I'd even watch it again if just to see how Washington pulls off the majority of her scenes.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesWhile filming this movie, Kerry Washington was still a regular on the TV show Scandal, on which she plays a political "fixer" modeled on the real-life self-dubbed "crisis management expert" Judy Smith. Smith is depicted as a character (played by Kristen Ariza) in this movie; during the era depicted in Confirmation, Smith was the G. H. W. Bush administration's White House Deputy Press Secretary and played a large role in countering Anita Hill's claims of sexual harassment against Clarence Thomas in the media.
- Gaffes@ about 1:36 Greg Kinnear, playing right-handed Joe Biden signs a document with his left hand.
- Citations
Anita Hill: Why are you doing this?
Charles Ogletree: I've got students more qualified than Thomas. Plus, I believe you.
Anita Hill: What about tenure?
Charles Ogletree: Hell, in 24 hours, I'll be able to get any job I want. Fuck tenure.
Meilleurs choix
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- 關鍵判決
- Lieux de tournage
- Atlanta, Géorgie, États-Unis(Not known at this time.)
- sociétés de production
- Consultez plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
- Durée1 heure 50 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 16:9 HD