Nobody Speak: Trials of the Free Press

This quite well presented 'documentary' makes no real attempt to address the facts and instead sets itself up with a number of straw man arguments it never delivers on.

For a start the film makes out that this is a story about the free press, the earnest, honest hardworking noble establishment working to uphold the high ideals of a great society.

In reality they're dealing with gossip journalism, muck shoveling drivel that at best distracts the population from looking at issues that really matter, like world peace, corporate corruption, racism social and gender injustice etc, and at worst pose a real and damaging effect on society and how we develop. It's almost laughable to watch these shills wince in interviews at saying the 'f' word yet their day job is to pedal and create as much pornographic like garbage and sensationalist atrocities as they can fit in an edition. They really are unintentionally self unaware and horrible low life.

Yes the concept of freedom of the press is an important pillar of the free world, but the concept is not there for the likes of these muck peddlers although it has until now protected their right to make sh!t up or profit from the misfortunes and ugliness of others. With that freedom comes responsibility and watching these people talk for almost 2 hours clearly demonstrates they have no interest or comprehension of what it takes to make a functioning safe and thriving society. They try to hang the discussion up on technicalities and loop holes pretending they're oblivious and innocent to the larger picture of what these particular individuals do and how they undermine the much more noble establishment of the 4th estate.

It would be funny if it didn't have real impact not only on the celebrities they attack but a serious real impact on the mindset of the world we live in. But that's just the people this film fails to paint in a favorable light.

As for the film itself, while its camera angles, sound and music are all professionally produced the producers fail to maintain any real 'documentary' credibility. They never address the harm that gawker style 'journalism' does to the individuals they focus on or to the public at large who are tricked into participating in a downward spiral of ugliness, as if it was irrelevant to the discussion.

This is a thoroughly unpleasant unsuccessful (at least to the producers goal of justifying gawker as some sort of moral high ground "what did we do wrong??" innocent victim of powerful men out to hurt them shtick) film.

What it unintentionally does is put the faces of the players in front of us and let them hang themselves with their own words, body language and expressions. We are without a doubt in a bad place as a society riddled with diversionary garbage news, and here are the people that bring it to you in all their self justifying, self-important, selfishness.

This is a truly horrible film in a way they didn't intend it to be.

Completely one sided film. The film sets out to make case that the free press is being silenced with money (a very broad description, but you'll see there are multiple ways the press is being "silenced" by the wealthy), but fails at every turn to prove it, or to even to make journalists sympathetic characters. Shot in foot #1: Claiming Gawker is a bastion of truth and had every right to share Hulk Hogans sex tape online. There is, of course, the Peter Thiel aspect. Thiel is a multi-billionaire investor/entrepreneur who, along with friends, was outted as gay by Gawker media 10 years previous, and so funded Hulk Hogans lawsuit with Gawker over sharing his foray into amateur porn. Of course, most sane people don't like third-party litigation when it comes to two already-wealthy people... But in this case it's hard not to feel for the billionaire who came to the aid of his millionaire friend. Oddly enough. Shot in foot #2 (and I'm going to hurry this along, as the movie does -- The story is really all about Hulk-Thiel): The Las Vegas Review is being bought by a mysterious company.... And the working journalists are concerned the buyer will silence them. They do some digging, expose the owner of the paper... and that's that. I also work at a corporate news outlet.... What's your point? I don't think there is one. Who but a rich man would own a newspaper? If anything this proves that those particular journalists were NOT silenced by their owner, at least in that instance.... Shot in foot #3: Trump fear mongering. We all know Trump disdains the free press. It's not his own original idea you know! Some ominous words and a few famous quotes later, and it's finally over. I laughed, I cried, and I learned nothing. Such a noble idea -- The free press is being bought out and silenced. I'm sure it's true. But this movie fails to make the case. Someone should take another shot at this subject.

A rocky start using a company that is just horrible and awful to human beings with a few good staffers, later takes a look at another company and a group of people who have nothing but my upmost respect for the work they do.

Frustrating but interesting.

Although fairly interesting, it's very muddled and unfocused, and very biased. Lots of interviews with the press-side, hearing their opinions, but nothing but others footage from anyone else making for a very one sided argument. No matter who is right or wrong, it makes for a very biased film.

For the most part, this is an engaging documentary. But despite its marketing, "Nobody Speak" isn't really about the Bollea v. Gawker case. Sure, the trial gets plenty of screen time (in all its salacious and uncomfortable glory) but this is really about behind-the-scenes funding; the billionaire with a grudge against Gawker, the baron who buys out the Las Vegas newspaper to suppress unfavorable reporting. These are moneyed villains that beg to be reviled. Even His Trumpness is involved in a final segment that feels wholly supplemental) after waging a war on "Fake News".

The movie loses steam when it moves away from Peter Thiel and Gawker (its strongest segment) to broaden the support of the Fourth Estate. But on the whole, it's not bad.

6/10