Strange Justice

This confirmation hearing changed things for good. It seems far fetched today because it is. Thomas would not be confirmed today.

I liked the movie, but it only pretends to be objective. I also liked the way they spliced in real scenes from the hearings. There should have been more. I'd also have liked the actors to use more of the real dialog from the hearings. In this instance, the reality was better than the fiction.

I barely remember the events of Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas portrayed in the movie Strange Justice, but now I saw the events unfold infront of me, I began to understand what happened when I just entered Kindergarten. Mandy Patinkin, being the best actor IMHO, does an emmy calibre performance of Kennith Duberstien, the lobbiest for Clarence Thomas. This is a very worthy movie for family with older kids, but beware, it goes into detail on everything, so this isn't suitable for young kids.(Besides, they'd probably go to sleep during this movie). And I have another gripe. Mandy Patinkin didn't show off is vocal talents in this movie.

Amusing work of fiction based on actual events (but not to closely). Several very good actors turn in fine performances, but the script is a travesty of justice. A shameful event in the nation's judicial history becomes a shameless attempt at character assassination, particularly upsetting since those too young to have watched the Thomas hearings will probably have their notions of what really happened warped. I was a lifelong knee-jerk liberal at the time of the hearings, just having a crisis where my views were changing, and the "high-tech lynching" (words surprisingly left in from the script) was enough to tip the scales, so it was a very important moment for me. Although one can't fault the production values, the movie was perpetrated by partisans trying in the best Orwellian fashion to change history into what they wistfully wish it had been, which is 180 degrees from what it was. Let's hope history does better justice to a distinguished and much-maligned jurist than this peculiar ideologist fantasy. If you thought "JFK" was sound history, you'll enjoy this one.

Frankly, I'm pleasantly shocked that a 90s Hollywood film could be so balanced over a historic event which was so aflame with bias (the leftist hand of Oliver Stone was not involved). If you were firmly on the side of Anita Hill OR Clarence Thomas, this effort will probably not shake your faith and fandom. If, however, you thought one or both were lying, that Hill's going public about Thomas after following him from job to job didn't ring true or that Thomas' purported predilection with porn was sad, then this will probably make both seem more human. The movie deals more with the way the two "combatants" were manipulated, at first willingly, and later (especially in Thomas' case) kicking and screaming. The acting throughout is excellent, and the pacing is spry for such a talky tale. Note that when Hill and Thomas give long testimonies to the assembled (and silhouetted) senators, it takes on a stagy, out-of-body quality. In this, Thomas comes off much more convicted and intelligent while Hill sounds whiny and self-centered; this is, in my opinion, interesting as Thomas comes off as more naive in the rest of the picture while Hill is focused and sober. So which one does the movie portray at his or her worst? Neither. Instead, it's Senator Joe Biden. Mandy Patinkin, commenting as himself as the credit rolled, thought that Biden probably regrets not calling a key witness in the case more than anything else in his life. Sorry, Mandy. It was probably his well-known plagiarism before that. And certainly how poorly he's treated in Strange Justice before that, too. A good film and I recommend it.

The acting was pretty good as was the casting and editing. There was some attempt at revising history but over all was fairly accurate. What was most distracting from the quality was the ill chosen transformation of Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill. During their testimony the light suddenly changed, their notes and microphone disappeared. Anita became almost demonic at one point. Clarence took off everything above his belt except his tie, approached the senate committee and ranted for five minutes. Then suddenly the lighting went back to normal, their notes and microphone reappeared and both witnesses went back to their normal selves. I have no idea what the director was trying to communicate other than his ability to not communicate. ???+