Confirmation

source: Confirmation

This movie was biased. The film focuses primarily on Hill. Comparatively, it gave little thought and screen time to how Clarence Thomas felt and what he was dealing with. The end of the movie showed the true agenda of continuing to try to discredit Thomas by overwhelmingly showing those who thought Hill told the truth. As someone who watched this unfold in real time, it was not an unbiased presentation of occurred.

I was not aware that Joe Bidden had played the prominent role in down playing Anita Hills testimony! Movie is example of Washington DC Good ole Boys Club at work.

I got around to watching the latest from HBO Films the other night. If you recall all the hoopla surrounding Anita Hill and SCOTUS nominee, Clarence Thomas, back in '91- the pubic hair on the Coke can, "Long Dong Silver", etc..- this movie will bring back some, um, "memories"-??? confused emoticon Kerry Washington plays the law professor who brings up these issues at the time, and Wendell Pierce is Thomas. The film goes into how reluctant Hill was to get involved- how she was sorta drawn into the whole thing, and how Republicans and Democrats (mostly made up of men who were involved in their own sex scandals at the time) really didn't want to delve too deep into the issue. Greg Kinnear plays Joe Biden, who was the reluctant head of the investigating committee. Treat Williams is well cast as Ted Kennedy. This was yet another really well-done film in the line of HBO originals. Even if you don't want to revisit that whole controversy, I think you will enjoy all the goings-on in backrooms, and the observing of the political processes. Definite thumbs up for this movie. Jennifer Hudson and Eric Stonestreet co-star.

There's nothing terrible about Confirmation. The acting is decent, with persuasive performances. It puts out the basic facts, shows the Republican street-fight tactics that included a threat to introduce nonsensical, sleazy testimony from some Hill students, and portrays the Democrats as outgunned and, as is often the case, unwilling to pull out their own knife even after the Republicans draw blood. The problem is, it's all pretty boring. To some extent, that may be the result of the source material; neither Thomas nor Hill is a dynamic personality, and you're essentially faced with a he-said- she-said between two staid Republican lawyers. At the same time, the movie seems desperate to keep things dry and serious. Alan Simpson says some nutty things, but the actor says them as blandly as possible. Kinnear does a good job of imitating Biden, except his performance tosses out Biden's low-key humor in favor of midwestern blandness. Basically, any place where the movie has a choice between making things more dynamic or less dynamic, it chooses less dynamic, resulting in something that's actually sometimes less dramatic than watching the original hearings on youtube. Confirmation seems built for the classroom, where students can watch and discuss it. If you want to learn a little history, I'd say this is a palatable choice, but if you want to watch something enjoyable, give this a pass.

This movie was mesmerizing from start to finish. The most famous sexual harassment suit in history is the subject matter of this dramatic HBO movie. The way the story exploded onto the national spotlight and got how it became a political battle is so interesting. By casting the highly sympathetic Kerry Washington as Anita Hill in the role you can tell which side the movie slants towards. She gives a clear and dignified performance even through all the salacious testimony. Jennifer Hudson is a supporting witness on her side - another sympathetic actress. Greg Kinnear as Joe Biden is aged appropriately and his various decisions as head of the investigating committee. The actor who plays Clarence Thomas, Wendell Pierce is a bit too passive until his testimony before the committee. Mamie Gummer looks quite different with darker hair and plays an aide to Ted Kennedy played by Treat Williams. Highly recommended.

The movie itself is a credible by-the-numbers presentation of the firestorm that was the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings from the early 1990's. Where the made for t.v. movie really shines is in its character portrayals. Anita Hill is shown as a martyr; Clarence Thomas is portrayed as a creep, but not a criminal; Senator Biden is played as a well meaning boob; Senator Simpson comes off as out of touch; Senator Dansforth seems loyal to a fault; and the presidential administration looks to not care if the charges leveled against their nominee are true or not. While not exactly covering any new ground, the film at least appears to give a fig leaf to not choosing a side (though it leans in favor of Anita Hill). It's not a hatchet job, which is something actually worthy of praise these days. All in all, it's a solid film, and doesn't try too hard to create its own narrative. Not a bad way to spend a couple of hours on a weekend.

Outstanding study of the Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill controversy of 1991 with Greg Kinnear a standout as Sen. Joseph Biden, head of the senate committee investigations the allegations made by Prof. Hill. Kinnear actually sounded like Joe Biden and he was quick to profanity behind the scenes. The person portraying Prof. Hill, Kerry Washington, did not come across as a college professor until things really began to heat up. Definitely a fine film showing how politics entered into the fray. Too bad that Jennifer Hudson's character never was able to testify. It would have brought out more from the Oscar winner Hudson. The man who played Sen. Simpson from Wyoming gave a convincing supporting performance. Certainly the affects of the controversy played a major role in women gaining political clout as shown by the 1992 elections.

This well-produced film from HBO offers a good recreation of the contentious and sensational congressional confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas in 1991. The acting was superb with the performances of Wendell Pierce as Thomas and Kerry Washington as Anita Hill. Still, the film dragged at the end and did not fully convey the emotional impact of the tense hearings. The strength of the film was that it sought to adopt a balanced and fair-minded approach to the portrayal of Thomas and Hill. With the hindsight of fifteen years, the HBO production had the opportunity to examine the case impartially. In this regard, the film was successful in not "taking sides." For the viewer who may not have lived through the televised hearings, the film allows everyone to come to terms with the controversy of who was telling the truth in the serious allegations of sexual harassment. With little doubt, it is clear that Thomas perjured himself in denying all of Hill's allegations and cleverly moving on the offense to accuse the Senate judiciary committee members of "a high-tech lynching." In the end, politics prevailed over ethics, Thomas was confirmed, and is still sitting on the Supreme Court bench in 2017. Hill concluded that she never received a fair hearing from the politically-driven committee presided over by Joe Biden. The film points to this case as a watershed moment when Anita Hill's voice empowered women to come out of the shadows in matters of sexual harassment. There followed greater freedom and opportunities for women in the workplace and even in Congress. Overall, the film was successful in walking a historical tightrope and allowing viewers to make up their own minds about essential themes of culture, race, and politics.

Almost twenty-five years ago, Anita Hill testified in front of an all-white male congressional hearing presided over by Senator Joe Biden, accusing Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment, a legal concept that did not, as yet, resonate with the American public. In "Confirmation", an HBO mini-series, we see the reliving of the riveting testimony: Anita Hill's accusations and Clarence Thomas's defense with almost exact wording from the hearing transcripts. At times the hearing seems to deal with race – particularly after Thomas's "high tech lynching" comment, which struck an emotional chord for some and a signal for others that Hill's testimony would be discounted. What "Confirmation" actually zeroes in on is how Anita Hill's world on the job was radically different from a male colleague's. Although sexual harassment had been defined as a form of sexual discrimination in 1977, almost fifteen years later the term "sexual harassment" was still not in the public conscience. The Anita Hill testimony changed that. Read the entire review at: www.unhealedwound.com