Confirmation (2016) Reviews

• Anita Hill was the Jessie Smollett of her time

  random-707782019-03-07

  If this was a reasonable film it would have both sides of this story, including the dozen women who worked with Thomas and who made it clear that Thomas was being smeared. Just google: clarence thomas witch-hunt Hill is simply a documented liar, even the cheer-leading mainstream press documented clear untruths by her. This was (another) lynching of a black man by Democrats. I recommend looking at Hill on meet the press in 1998 where she made her motives clear: Appearing on "Meet the Press" in 1998, Hill was asked to respond to Gloria Steinem's defense of President Clinton following allegations he'd groped a White House volunteer. Steinem had said, "The truth is that even if the allegations are true, the president is not guilty of sexual harassment. He is accused of having made a gross, dumb and reckless pass at a supporter during a low point in her life. Hill AGREED. When "Meet the Press" host Tim Russert asked her if she had a double standard for sexual harassment claims made against Clinton, she said, "There are larger issues, larger issues than just individual behavior." Just google: youtube Anita Hill This rationalization of it being ook for partisan interests reasons to make up claims of sexual harassment or ignoring those by Democrats because of the "larger issues" (ie PARTISAN interests making lies and smears ok) also accused recently with Kavaugh hearings where after that circus we saw two of the accusers withdraw accusations, one have theirs totally debunked, and the fourth, a Democratic Party activist, not able to recall when where or who committed the assault.

• A Supreme Court confirmation hearing becomes complicated by Anita Hill's charges of sexual harassment against Clarence Thomas.

  grimalkin-22016-04-22

  The movie did a fine job of condensing the confirmation hearing of Clarence Thomas for the Supreme Court, and Anita Hill's accusations that Thomas had sexually harassed her on numerous occasions and was morally unfit to become a justice. Various issues are explored, including sexual harassment in the workplace, sexual harassment by an African American in the workplace, and sexual harassment by an African American male directed toward an African American female in the workplace. If there is a villain in the piece, it is neither Anita Hill nor Clarence Thomas (beautifully portrayed by Kerry Washington and Wendell Pierce respectively), but the Democratic chairman, Joe Biden (Greg Kinnear), of the Senate committee debating Thomas's qualifications. From start to finish Biden is presented as a wuss, easily swayed and manipulated by Republicans to present Thomas in the best possible light. Along the way, Biden also loses witnesses to affirm Clarence Thomas's alleged behavior toward Anita and other women. The movie confronts the cowardliness of liberal white men (all the Democrats on the committee) dealing with sexual harassment charges that concern a black man, with the possible exception of the late-blooming Edward Kennedy who finally comes to Anita Hill's defense. For the most part, Republicans have a field day in attempting to destroy Anita Hill's reputation with bogus charges while Democrats remain mute. Greg Kinnear is completely credible as Biden as is Treat Williams as Ted Kennedy. The movie stresses how this confirmation hearing resulted in the country's growing sensitivity to sexual harassment. But it also shows how Joe Biden's ineptness results not only in Clarence Thomas's confirmation, but a generation of conservative opinions from the Supreme Court.

• Thrilling Political Drama

  gmclean-246362016-05-01

  The HBO film, "Confirmation" documents the grueling events of Judge Clarence Thomas' US Supreme Court confirmation hearings. For a young person that is not as familiar with the history behind his confirmation to the US Supreme Court this film was very shocking and very upsetting. Before watching this movie I did not know about all of the controversy that surrounded his nomination and I had never heard of Anita Hill. When President Bush nominated Thomas (Wendell Pierce) to replace Thurgood Marshall the nation was overall convinced that he would be confirmed by the Senate. However when Anita Hill (Kerry Washington) is asked to come forward to with her testimony of sexual harassment against Thomas the chaos begins. The director Rick Famuyiwa includes news clips that were live during the hearings which enhances the audiences' experience. The news clips make the viewers feel as if the hearings are taking place now. Also this film includes many behind the scenes looks into what occurred without the public's knowledge and it is very disturbing. I would recommend this film because of the outstanding acting and the important message.

• not great, but its story speaks volumes

  Quinoa19842016-04-17

  The bottom line with Confirmation is that it's not complex as far as the plot goes, and this is particularly if you know the history. In fall of 1991 Thurgood Marshall retired from SCOTUS, and, feeling the pressure to nominate a black man to the court, Bush picked Clarence Thomas, a man who many felt wasn't qualified for the court (as Jeffrey Wright's character says at one point, "I have students who are better qualified than Clarence Thomas"). But when asked by someone from Senator Biden's office about whether or not he should be confirmed, Anita Hill couldn't hold back and be silent and told the truth: she was sexually harassed, as far as having to hear vulgar talk about sex (i.e. "Long Dong Silver" is a thing in a court of public record, I mean Jesus), and asked out on multiple occasions. It got out to the press, she had to go testify, as did Thomas, and all this before a seemingly immovable date for the man's confirmation. 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.

• Accurate and Well Done

  Mcc80072016-04-17

  Great casting, writing, and performances. It's very difficult to separate political opinions from opinions about this film. As usual, HBO does a great job depicting these accusations and subsequent hearings objectively and inspiring discussion about them. Since they don't cast Thomas in a very good light, I'm guessing the lower rating is due to some Thomas defenders who don't want to be reminded of the accusations. It's difficult to watch this in light of Thomas's subsequent lackluster performance on the Supreme Court without concluding that Bush should have withdrawn the nomination. Both Kerry Washington and Wendell Pierce did an outstanding job, as did the entire cast. I remember this well and the movie is historically accurate -- no matter who seeks to deny it.