I think I realized, like, I was thinking about why this film, like, doesn't quite work,

why is it, why it doesn't quite reach its potential.

And I realize it's because the trial of the Chicago 7, like the event,

already has writers.

Like, Abby Hoffman, he said funny lines, he performed funny things, he created drama, that was literally his thing.

So the trial is already an event that has been dramatized, it was being dramatized as it was being created as this like televisual event that Hoffman wanted to be something you could something you could literally watch on TV or in a

movie, right?

So there's already kind of two writers.

And I sometimes kind of felt like there were moments where, like, Hoffman would say something

that was based on what he had said in the actual thing, but the original

version was actually a little bit funnier. And I almost kind of felt like there was an ego thing

going on where Sorkin didn't actually want to use Hoffman's lines because he wanted to do it

better. Like he was kind of almost like wrestling with Hoffman and not wanting him to be the funny

writer. Yeah, I definitely felt that. I mean, if you go back through the trial transcript,

Hoffman is hilarious. He's just so funny. And we'll pull out some quotes, but he's so funny. And also

the other, the other thing that felt that was sort of like Sorkin putting his vision on the events,

just in a structural way, beyond this kind of competition with Hoffman, which I agree

overshadowed the very good lines that he could have just extracted straight from history,

is also what it seemed like he was trying to do with character building, where everyone had

their role.

Like Tom Hayden was like the straight

man that was always in conflict with Abby Hoffman, and Avi Hoffman is the ridiculous guy. And, like,

...