nafps There have been a spate of right wing reviews of this film, all repeating the same talking points. Right wing in this case means either racist, or those determined to take down an icon among the 70s counterculture, Mr. Carter.So determined are they to take down Carter's image, they resort to easily disproved and almost trivial falsehoods. It takes quite a bit of obsessiveness to dismiss Carter's boxing career as either "failed" or "mediocre." Two pairs of reviews repeat those talking points. Anyone can easily look up that Carter was ranked third as a contender against the champion.Another falsehood is the claim that there was no all white jury, that two Black jurors were on it. This one is harder to disprove without knowing where to look. Most links require some digging. The easiest one is The Guardian's article by a lawyer for Carter. Yes, it was an all white jury. And no, Carter was not a Black Panther, the silliest of all the claims in the negative reviews.Yes, this film does have quite a few falsehoods. About the only one the negative wing reviews get right is that Carter did lose the fight featured at the film's start. Nearly all the falsehoods in the film DIMINISH, DOWNPLAY, or LESSEN the amount of racism in his case.Why would supposedly liberal Hollywood remove much of the racism Carter faced in his case? First, Hollywood is not all that liberal, not in a genuine way. Openly racist recent films like American Sniper and Green Hell show that. The film makers for The Hurricane altered the facts because the real history is pretty complicated.The film lays blame for Carter's imprisonment on one crooked racist cop. In truth, there were multiple racist cops who framed Carter. The main witness against Carter, a mob connected thief, is here shown testifying to get his sentence reduced. Actually, he was heavily bribed by police too.A whole series of attorneys for the DA's office also took part in setting up Carter. But the film makers likely thought white viewers wouldn't believe the actual massive conspiracy with over a dozen police and lawyers. So they chose to make it just one fictional man.Even the anti racist activists are diminished. The film depicts Carter's realize as coming from three "Canadians." Actually it was a vast network of dozens of supporters. The film also leaves out Carter's own violent past. Surprisingly, none of the right wing reviews mention this. Carter did have a juvenile record of assault and theft. He also had court martials while in the military. Here the film makers could have done what Dead Man Walking did, admit the main subject was a deeply flawed criminal who still got railroaded and a punishment he did not deserve.Another model the film makers could have used is the far older Birdman of Alcatraz. Burt Lancaster played real life murder Robert Stroud, one who showed himself to be reformed. (The big difference, of course, is that most evidence shows Carter was never a murderer.) Rubin Carter, despite his criminal past, did great things after being released. He headed the Ass'n in Defence of the Wrongly Accused, which helped 21 others gain their freedom. He received awards, honorary degrees, and was in great demands as a motivational speaker.But none of the right wing/racist reviews mention any of that. They also don't mention that police falsely arrested him yet again, this time falsely accusing him of dealing drugs. Hollywood doesn't mention it either. Again, white audiences might have a hard time understanding just how constant police harassment is for Blacks...and Latinos and American Indians, as I can tell from personal experience.The Hurricane is a moving film. It's a shame the film makers believed some whites wouldn't find the actual amount of racism in this case believable. Al Carroll Author of Medicine Bags and Dog Tags, Presidents' Body Count, and A Proposed New Constitution.

sabujosephjr Denzel truly deserved an Oscar for this and in the Equalizer over his performance in Training Day. I mean the expression "eyes are the windows to the soul" made sense after I saw this film. Every word, every pantomime professionally delivered by Denzel began to accrue his innocence and eventually oozed out of his eyes. Brilliant direction, if not for the twisting of facts for commercial gains and to play the race card up a notch.This movie definitely deserves more than the 7.6 accorded to it at present.

ovigian Booking photo- I'll address it in a bit. Did research while watching the movie a second time, a movie with perhaps the best actor of our time Denzel Washington. I was convinced Rubin was guilty and still do. Many sites suggested that the Pesca character was all but fiction, as were a number of other characters for drama's sake. If so, why the f&#* would the producers and director essentially suggest it's a true story. The caveat, if Mr. Carter's booking photo was indeed with him in a tuxedo,I believe he is innocent. Why? I cannot imagine a black man, or any man, walking into an establishment with the intent to rob and/or kill,while standing out like a wedding groom.

goreilly40 People have asked why didn't Denzel get the Oscar for this performance? Well first off it wasn't because the acting was bad by any means, he gives a very strong performance, which is why he was nominated to begin with. So why the Oscar went somewhere else was because of the distortion of the events this movie was based on. Lets start with the main man himself, the movie depicts Ruben Carter as a noble person who was the victim of racism and injustice, were as the real Carter was an unstable violent character with an extensive criminal record. Now the events the movie got wrong, Carter did not stab a child molester as a juvenile, it was assault and robbery. Carter was dishonourably discharged from the army and declared unfit for service, he was not the highly decorated solider depicted here. Carter was not robbed of the middleweight crown, Joey Giardello won the fight fairly, even Carter himself admitted this. Carter's boxing career was in decline at the time of his arrest, he was not about to challenge for the title. The main detective was not the foul mouthed racist who was obsessed with getting Carter, in reality he never met Carter before the murders, he rarely swore and was a sensitive individual due to a facial wound received during WW2, he couldn't have been present at the Federal Court hearing, he died years before. The Canadians did not find new evidence, neither did anyone else and nobody tampered with their car. Carter WAS tried by an all white jury in his first trial, but the second jury had two black members. I could go on and on about what the movie got wrong but there isn't enough space, this movie butchers so many facts and ruins the reputations of people, some of whom are not around to defend themselves. As I said before it's not a bad movie to be sure, however this is not a true telling of the story, by all means watch it but don't accept of what you see as fact.