On the Basis of Sex (2018)

On the Basis of Sex is a historical, biographical and legal drama about Ruth Bader Ginsburg and her husband Martin Ginsburg, which premiered in 2018. Here is some basic information about it:

** Director: Mimi Leder

** Writer: Daniel Stiepleman

** Run time: 120 minutes

The cast includes the following:

** Felicity Jones as Ruth Bader Ginsburg (“RBG”) (1933-2020) – a lawyer

** Armie Hammer as Martin Ginsburg (1932-2010) – a lawyer

** Cailee Spaeny as Jane Ginsburg (born 1955) – Ruth and Martin’s daughter – in the drama, she is a baby at first and later a teenager – today she is a lawyer like her parents

** Justin Theroux as Melvin “Mel” Wulf – a lawyer, who works for the ACLU

** Sam Waterston as Erwin Griswold (1904-1994) – Dean of Harvard Law School 1946-1967 – US Solicitor general 1967-1973

** Stephen Root as Professor Brown – School of Law, Harvard University

** Kathy Bates as Dorothy Kenyon (1888-1972) – a lawyer

** Sharon Washington as Anna Pauline “Pauli” Murray (1910-1985) – a civil rights activist and a lawyer

** Chris Mulkey as Charles Moritz – Ruth and Martin’s client in a case against the IRS

This movie is not based on a true story. It is inspired by real events, as an on-screen message explains, as the movie begins. This means the basic story is true, but the movie-makers have used the concept that is known as artistic licence: some details have been altered or invented for dramatic purposes.

Daniel Stiepleman – author of the screenplay - is RBG’s nephew. Martin Ginsburg was his uncle. RBG read and corrected the first three versions of his screenplay. After this, she handed over the task to her daughter Jane. When RBG watched the movie in December 2018, she said she was pleased with it; adding that some things in it are true, while others are not, but the two elements go well together.

The story begins in 1956 and ends in 1972. This is the time when Ruth and Martin are in law school and the beginning of their careers. When the story begins, they are already married and they have a daughter Jane, who was born in 1955.

What do reviewers say about this historical and biographical drama? Here are the results of three review aggregators:

** 60 per cent = Meta

** 64 per cent = IMDb

** 71 per cent = Rotten Tomatoes

As you can see, the reviews are not bad. On the other hand, they are not great. The ratings hover between three and four stars on Amazon. This is not much for this movie. I suspect the audience ratings will go up after a while. If you ask me, all these average ratings are too low. Why?

(1) The script is well-written and the actors play their roles well.

(2) The story is captivating, dramatic, and often quite emotional.

(3) It is inspired by real events.

Having said this, I have to mention that there are two flaws. First of all, the structure of the movie is a bit uneven. We start in 1956. From there we move step by step to 1960. But from this point in time we suddenly jump forward to 1970 where a new and important case begins. The major part of the movie is devoted to this case which plays out from 1970 to 1972.

Secondly, historical truth is violated on several occasions. Some details are missing, while some of the details that we see never happened or did not happen in the way they are presented here. I will not say too much about this issue, because I do not wish to spoil the viewing for anyone.

If you wish to know more about this issue, I think you should watch the movie first. Once you have done this, google the title of the movie and the words “historical accuracy.” When you do that, several items will pop up.

As stated, there are two flaws, but I have decided to regard them as minor. Why? Because this drama is great: it is not only entertaining, but also informative. It will capture your attention and give you something to think about.

I want to go all the way to the top with this product. I think it deserves a rating of five stars.

PS # 1. RBG - a documentary film which premiered in 2018 – covers Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s life from the beginning in 1933 until the time when she is one of the nine Justices sitting on the US Supreme Court.

 

PS # 2. Ruth - Justice Ginsburg in her Own Words is a documentary film which premiered in 2019.

*****

RBG (2018)

RBG is a documentary film about the life and career of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Justice on the US Supreme Court. Here is some basic information about this film which premiered in 2018:

** Directors: Julie Cohen and Betsy West

** Available on DVD and Amazon Prime Video (2019)

** Run time: 98 minutes

Many persons are interviewed in the film. Archive footage is also used from time to time. I will not mention all names, because the list is too long. Here are some of the names (divided into three categories):

# 1. RBG AND HER FAMILY

 

** RBG – 1933-2020

** Jane Ginsburg – daughter – born 1955

** James Ginsburg – son – born 1965

** Clara Spera – granddaughter

# 2. PLAINTIFFS IN SIGNIFICANT CASES

 

** Sharron Frontiero

** Lilly Ledbetter

** Stephen Wiesenfeld

# 3. OTHERS

 

** Bill Clinton – nominated RGB for the Supreme Court in 1993

** Orrin Hatch – a politician – Republican

** Arthur R. Miller – a lawyer

** Gloria Steinem – women’s rights activist

** Nina Totenberg – a reporter (National Public Radio)

This film covers RBG’s life and career from the time when she is a young girl until the time when she is more than 80 years old. There is information about her family and information about her professional life as a lawyer.

During a long life, RBG has been involved in numerous cases. For obvious reasons, only the most important cases are presented in this film. This is as it should be.

What do reviewers say about this biopic? Here are the results of three review aggregators:

** 71 per cent = Meta

** 76 per cent = IMDb

** 78 per cent = Rotten Tomatoes (the audience)

** 95 per cent = Rotten Tomatoes (the critics)

As you can see, the ratings are quite good. When you look at Rotten Tomatoes, you can see that there is a clear difference between the general audience and the professional critics. It seems the critics like this film more than the general audience.

In this case, I have to side with the critics. RBG is a great film. From the beginning to the end there is an incredible drive. The story of her life and her career is told with many details and in a fascinating way.

The film opens with a few derogatory statements about RBG. But when we get to the interviews, almost everything is positive. There is a good reason for this. As a lawyer, RBG has been involved in several cases where she supported and advanced the human rights of women and men. In short: she has done a good job.

However, she is not infallible. She is human. She can make a mistake. A faux pas. The film offers one example of this: in 2016 she made a negative comment about Donald Trump who was at the time a presidential candidate. Later she apologized for this. She said she should not have said anything about a political candidate.

While the film is great, it is not flawless. RBG made another faux pas in 2016, which is not included in the film. When US athlete Colin Kaepernick refused to stand while the national anthem was being played, RBG made a public comment describing his gesture as “dumb.” Later she apologized for this. She said she did not know why Colin (and other athletes) made this gesture. She said she should not have spoken on this issue.

This example is not included in the film! It is a shame!

Here is another flaw. This time not a faux pas, but a case in the Supreme Court where she seems to have voted against her own principles.

On the bench she represents a liberal point of view. She supports human rights. She supports gender equality. And in most cases, her voting reflects this point of view. However, there is at least one case where she seems to have voted against her own principles.

In Kelo v. City of New London she sided with the City of New London against Susette Kelo. This was in 2005. The court voted 5 to 4 in favour of the City of New London against Susette Kelo.

It is a case where we see the system against the ordinary person. We would expect RBG to vote for the ordinary person. But she voted for the system. If she had sided with Susette Kelo, the City of New London would have lost, because then the vote would have been 5 to 4 in favour of Susette Kelo.

** The case is covered in a book that was published in 2009: Little Pink House by Jeff Benedict.

** The case is covered in a movie that was released in 2017. The movie Little Pink House is based on the book from 2009.

But the case is not mentioned in the film! It is a shame!

Here is another case which is not included in the film: Moritz v. the IRS, which took place 1970-1972. It was the first major case argued by RBG and the only case where she worked with her husband Martin Ginsburg (1932-2010). She covered constitutional issues, while he covered the tax aspects of the case. They won!

Why is this case not covered in the film? I think I know the answer. Because it plays a major role in the movie about RBG: On the Basis of Sex, which also premiered in 2018. Perhaps the people behind the film and the people behind the movie got together and talked about their projects. Perhaps they decided to divide the story between them: the Moritz case will be the movie, while all the other cases will be in in the documentary. A good idea.

As you can see, the film is not flawless. There are at least two flaws, but I have decided to regard them as minor. Why? Because RBG is a great film. I think it deserves a rating of five stars.

PS. Ruth - Justice Ginsburg in her Own Words is a documentary film which premiered in 2019.

 

REFERENCES

** Notorious RBG by Irin Carmon and Shana Knizhnik (2015)

** Ruth Bader Ginsburg: A Life by Jane Sherron de Hart (2018)

** Dissenter on the Bench by Victoria Ortiz (2019)

*****

Ruth Bader Ginsburg (1933-2020)

*****