The main plot of this movie focused on the alleged communist propaganda and influence

in Hollywood and the relentless pursuit of the House Committee on Un-American Activities
(HCUA) to unveil each and every person involved in subversive activities --- or at least to have
their names cited by the so-called friendly witnesses. David Merrill, played by Robert De Niro,
is a Hollywood director who has a promising career ahead of him. However, his name, together
with those of his friends and acquaintances, was implicated in relation with communist activities
which led to the infamous Hollywood blacklist. Any person who refuses to cooperate with the
Committee is immediately deprived of the opportunity to work in Hollywood and even in several
other lines of livelihood. It caused mass hysteria and resulted further into naming persons based
on fear due to the close involvement of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to the everyday
lives of the characters.
While it is true that Merrill had attended few communist meetings during the Depression,
and thereafter was booted out, more probably due to his opinion or argument, there is no
sufficient evidence to prove his concrete involvement in subversive activities aside from the
confession of other witnesses --- which, more likely, may have been acquired due to fear from
being blacklisted in the film industry. Merrill was deprived of his right to practice his profession
to the point that his finances tumbled and also to include the fact that he was abandoned by his
friends; and, some of whom may have incriminated him. Larry Nolan was one of those who
testified against certain people, including his wife which led to the suicide of the latter at one
point of time in the film. It only meant that the Committee had such power to incriminate
innocent people in all aspects of their lives.
In the legal sense, more specifically speaking based on Philippine laws, there is a saying
that he who alleges must prove. The Committee who initiated the proceeding has the burden to
prove the facts against the persons allegedly involved in communist activities. In my sole
opinion, the Committee has no other evidence, whatsoever, to prove the connections of the
characters aside from extrajudicial admissions or testimonies. In People vs. Villanueva, it was
held that when the prosecution has succeeded in discharging the burden of proof by presenting
evidence sufficient to convince the court of the truth of the allegations in the Information, or has
established a prima facie case against the accused, the burden of evidence shifts to the accused
making it incumbent upon him to adduce evidence in order to meet and nullify, if not overthrow,
that prima facie evidence.
Likewise, hearsay evidence cannot be given due credence, unless otherwise supported by
another distinct evidence proving the same allegation. It is unjust to have a person bound by the
unauthorized act(s) of a stranger. In relation again to Philippine laws, the Committee did not take
firm notice of conspiracy among the people involved, especially, the witnesses and those they
named. The proof of conspiracy among those co-conspirators must be established to support
extrajudicial confession(s). Otherwise, hearsay, by itself, cannot incriminate other persons. In
order that the admission of a conspirator may be received against his or her co-conspirators, it
is necessary that (a) the conspiracy be first proved by evidence other than the admission itself (b)
the admission relates to the common object and (c) it has been made while the declarant was
engaged in carrying out the conspiracy. Conspiracy cannot be presumed and must be shown as
distinctly and conclusively as the crime itself. (Harold Tamargo vs. Romulo Awingan, et. al.,
G.R. No. 177727. People vs. Cachuela & Ibanez, G.R. No. 191752

Thus, the fact that Merrill was blacklisted by reason of an extrajudicial confession of
another person was already a flagrant violation of his legal rights. Also, how can Merrill nullify
the allegations against him when all the Committees intention was to publicly humiliate those
that would be named, whether or not they are guilty or innocent, so as to convey the greatest
limelight to its political desires? It was not about subversion anymore. It was about supremacy in
fear.
Furthermore, the film divulged betrayal of trust and confidence. People turned against
each other to save themselves from being blacklisted. Even Larry Nolan turned against his wife
though he, himself, was in fact a communist. Merrill, although confused on what to do,
maintained his decency so as not to implicate innocent people as he knew of the Committees
intention. Challenging the system caused the character(s) certain abuses, more specifically, on
their basic civil rights.