Generally favorable reviews - based on 15 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 10 out of 15
  2. Negative: 1 out of 15

Where To Watch

Stream On

Critic Reviews

  1. Reviewed by: Kenneth Turan
    Mar 20, 2014
    If you can't place the name, or want to know more, Anita is a splendid place to start.
  2. Reviewed by: Miriam Bale
    Mar 20, 2014
    Anita is an important historical document about an event that prompted a larger cultural conversation about sexual harassment. But, perhaps more important, it conveys Ms. Hill’s journey from an accuser alone to an activist who shares with, and listens to, others.
  3. Reviewed by: Duane Byrge
    Mar 18, 2014
    This intelligent and comprehensive documentary not only conveys the genuine nature of Hill herself, but also recreates the national sensibility of the time, an era when sexual harassment in the workplace was not yet a national concern.
  4. Reviewed by: Nick Schager
    Mar 18, 2014
    Writer-director Freida Lee Mock’s concise and potent chronicle uses a wealth of archival video and numerous new interviews with its subject to properly contextualize Hill’s testimony as a landmark moment in the fight for gender equality.
  5. Reviewed by: John Anderson
    Mar 18, 2014
    Anita may be a tribute doc, but it’s one with real heft.
  6. Reviewed by: Stephanie Merry
    Apr 3, 2014
    Mock’s biases are clear here, and her documentary does at times feel a bit too worshipful of its subject... Still, the documentary remains a powerful time capsule. It’s a reminder of what we were and, thanks to Hill, how far we’ve come.
  7. Reviewed by: Ty Burr
    Apr 3, 2014
    If you were alive in 1991, the televised images may still stick in your mind and your craw.
  8. Reviewed by: Chris Nashawaty
    Apr 3, 2014
    The film itself feels a bit padded and clunky.
  9. Reviewed by: Odie Henderson
    Mar 21, 2014
    As a documented record of Hill's story and her achievements, Anita is a serviceable, at times riveting documentary.
  10. 63
    When Anita Hill took her seat before an all-white Senate committee in 1991, the optics said nearly as much about the systemic dynamics of race, gender and power in American politics as any of the specifics of the case at hand.
User Score

Generally favorable reviews- based on 4 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 1
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 1
  3. Negative: 1 out of 1
  1. Oct 12, 2014
    Based on the title alone, one knows that this is going to be a one-sided documentary, but by distorting the actual facts of Hill v. ThomasBased on the title alone, one knows that this is going to be a one-sided documentary, but by distorting the actual facts of Hill v. Thomas this pathetic piece of propaganda exposes itself. Those who truly believe that Anita Hill is courageous for bringing forth her testimony alleging sexual harassment by Mr. Thomas, are missing some very essential points. To wit, it is not possible that an EEOC attorney did not know the civil rights law of 1964 which prohibits employee discrimination, to which sexual harassment is one of those discriminating prohibitions as previously adjudicated per case law. Additionally, the alleged sexual harassment occurred somewhere in the period of 1981-1983, and has a specific statute of limitations which is typically two years, which undoubtedly Ms. Hill was aware of. It would have been truthful and courageous if Ms. Hill had made her allegations during that time, but she deliberately chose not to. Furthermore, Ms. Hill offers no documentation to support her bogus claims other than her shaky memory of innuendos and double-speak. This is an unacceptable performance from any competent attorney, bringing her accusations against Mr. Thomas simply down to the level of "he said, she said".

    The documentary trumpets the same tired song and dance heralding the great courage of Ms. Hill over and over again, and selling the story that she is to be honored as a wonderful feminist hero. She shouldn't, because unexamined in this limp documentary is the motivation of Ms. Hill which comes down to these salient facts: Mr. Thomas' nomination, meant that Ms. Hill's fast track to any high court had been derailed, to which she felt both envy and scorned, and when the white power establishment, through proxy, came calling on her, she was only too willing to sign up to demonize the black man and to stereotype the black man as a sex-crazed fiend incapable of civility. Ms. Hill's legacy is clear, she fears and despises the black man, and is a complete sell-out.
    Full Review »