Pertaining To The Conspirator

Zzzzzzz... What? I'm sorry. Fell asleep for a minute there.

Okay, something about a woman who is (perhaps) falsely accused of conspiring to kill President Lincoln. She stands trial in a closed military court with Union generals as the deciding body. A young man in the war department is her defense. He's reluctant at first, but then starts to believe the trial is unfair and she may be innocent. He's willing to risk his career to see her get a fair trial.

That about covers it. I've heard the movie is relentlessly accurate (historically, I mean). However, I doubt that very much. It seems a little too liberal to be accurate. The writing is so-so (what's with the contractions in the dialogue?). The acting is kept afloat by Robin Wright as Mary Surratt, the accused woman, and, to a certain extent, James McAvoy as Aiken, her defense lawyer. (Although I think he occasionally had trouble dropping his British accent.)

Aside from the sheer boredom, I also had a problem with the portrayal of the military court. Whether the generals were truly on a witch hunt or not is beside the point. What matters is what audiences bring away from this movie. Unfortunately, The Conspirator implies that military trials are necessarily biased. With the recent (and still unresolved) controversy over suspected terrorist trials, this seems like a thinly veiled condemnation of the military trials that many conservatives want to use. I have heard that this movie was in the works well before the War on Terror, so it seems that the man behind the movie did not intend it as a condemnation. However, I am perfectly willing to believe that director Robert Redford intended it as a condemnation.

Additionally, military trials are called "unconstitutional." Shortly after Surratt's trial, the Supreme Court ruled that citizens cannot be tried in military courts. I would agree. But this was an extraordinary period in the history of this country. Nearly all enemy combatants were citizens because it was a Civil War. The filmmakers also forgot to mention little details like: Abraham Lincoln himself suspended habeas corpus during the Civil War. Imagine that! The man that everyone includes in their top five best presidents list suspended something that the Supreme Court has recently (and perhaps wrongfully) given to non-citizens. Also, if Lincoln suspended habeas corpus rights without a huge uproar, why would anyone at the time think it untoward that Surratt got a military trial?

Finally, the story seemed a little stilted. For most of the movie, it is implied that Surratt is innocent. Only at the beginning and the end does Aiken seem to doubt her innocence. In the beginning, he is convinced that she is guilty. In the end, he admits that he doesn't know; he just wants her to have a fair trial. In between, he seems to never doubt her innocence. The flimsiness of the evidence presented against her also seems to imply that she is innocent. In the mystery genre, it's a good thing to mislead audience by getting it caught up in the moment. In the historical genre, it's just bad storytelling.

In conclusion, this is a good movie to watch when you need to catch up on some sleep. Robin Wright was wonderful as Mary Surratt, and James McAvoy was pretty good as Aiken. But they were the only bright lights in an otherwise drab (and probably politically slanted) movie.

My Rating: T (mild language, violence (including stabbing), several people are hanged)


Reviews of similar books or movies:

• The Winslow Boy
• Bright Star

On Don Bosco

In 19th-century Italy, young boys work at factories and building sites for starvation wages. One man gathers up as many boys as he can, repeatedly going to the factories and other work places to rescue these children and young men from a life of hardship. Father Bosco (Ben Gazzara), better known to the world as Don Bosco or St. John Bosco, has dedicated his life to the boys and will do anything to show them they are loved. However, like any holy person in history trying to make a difference in society, he meets with stiff opposition from all sides - and some of his adversaries even try to kill him.

Pros: Ben Gazzara plays a great Don Bosco! This movie is not like many other saint biographies - the acting, writing, and costumes, etc., are pretty darn good in this one, as opposed to pretty much all the others I've ever seen.

Cons: Lina (Patsy Kensit) is mildly annoying. She's not a real great actress, and her high-pitched voice rapidly gets annoying. Also, the Latin in the movie seems a little out of whack. Starting Mass on Easter Sunday with the Pater Noster (Our Father)? St. Dominic Savio, one of Don Bosco's boys, isn't in the movie. I guess the filmmakers didn't want anyone to steal Don Bosco's thunder.

My Rating: T (a brothel near Don Bosco's house for boys)

Regarding Bright Star

Fanny Brawne (Abbie Cornish) is a fashionable young lady who loves witty remarks. John Keats (Ben Whishaw) is a shy poet who likes jokes, but doesn't care to dance. They're hardly an ideal pair. Yet, Fanny is attracted to Mr. Keats the very first time she meets him - despite his need for a new coat. She determinedly pursues a friendship with him, ignoring the discouragement she recieves from his obnoxious friend, Mr. Brown (Paul Schneider).

Pros: This movie is absolutely gorgeous. I caught my breath both times I saw the scene in the field with the blue/purple flowers. Fanny and Mr. Keats's love story is beautiful and almost entirely chaste (chastity runs deeper than simple abstinence). Mr. Brown's Scottish accent is awesome! The acting is almost impossibly good. Fanny's younger sister Toots (Edie Martin) is very cute and sweet.

Cons: "A poem needs understanding through the senses. The point of diving into a lake is not immediately to swim to the shore, but to be in the lake, to luxuriate in the sensation of water. You do not work the lake out, it is an experience beyond thought." -Mr. Keats, in a conversation with Fanny. Replace "a poem" with "this movie" and you have what I think of Bright Star. The first time I watched it, I didn't like it. I wanted it to pull me in, to capture my imagination and my emotions. It didn't. The second time I watched it, I was determined to become immersed in it. While even then it didn't affect me like many other movies I've seen, it was a lot better.

My Rating: T (thematic elements)

Picture from movieberry.com