zkonedog
I rented this movie because I enjoy period films about U.S. history, and what better event to be covered than the Lincoln Assassination?! Unfortunately, this courtroom drama fails in a number of aspects, with acting being first and foremost on that list.For a basic plot summary, "The Conspirator" tells the story of Mary Surratt (Robin Wright), accused of harboring the men who conspired to kill President Lincoln. With all the odds stacked against her, Surratt is given a military trial that she has no hope of winning. The only thing in her corner is lawyer Frederick Aiken (James McAvoy), who is persuaded to fight for her cause.As a courtroom drama, this film is okay. It touches on a few interesting themes and really shows the mood of the Civil War era. However, the acting is so poor that it never really sucks viewers into the proceedings. Besides Wright as Surratt, the acting performances fail in a variety of ways. McAvoy does not convey "period" whatsoever, the auxiliary cast isn't given much to do, and the laughable casting choices of Justin Long and Alexis Bledel only serves to further exemplify the acting in this effort.Also, "The Conspirator" does none of the "little things" right, like character depth. A romance angle with McAvoy's character goes nowhere, for instance, while the drama of the film is confined to the courtroom scenes and no others.Thus, I cannot recommend "The Conspirator" to those looking for anything more than a mediocre, stuffy period piece about a very specific topic. If you only want to see it because it has Lincoln on the cover, go elsewhere for your history fix.
ryinex
I thought the movie was quite good. It kept me entertained through the entire two hours. As I myself did not have express details on the outcome of the trial featured in the film. I was unaware of the outcome so I was kept guessing. There was good quality of acting, in that James McAvoy portrayed a genuinely upset and determined lawyer seeking justice rather than vengeance. It was relatively accurate historically with the assassination of Lincoln with how he was aided by other southerns and how the court officials sought someone to blame instead of the truth. It was kind of frustrating watching the case slowly come together only to fall apart at the dishonesty and corruption of the government.
valadas
To duly appreciate this movie maybe you must forget that the Southern cause during the Civil War in USA was a bad one because furthermore to the rest, it defended slavery and racism which means you must avoid any sympathy for it. Putting this aside we must admit this is a very good film which tells the real story of the trial of a southern woman charged with conspiracy to murder President Lincoln and who always declared herself innocent. The trial, conducted by army officers was an apishness of justice with total violation of the defendant's rights, subtracting her to a trial at a civil court to begin with and that she was entitled to. The offense of her right to defend herself is constant and it includes manoeuvres to favour the accusation some of them carried out by the prosecution itself. The movie respects faithfully the historical truth of this real case and all the performances by actors and actresses are superb, by "goodies" and "badies" as well with particular notability to James McAvoy as Frederick Aiken, the defence lawyer and Robin Wright as Mary Surratt the defendant. All the scenes are very realistic in terms of interior and exterior sceneries, characters' dressing and personal behaviour all according to the movie's epoch. A movie worth to be seen indeed.
Clifford Quinn
This started off as if it would be really good because of an interesting premise, a good cast and high production value but the film failed to deliver.The story is told from the point of view of a former Union soldier turned lawyer, played by James McAvoy with an out of place English accent, as he must defend a woman implicated in the assassination plot of Abraham Lincoln. He is conflicted by his want for revenge and his belief that all people deserve a fair trial. The difficult relationship between these two characters, one Union and one Confederate, in a wider sense symbolises the process of the country coming to terms with peace after the hard fought American Civil War. McAvoy wants to give in to his desire for vengeance and 'swift justice' but is also aware that principles are only worth something if they are followed when it is difficult to do so. The restriction of civil liberties and the slippery slope that can follow highlighted here is relevant to increasing concerns over privacy in the 21st century which gives the film some substance. While highlighting this is a noble aim I think the film would have been better served by focusing on the victim of this injustice rather than the lawyer. I mildly enjoyed the recounting of the story without ever really investing emotionally which for me is the films main problem.
AD
