bigbadbear69
As a member of my family (Robert Barton) was one of the Irish negotiators of the treaty, I tracked this down and watched it a few nights ago on YouTube.I would agree with the views expressed that The Treaty is an historically accurate although dramatised account of events that led to the situation we have today.Maybe I have a biased viewpoint but I think the character of Michael Collins dominates this too much. This drama focuses on the treaty negotiations and more could have been made of the of the split between Collins, Griffith and Duggan who were in favour of the treaty and Barton and Childers who were against, particularly as the division was referred to early on. Nonetheless, far better than "Michael Collins"!
fenianbritt
I purchased the DVD through the Collins 22 Society on the web. I think both Neeson and Gleeson portrayed Collins well. Gleeson was lucky enough to work with writers who portrayed Collins' intellectual side better. It's hinted at in "Michael Collins." The list of noteworthy Irish and British actors is impressive, and Doyle is excellent as the leader (as said in an earlier post--yes, Griffith was the leader) of the delegation.It would take a 10 part series to properly include all the intrigue, side deals, secret meetings, and counter-intelligence involved in that short period of time. This film does well in giving the essence, if not the details, of the time.
dieBaumfabrik
**seriously, if you don't know how the Irish War of Independence went, you shouldn't be allowed internet access.** 'The Treaty' may seem dull in comparison to Ridley Scott's badly-cast money-maker 'Michael Collins', but this movie had two well-cast stars in the meat of the affair: Gleeson and Bannen. I could rest there, but the other English and Irish characters were also well-played. Oh, such a great ensemble piece without the redundant explosions! Unlike other shows about the War of Independence, in which only about 2000 people died, this movie let us know how justified the War was, by giving us a potted insight into the Irish and British minds. Whereas the idea of stopping the War was portrayed as a disgrace for a bunch of well-fed and well-bred British politicians, the consequence of which would be a few lost votes in Parliament, the idea of losing the War for the Irish was met with such hostility that the clever Irish leaders were looked upon as traitors - an idea that led directly to the more costly Civil War...The Civil War should not have been (Collins was killed, in case you didn't know), but to watch the boys 'at the top' argue who should live, and for what reason, made watching this show a thrill.
busterkeaton11731
Brendan Gleason seems to come closer to the image of Michael Collins I got from reading Tim Pat Coogan's biography of the Irish leader then Liam Neeson's turn in Niel Jordan's biopic.While this film,an RTE/BBC co-production didn't have anywhere near the budget of Jordan's film it's producers did a first rate job none the less.The acting is quite good,and the resemblance of Ian Bannen to David Lloyd-George is remarkable!The discussion he has with DeValera about the translation of the Irish word "phoblacht" is interesting,as Lloyd-George was a Welshman,a Celtic group who've managed to keep THEIR Gaelic tongue alive and kicking.All in all while this film hasn't the big screen glamor of "Michael Collins",it is less about the legend of the "Big Fellow", and much closer to the real man.Anyone interested in how modern Ireland came to be should see this film.
AD
