Moustroll Good movie but grossly overrated

Executscan Expected more

Spidersecu Don't Believe the Hype

Dana An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

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.

poc-1 This is a historical drama about the treaty negotiation of 1921 that founded the Irish Free State in 1922, later to become the Republic of Ireland. I found it fascinating for two reasons. Firstly it is striking how the two parties locked horns over words and issues which are totally irrelevant today. The importance of the oath of allegiance to the King and the notion that Ireland remain part of the "empire". How stupid it all was looking back. The really important parts, about protecting the rights of minorities and avoiding civil war, seem to be only minor issues to both sides. The Irish Nationalists were obsessed "Irish Freedom" and the British with their "Empire".The second reason I found it interesting is that it is an object lesson on how negotiations work. There is of course an inevitable comparison with Neil Jordan's epic "Michael Collins". In terms of budget, actors and drama "The Treaty" does not come close. However in terms of historical accuracy and educational value this is a far superior film. I found Jordan's film was far too coloured by his views on the Northern Ireland conflict. He took too much liberty with the historical facts. Watch "The Treaty" and you will learn far more about the events and people of the time.

clonion For those who are interested in modern Irish history - this is for you. It gives the details of the Treaty which ended the War of Independence between Ireland and Britain, which, dry though it sounds, is interesting. It has been well scripted, and superbly acted. It is ironic to consider that here, Brendan Gleeson plays Michael Collins, and in 'Michael Collins'(1996) only the sidekick. Liam Neeson doesn't do the character justice, Brendan Gleeson does. He looks a lot like Michael Collins, and from eyewitness accounts, behaves a lot like him as well. Another interesting point about this film is that it is almost all factually accurate (my sole quibble would be the interplay between Michael Collins and Lloyd-George's wife (I hope that's correct, its a while since I have seen it, sorry if it's wrong)) If you are going to rely on a film for historical accuracy, then please use this as opposed 'Michael Collins'