Dull? Did you see the same film I did? I doubt it! The audience I saw it with was not bored. Enraged was more like it. The film was illuminating and fascinating,. I thought I knew US history and was shocked at events that seem to get every little attention. The parallels to today's need for revenge vs the scales of justice provide a powerful undercurrent to this remarkable and well acted legal thriller that is a history lesson we all need to sign up for.I
Whether or not the film was "illuminating" or "dull", the consequences of audiences blindly accepting Hollywood films as history is the real tragedy. Creating characters, however insignificant those characters turn out to be, and selectively presenting only those 'facts' which bolster the viewpoint of the makers of the film in order to sway the audience to their point of view are strategies that are disingenuous at best. They leave movie-goers with the impression that they now "know" what happened, although what has really transpired is that some movie director with a political agenda has rewritten history. The movie "JFK" comes to mind immediately.Those who take even a cursory glance at some of the historical record may also be "shocked at events that seem to get very little attention", at least by the film. Mary Surratt was guilty as guilty can be. Hollywood pictures are not substitutes for real history, although too many people are duped into thinking so.