Private Screening of 'The Conspiritor'

[MtVernon]

Hello all,

I thought I would put this out to all of the fine folks here. I've been invited to a private screening of Robert Redford's new movie, "The Conspirator" this Sunday in San Francisco. One of the producers will be there after the film for a Q and A. The purpose of inviting me and others like us is to get feedback and use our word of mouth to promote the film to...you, I suppose.

As we do have an opportunity for a Q and A, and understanding most of you reading this won't be there, what would you want to ask at the end of this, and what would you most be interested in seeing in the movie. Authenticity in historical fact, gear, speech, etc.

I don't want to waste the opportunity before me for a lack of imagination, so I'd like to hear what you all have to say. I grant you all that having not seen the movie, your questions will not probably be the same ones you'll have after you do see it, but still, I just thought I would put it out there for your thoughts.

[sbl]

Like most American made history movies (except westerns for some reason) most people look like they have just been issues the "costume" and speak the period speech uncomfortably. Since it's usually history "buffs" that go to these films, why don't directors understand that we WILL be looking for details. Just from the trailer I found...

http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u100/sbl1952/Untitled3-1.jpg

http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u100/sbl1952/Untitled2-1.jpg

http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u100/sbl1952/Untitled-2.jpg

http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u100/sbl1952/LincolnTrain.jpg

[Ross L. Lamoreaux]

How many times must this be said - "we" as reenactors are the only people in the planet who care about the details. To the rest of the world, the story is the most important element. Hollywood will never cater to a small fringe element of historical detail extremists. In this financial entertainment world, Big Hollywood (to coin a new term) couldn't care less about an estimated 20,000 - 30,000 American Civil War reenactors when their market is the other 240 million people. The ticket-paying public doesn't know that garrison soldiers shined their brass, nor do they care. The ticket-buying public doesn't know the difference between a Dirty Billy Type II forage cap or one straight off the boat from Pakistan, nor do they care. We are wierd in the eyes of the world people - embrace that which we can change via education, living histories and reenactments, and forget about that which we are tilting at windmills. Big Hollywood, and the world, does not care.....

[sbl]

Well.....Mr. Marti did ask.

But I did beat the old expired equine. I figure if motion pictures can make Middle Earth seem "real", the CW/WBTS would be easy.

[sbl]

Two of my sightings could have been fixed by the reenactor extras themselves. Brass and drill.

[MtVernon]

To Mr. Lesch: Thank you, you're correct, I DID ask, so thank you for pointing out what you saw.

To Mr. Lamoreaux: Thank you , you're correct as well, as far as expectations. As I asked of you, however, so apparently are the makers of the movie asking those of us in this hobby to preview the film to comment from OUR perspectives. I feel like you do that whatever we say, that's nice and all, but the movie is already in the can and set for release on April 15th. Nothing we say is going to alter brass or locomotives, or even, I daresay, high heel shoes.

What gets me is this, and it was touched on: If you have a choice, and the means, to do it 'right', and you're going to all the trouble, why not do it right? As with the train, if it's CGI (I don't know if it is or not) and you're making it from whole cloth, why not go ahead and make it correctly? That's what I don't understand. The effort to produce it right and produce it wrong are roughly equal.

[sbl]

Mr. Marti, I will say that I'm looking forward to seeing the film despite some details I picked out of the trailer. I'm lucky to be married to a woman who considers going to history movies as a good date.

If the "extra" troops in the film are fellow reenactors, they should know better about drill and military appearance in formal settings.

A good question at the showing is IF the film makers consider authenticity when making a film that history buffs are certainly going to see. If a viewer can "believe" the planet Pandora, why not a time in history?

[1ofHoward'sCowards]

Hollywood could solve half of the appearance problems by fixing the #1 thing people should change as far as their impressions are concerned. Think of Tom Beringer without the cowboy hat in Gettysburg, and if only half the actors in Glory didn't roll their forage cap bills like baseball caps. The first thing I noticed when I saw a preview for this movie was how bad some of the Union forage caps were.

[MtVernon]

Hollywood could solve half of the appearance problems by fixing the #1 thing people should change as far as their impressions are concerned. Think of Tom Beringer without the cowboy hat in Gettysburg, and if only half the actors in Glory didn't roll their forage cap bills like baseball caps. The first thing I noticed when I saw a preview for this movie was how bad some of the Union forage caps were.

Agree 100%, and it doesn't cost a penny.

[MtVernon]

Mr. Marti, I will say that I'm looking forward to seeing the film despite some details I picked out of the trailer. I'm lucky to be married to a woman who considers going to history movies as a good date.

Oh, make no mistakes, I'm super pumped to see this. I've seen exactly two movies in the theater in over three years. Having three children 3 and under will tend to do that. So I'm just happy to spend time in a theater.


If the "extra" troops in the film are fellow reenactors, they should know better about drill and military appearance in formal settings.

A good question at the showing is IF the film makers consider authenticity when making a film that history buffs are certainly going to see. If a viewer can "believe" the planet Pandora, why not a time in history?

I think they did utilize quite a few reenactors. I saw some cattle-call type calls in other corners of the internet, and here in the Bay Area they did some CGI scenes in a studio here where several of my friends were selected to be extras. One friend brought several different uniforms and civilian outfits and might be in the same scene several times through the miracle of technology.

They didn't drill though, so I can't pin that on them.

[cal 100]

THE CONSPIRATOR
Saw the film today, I was very impressed. Yes somethings looked wrong (mostly uniform items) but on the whole a job well done. Great film locations and acting. Outstanding period feel. Strongly recommended film when it comes out on April 15th.

[cal 100]

Here is a link for the trailers to the film.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0968264/

[Elaine Kessinger]

I will take exception to your pointing out of "high heels" in 1865 as a no-no. Her heels are wide, stacked leather that covers the entire heel section, no more than one inch tall... well within acceptable range for most authentic female re-enactors. My own, made by Robert Land include a small, stacked leather heel much like this. At least she is in a bonnet rather than a hat, her hair is parted down the center front and smoothed down on the sides (HOORAY!!!!! for the lack of Hollyweird Hair), and she is wearing a minimum of "visible make-up." (Again HOORAY!! for the lack of Hollywierd faces).

In all, in the women's costumes, they seem to have shown great restraint and much careful attention to details that will be noticed by us weirdo history geeks. I appreciate that effort very much. Will it be perfect? Probably not. Will it be one of the better ones for attention to historic detail in costumes and material culture, until further research alters our perceptions further? Most probably will.

..and for all I am a weirdo history geek, and proud to be so, I still won't enjoy a movie if I'm not captivated by the plot. Just sayin'....

[sbl]

I think the actress might be wearing those Amish lace-up boots. I don't think the wardrobe department expected me to do a screen capture of the actress leaving the stand in the courtroom. I do remember a written comment by lady friends of Jefferson Davis noting the "high heeled women" at Fortress Monroe.

Now about that railroad engine.....

[Bruce Schultz]

A fellow wet plate photographer made images on the set to replicate Alexander Gardner's photographs, and she arranged to get a replica camera to be used in scenes where Gardner's character photographed the hanging scene and maybe portraits of conspirators. She told me she managed to talk the set dressers out of using the ubiquitous flash that is commonly misused in period films before the 1870s when such devices were introduced into photography.
Myself, I couldn't watch Gods and Generals because of the bad beards.

[captdougofky]

How many times must this be said - "we" as reenactors are the only people in the planet who care about the details. To the rest of the world, the story is the most important element. Hollywood will never cater to a small fringe element of historical detail extremists. In this financial entertainment world, Big Hollywood (to coin a new term) couldn't care less about an estimated 20,000 - 30,000 American Civil War reenactors when their market is the other 240 million people. The ticket-paying public doesn't know that garrison soldiers shined their brass, nor do they care. The ticket-buying public doesn't know the difference between a Dirty Billy Type II forage cap or one straight off the boat from Pakistan, nor do they care. We are wierd in the eyes of the world people - embrace that which we can change via education, living histories and reenactments, and forget about that which we are tilting at windmills. Big Hollywood, and the world, does not care.....


Ross

When you've done Living History and people ask who won the War. High Heels and Brass are lost on the masses. Forrest for the Tree comes to mind. Details noted by the Poster I appreciated, like the Photo quiz. Most of the public buying tickets to see the movie won't get 20 out of 20 on the photo quiz. Myself I managed 19 out of 20. Ladies I missed like others. If the movie isn't any good, it will be on pay-for-view in less time than one might think.

Always
Doug Thomas
Lyons-Kentucky CS

[Rob Weaver]

While costumes and props are important, they do not make a theatrical performance. Shakespeare staged the Hundred Years Wars with a dozen guys with 16th century armor pieces waving flags and people believed in what they were seeing. "We few, We happy few, we band of brothers..."
And we still thrill to that speech. Theater is about strong writing, characters and compelling story. Prop details will not carry a film.
I remember reenactors who tearfully said "_Gods and Generals_ was the most authentic movie ever made." We can debate the truth of that, but we can't hide from the fact that that was one boring slog of a movie. Why? See above: writing, charactors, story.
I will see "The Conspiritor" for the drama. ANd if it's successful, it will cause me to engage more research on the Lincoln assassination (which is not my strongest Civil War subject)