After watching the series, here are a couple of things that I noticed that were incorrect -

--At the play, the actor said "Well I guess I know enough to turn you inside out, old "woman" - when it should have been "gal"
--I thought that the way Powell entered the home and eventually into the Secretary's room was too awkward and too confrontational
--I did not hear Silas T. Cobb reference the other part of the curfew that one could not come back over in the same night
--The boarder at the Peterson House was not in the crowd necessarily, rather, he came out of the house after hearing the commotion after waking up
--At the speech given by Lincoln following the war, I have studied that it was Booth that wanted to take the shot, but figured out that it was an impossible shot, not that Powell did not want to take the shot (This one I am not 100% sure on)
--I never heard Leale give his famous saying "His wound is mortal"


Here are the things I appreciated -

--I thought that they portrayed Dr. Leale very accurately, especially the probing part
--98% of the material presenting was correct, and I did not see much that made it look "Hollywood" instead of the correct information
--Thought they did not mention much about Atzerodt, the information about his arrest was accurate
--Great stuff about the the conspirators

I give this a 4.7 out of 5!!!![/b]

Overall, I enjoyed it thoroughly. There were a few things I didn't care for.…Booth was a little over-acted for my taste, I think Mudd was shown treating Booth in a bed when I believe it was actually done downstairs on the red settee, and Stanton didn't really come across as the force I believe he was. Though I did appreciate that Stanton's physical characteristics were done right. That's one of the things that still nags at me a little bit about The Conspirator. That said, I believe that this was very well done, and the entire time I did a lot of head nodding as I continued to notice how many things were right. I was skeptical before hand about the whole Tom Hanks thing, but as it turned out that was very well done and I realized fairly early on why it was necessary. I've always thought the best way to do the assassination story would be a mini-series, where there's plenty of time to really dig in. Considering the time constraints, I believe the narration was a good way to handle it, and that worked very well for me. I also liked the way Booth shouted sic semper in the box and again on the stage. And I loved the way the pictures of the real conspirators were shown at the end. There were many things that got glossed over or left out that I would love to have seen, but as I said that's simply not possible when there's less that 2 hours to work with. All in all I enjoyed it very much, and those involved should be proud.

Here's what I just posted on IMdb:

For over fifty years, I have been intrigued with the story of the Lincoln assassination. For the past thirty-eight years, I have lived with it on a day-to-day basis as first a volunteer and then director of the Surratt House Museum in Clinton, Maryland. During that time, I have worked with researchers, authors, journalists, and a variety of film makers from the old In Search Of series, Unsolved Mysteries, History Channel productions, and more - including The Conspirator movie directed by Robert Redford.

Through those years, I have waited patiently for someone to give an accurate, detailed account based on the facts of the Lincoln conspiracy. I finally have seen the best depiction to date with Killing Lincoln. Thank you to all the writers, directors, cast members, and production staff who finally took the time to get the story right. It's an event that came at the end of a horrible war and changed the course of American history. With skillful writing, directing, and acting - and with the excellent guiding narrative by Tom Hanks, my waiting patiently has paid off. Thanks to all.

Now, for you guys: One of my worst fears in waiting to see the film was whether or not Tom Hanks would be a help or a hindrance. Even though I have been a talking head on several shows, I do not particularly like talking heads stuck in the middle of historic action. In this case, however, it was very effective. The writing of his script was very well done and served to tie everything together and to fill in missing pieces in the essence of time.

I thought Billy Campbell was excellent as Lincoln. One of my staff members who saw the premiere said that Lincoln could only hope to be as handsome as Campbell! I thought the makeup did a great job, and Mr. Campbell's mild and calm approach mimicked my idea of what Lincoln was like in person. I was also pleased with Jesse Johnson's portrayal of Booth. To me, he was almost a spitting physical image of JWB, and I appreciated his villainous portrayal - because that's what Booth was, a villain. Atzerodt was perfect. When he first appeared in that straight-on head shot, I thought that they had actually doctored the photo of him taken on the monitor.

Finally, I thought they did a remarkable job in recreating the scenes. I was viewing it on my old, small television; but my daughter was taping it for me to see later on her "IMAX." I can't wait to see it on a large screen to really appreciate the efforts that were put into recreating what I am so familiar with.

As for the nit-picking that I know we are all doing, I am only going to say that time is fleeting when you are trying to tell a story of this significance that covers a broad period and that, when done for the small screen, you are hampered by those blasted commercials. Things have to be cut somewhere. When The Conspirator was being shown, I got in the habit of telling the nay-sayers of our group that I didn't care whether or not they liked it. What counted was that it appealed to people who did not know the story. Again, I'll say that it is about teaching the younger generation and the older ones who slept through history class what has really gone on in the making of our country.

P.S. Craig - I can only guess as to why "woman" was substituted for "gal," but I suspect that it has to do with being politically correct. "Gal" may be one of those objectionable terms in modern society. Of course, I'm sure that there will be complaints that the "n" word was used also. As for Powell's scenes at the Seward home, I found them very realistic - except Betty told me that Frederick was struck only three times, not five... I guess it's all in our expectations.

I think you summed that up very well, Laurie and with your experience with these types of productions and documentaries, I think that's quite a compliment to the film maker. Could we nit pick Booth's hat, cravat, his exact words, etc.? Yes. But overall, this was an outstanding job. Erik and company did an outstanding job.

Sadly I think Ive gotten to the point where I'm convinced that no treatment under 2 hours can do the story justice. Thats my standard complaint, it seems every version is just to short. Of course holding an audience is tough over 2 hours esp on a Sunday evening. But it was SO MUCH better than most of the other versions I have seen. The look and dress of the conspirators was really great as was the look of Fords Theater inside and out. I myself could have done without Tom Hanks although he did a good job,it just messed up the pacing. Most dissapointed not to see anything on Mary Surratt really. I understand that there have to be commercials in the TV world but towards the end they seemed a bit much. The DVD/Netflix version will fix that problem. Overall I just wasn't blown away by it the way I had hoped to be, but Im glad to see anyone willing to invest in telling this story and bring it to a new audience. I give it 3.5 out of 5. Id like to see a Gone with the Wind length version on the big screen someday.

"Killing Lincoln" is a rarity. The movie was much better than the book. I think we all have scenes we would quarrel with. Anything that turns some kids into history nuts is a good deed by definition.

I was introduced to history by Walt Disney and I have an unrepentant preference for the Disney Davy Crockett over the real Davy Crockett. Without Disney I would not have bothered to read real history. I can still remember the last sentence of Fletcher Pratt's magisterial Civil War history for 8 year olds; "When the other Confederate generals heard that Lee had surrendered,they surrendered too and the Civil War was over."

Reading this for the first time, I lamented their action as I wanted the book to continue.
Tom

First, my original expectations were very low. If "Killing Lincoln" was to be based on Bill O'Reilly's book, I had concerns. Not that the book was not an entertaining read, it did take more than a few liberties with the facts. That being said, we are a hard group to satisfy. Through the months of anticipation, my concerns abated. The more I heard of the efforts to portray the events as accurately as possible, the more my anticipation grew.

Last week, with the very bias review of the premier from Betty Owensby, Any concerns were waylayed. While not a world reknowned movie critic, Betty has a critical eye for all things Lincoln Assassination, and has been involved in numerous previous project. Her knowledge and experience in the field of the Lincoln Assassination, and her experience previously as a "talking head", gave me unquestioning confidence in her opinion. Betty has done a wonderful job keeping all of us informed with the progress of this production.

That being said, everyone involved in National Geographic's "Killing Lincoln", nailed it! Thanks to the dedication of this team, we have the best production on the Lincoln Assassination which will probably be impossible to beat.

I agree with Jim that it is the best production we have seen to date, and yes kudos to the team of actors and production staff for a job well done. I hope that there in now a new audience and soon some of them will be furthering their study of Lincoln assassination. Perhaps a few will even join us here on the board !! Impossible to beat ? Given the time and budget constraints of cable TV then yes I agree. It would have made a fantastic mini-series in my view. Im sure that buffs and Boothies alike could have sat through more hours of it. I do understand that funding is a huge issue when doing that kind of production. Hope a DVD is in the works packed with those beloved deleted scenes and special features.

I think that I will be giving out alot of DVDs as Christmas presents.

I was utterly enthralled with the production - and this after the third time seeing it (twice on the big screen!)

This is by far the best production I've yet to see. Tom Hanks does a masterful job of narrating (which, if it is not a strict drama there needs be some sort of cohesive story telling to bind things together!) A wonderfully produced production all the way around!

I, too would love to see a mini series done of this (ala' Henry VIII style a few years back on PBS) - Erik, Adrian and their associates have shown that this CAN be done! Of course we, ourselves being the assassination researchers/historian/buffs that we are, can never get enough of the story.

One minor nitpick - is that in the wonderful scene with Gardner, he asks "Mr. Powell" to sit down. I didn't catch that on the "big screen!" At this venture, Powell was unknown and going by the alias of "Paine" - it wasn't until the middle of the trial that they even knew his real name was Powell....still, a masterful scene that overshadows minor glitches - It's still the very best there is!

But, yes - if this brings even one child or student to a stronger, abiding interest in Lincoln or the assassination story - then of course I'm all for it!

Congratulations again, Erik, Adrian, Josh and Jesse !!

---

Question for Erik -

I'm co-teaching class tonight at my university - are there any educational tools associated with the film on the Nat Geo website?

Just curious.....

Best thing I've ever seen on the Lincoln assassination, and over the years I've watched them all!
A few nitpicking scenes, but nothing that damaged telling the real story
This will be the documentary that all future ones will be trying to top!

Overall, I thought it was pretty good.

Some liberties were taken of course. Booth is always portrayed as a bombastic nut and I'm not so sure he was that over the top. I wish they wouldn't give any credit to O'Reilly as his book didn't add any new information. Actually, his book is flawed in many ways and is more a gimmick than anything else. Many,many other books on the assassination could have been credited with the same story.

(02-17-2013 10:00 PM)JWB1865 Wrote:  After watching the series, here are a couple of things that I noticed that were incorrect -

--At the play, the actor said "Well I guess I know enough to turn you inside out, old "woman" - when it should have been "gal"
--I thought that the way Powell entered the home and eventually into the Secretary's room was too awkward and too confrontational
--I did not hear Silas T. Cobb reference the other part of the curfew that one could not come back over in the same night
--The boarder at the Peterson House was not in the crowd necessarily, rather, he came out of the house after hearing the commotion after waking up
--At the speech given by Lincoln following the war, I have studied that it was Booth that wanted to take the shot, but figured out that it was an impossible shot, not that Powell did not want to take the shot (This one I am not 100% sure on)
--I never heard Leale give his famous saying "His wound is mortal"


Here are the things I appreciated -

--I thought that they portrayed Dr. Leale very accurately, especially the probing part
--98% of the material presenting was correct, and I did not see much that made it look "Hollywood" instead of the correct information
--Thought they did not mention much about Atzerodt, the information about his arrest was accurate
--Great stuff about the the conspirators

I give this a 4.7 out of 5!!!![/b]

I agree with that statement! Although I did not appreciate it! ;} Mary's role as well. Overall very well done!

Where was Mary Surratt in this whole story??? They showed the real pictures of Powell, Atzerodt, and Herold but not Mary??? They made a quick reference to her about being the first woman to be executed by the govt. and showed all 4 conspirators on the gallows. I think they should have included Mary and quickly explained her story so that the average person who may not be familiar with the whole story would understand who she was and why she was executed. I think John Wilkes Booth stole the show. It's like he was brought back to life.

Note to Dan: We all wish you the best of luck with your biography of George Atzerodt. It will be a wonderful addition to the assassination literature! Dan, let us know how things are going from time to time.

(Also, I'll send you a pic from Fenway South in early March.)