VeteranLight I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

MoPoshy Absolutely brilliant

Ava-Grace Willis Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

Ella-May O'Brien Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

lance-758-562232 Pacino delivers another epic performance absolutely nailing Phil Spector. Helen Mirren was great. David Mamet's writing and dialog are absolutely brilliant. Now, I don't know about the accuracy of the piece, but it is so powerfully convincing, I could believe it to be the truth. Whether or not was irrelevant to me as the film states upfront that it is not intended to be interpreted as an absolute representation of fact. I mean, the media is more propaganda than anything else, why would one 'expect' gospel truth from a movie?With the predominance of Shlock in today's film world, I found this to be highly entertaining, I was completely absorbed and thoroughly enjoyed the ride it took me on.

M E HBO should have fired David Mamet and made a film based on the facts that came out in the trial. The phony claims about blood splatters that were made in Mamet's film are blatant lies, as proved by the police photos of the murder scene, and evidence that proved that Spector had to be within two feet of Clarkson.HBO could have made an electrifying film with the same cast, using the same disturbed character, but based on evidence. Pacino could have been shown walking out the back door, with the gun in his hand, after murdering Clarkson, seen by his driver, with blood on his hand. Phil Spector confessed to the murder to both his chauffeur and to a police officer at his house. The film could have shown Pacino spending 45 minutes, dipping a diaper in a toilet, and using it to wipe down the weapon and the crime scene, to cover up his crime. A nice camera angle could have repeatedly shown his phone all this time. Flashbacks of the phone could have been shown, while his revolving door of highly paid celebrity defense attorneys asked him, "If she committed suicide, why didn't you call 9-1-1?" Flashbacks could have demonstrated that Lana Clarkson was right-handed, as his attorneys asked how the gun could have ended up behind her left foot. We could have seen Pacino place it there after the crime scene cleanup, not realizing that it could not possibly be there, if she had committed suicide. His attorneys could have been shown asking him, "If she took a gun and sat down to kill herself, why would her purse strap be hanging from her dead shoulder, as though she were ready to leave your house? HBO could have shown a flashback of a member of the defense team stealing Lana Clarkson's fingernail from the crime scene, as they showed a member of the defense testifying about it. The truth was more compelling than the lies they tried to sell. Instead of a post script about the conviction, the film could have shown the courtroom verdict. The audience would have had a satisfying feeling that a rich washed-up record producer couldn't pay lawyers millions of dollars to get away with murdering an innocent woman.Al Pacino is better than this. Instead of selling out, to make this defamatory garbage, he should have insisted on going all out, and playing Phil Spector as the Bad Guy that he really was in this case.

evening1 I didn't expect to come out of this liking Phil Spector. But I kinda did.Based partly on his famously big hair, I considered him a whack job who'd done well earlier in life, then spiraled way downward. Thanks to an extremely compelling screenplay by David Mamet and a bravado performance by Al Pacino, I came away if not exactly feeling comfortable with Spector then at least considering the possibility that he was convicted of being weird and having a checkered past -- and not necessarily for being a killer.Helen Mirren excels as hard-as-nails defense attorney Linda Kinney Bader (wife of the famed forensic pathologist), who starts out skeptical, but (thanks in part to the defense team's $1-million fee?) comes to believe in the innocence of the extremely eccentric but probably not insane music producer.I recognized Jeffrey Tambor as someone from TV -- which shows I knew not -- but he wasn't convincing as powerhouse attorney Bruce Cutler, vaunted defender of mobster John Gotti. (I wasn't even aware he was supposed to be the tough-:guy lawyer till I read the closing credits.)Back to Mirren, who was interesting to observe as her character battled pneumonia throughout Spector's first trial -- "If you're not sick, you're not working hard enough," she mutters through Kleenex and gulps of Alka Seltzer. I had never questioned Spector's guilt until watching Bader's vigorous work here, which resulted in a hung jury. (We learn in the epilogue that she was too ill to represent Spector in his re-trial, which resulted in his conviction and 19 year-to-life term, which he's now serving -- God only knows how -- in California State Prison at Corcoran.) Spector had a history of erratic behavior that had not previously resulted in violence. However, at least one former consort testified that he had used a gun to prevent her from leaving him. Could something similar have happened with the hapless Hollywood hanger-on Lana Clarkson? Mamet presents a good argument against it. As Spector points out, this suicidal wannabe would have done anything he wanted and he had absolutely no reason to murder her. Yet we also see scenes in which he unleashes a formidable temper.Spector seems to have suffered freom a persecution complex. Others get away with stuff, but not him (Robert Blake comes to mind). To hear Spector tell his story, the no-name cocktail waitress walks into his life and inexplicably destroys his own.This made-for-HBO production is quite compelling and well worth viewing. See if it changes your mind, too.

riverstyxmail I sit somewhere on the fence with this piece. I tip my hat to the skilled crafts people who worked on this little film (hence the 7 of 10). It looks great. Sounds great. Smells great. The performances...eh, it probably boils down to what/who you are into.I see and understand a lot of the critiques people have with the actors' performances. I do love Helen Mirren. If it were Pacino and Bette Midler, to be honest, I probably would have spent 80 minutes elsewhere. But, overall the experience for me was gaining a little more perspective on Phil Spector and this trial that existed in the periphery for me. This trial didn't really engage me at the time and I knew/know little of the facts, gossip and the characters involved. Overall this is a tight little story that made me pay attention to something that was white noise to me while it played out.Additionally, this is just another tick in the box for television at the moment over film. I think film/movies/cinema has hit a bit of the old dark ages at the moment. TV and broadcast is kind of where smart, well crafted and interesting story telling is happening (thank god for cable). I think it can go further for sure and hopefully execs realize there is a market here and figure out a way to make money to do it (we don't all want 4 minute youtube series episodes). I hope for the day that things can get really crazy, experimental and smart for story telling. We're not there yet. But, in the meantime...this is pretty good. If I may meander a little more off review, because I've read other critiques of the piece...for people who have a more personal stake in all of this (ie family, friends, colleagues etc. of those involved), I say this: This little film didn't make me feel like Phil Spector did or didn't kill Lana. It made more aware and more sympathetic to both parties. Ultimately, for me, I think it's not a great idea at all when you are entertaining people, and you are wasted, to show them your gun collection (no matter how impressive). For that, he does deserve 18 years (with parole options). I don't care if you are the Sultan of Brunei and out of you mind from Parkinson's or drink...that is just not a good party plan. Whether she put the gun in and pulled or he pulled...it doesn't matter to me. He got convicted for general poor judgement. When people come to my house, I offer them a glass of water, some wine, maybe some weed, not a gun to play with. However the night went down, it's probably better he went to jail. That doesn't mean I'm devoid of sympathy for him, it just means there is something wrong with him and his judgement. This poor judgement cost someone their life and people do go to prison for less.I think he is in the right place. Hopefully he is getting the medical care he needs. And, if he remembers nothing else in his great and impressive life, he needs to remember a woman is dead from his gun and poor judgement.