Dramatization of events in the murder trial of once-famous record producer Phil Spector, who was accused in the shooting death of struggling actress Lana Clarkson in his Hollywood mansion in 2003. Cable offering from HBO Films (who open the movie with a disclaimer!) is a triumph for writer-director David Mamet, who succinctly examines the events of the case, coming up with no motive for murder on Spector's behalf. While typically over-the-top during the course of the proceedings, Al Pacino still manages to give a mesmerizing performance; his portrait of Spector is, by turns, strange, sad, deluded, self-amused and amusing, and utterly out of control. Spector is a lunatic, but does that make him a murderer? Mamet isn't so sure, and provides for us great food for thought. Helen Mirren, as defense attorney Linda Kenney Baden (with a nagging cold) is nearly as masterful as Pacino. Nominated for 11 Emmy Awards, the film surprisingly came up empty-handed; nevertheless, a superlative achievement.

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.

The cast of this film is sterling throughout. There are some great parts for several legendary, at this point, character actors at work. Anyone who has a strong passion for music understands something about Phil Specter. This film gives us a workable understanding of a complex, reclusive and aggravating person at the end of a legendary life. The film clearly makes an argument about his guilt or innocence that surprised me. Most people did not follow the details of this story. I was traveling during that period and recall hearing he was convicted, which is a well known fact, so not a spoiler. This film takes us at least part of the way inside the story of his trial and the question of his true nature, and it does it very relentlessly and fairly in my view. It could have been fleshed out more, there could have been more of it...but is sure does settle some questions in a very interesting way. I was intrigued by one line that suggested Specter would be convicted to make up for not convicting OJ Simpson.I agree his trial was perhaps hopelessly poisoned at the beginning, and this film shows us some basis for this interpretation. The cast and the direction are very, very good.

I just read through the reviews (9 as of this writing) and I find reactions interesting yet predictable. Yes, we can talk about performances- Pacino is "masterful"! Mirren is "pure class"! Yes, we can talk about Mamet's writing style. I guess that, for me, these are reviews seemingly by film students and not people who paid attention to not the technical details but what the movie is about.It is, in my mind, less about Phil Spector, and more about the legal system, about understanding society's inclination toward prejudging, presuming guilt, casting the first stone, and it's inability to distinguish between an eccentric and a psychotic. As for the performances, did we suddenly expect poor acting from the talent of this cast? They're good actors and they delivered as expected. I don't think the reviews are helpful when they focus on such trivialities.Anyway, I thought it was interesting, reflective... but not a "masterpiece". Absolutely recommended- I'd say 7 stars.