I agree with the general consensus on this site. The treaty is an excellent, historically accurate dramatisation of the negotiations that led to the Anglo-Irish Treaty of 1921. Comparisons with Neil Jordan's epic big budget Michael Collins are inevitable - so here goes! The Treaty is not only much more accurate in terms of events but also in terms of characterisation. The portrayal of Michael Collins by Brendan Gleeson is excellent and comes very close to what the historical Michael Collins was like. Liam Neeson's portrayal in Neil Jordan's film by contrast made Collins a little too 'nice' and emphasised Collins' moral qualms. Rightly or wrongly I don't think Collins had moral qualms about his actions. He certainly didn't express many in public. Credit also to the actor (I don't know his name) who portrayed Cathal Brugha. The quiet menace he showed was again much closer to the historical character than the somewhat hysterical portrayal in Jordan's film. The late Tony Doyle also plays Arthur Griffith very well (Griffith is justifiably given a higher place in this film than in Michael Collins). Also good was Barry McGovern's portrayal of DeValera.In short, the film Michael Collins is a good yarn but looking at the comment pages about how much people 'learned' from it makes me suggest they'd learn a lot more by watching the Treaty.The Treaty is low budget and originally made for TV so don't expect an epic scale or special effects. It is however, well done throughout. One slight negative (Spoiler Alert) is the one occasion where the film depicted ordinary people, which veered close to stereotype. That said, if you want to learn about this period of Irish history in a manner that is accurate and leaves you to decide for yourself the moral and historical issues involved then I would unhesitatingly recommend the Treaty. I give it 9/10.

I agree completely with the reviewer from Cork that this is a fascinating movie. It's a dramatization of the agonizing negotiations that led to the creation of the Irish Free State in 1922. This is a subject that is pretty much jumped over in the Neil Jordan film "Michael Collins" but which lies at the heart of the current divisions in Ireland. As a result of these negotiations came the bitter Irish civil war and the partition of the island that has caused so much grief in the years since. If you listen you will note the manipulation of events by the principal characters (especially DeValera and Lloyd George) and the betrayals, small and large,and the failure of promises made that led to the divided Ireland of the years since.Brendan Gleason's portrayal of Collins seems far more reliable and realistic than the one done by Liam Neeson. Gleason's Collins, far from being a "yob from West Cork" is revealed as an intelligent, realistic individual who was well able to hold his own in the company of the British cabinet as well as the sophisticated guests at a dramatized dinner party held by Hazel, Lady Lavery.Some of the other performances a very good as well. I especially like Ian Bannen's foxy Lloyd George and the late Tony Doyle's portrayal of Arthur Griffith. As an aside about historical accuracy. Griffith was the actual leader of the Irish delegation, as shown here. The Neil Jordan movie incorrectly implies that Collins himself was the leader. So, if Hollywood fiction and romantic interest are your cup of tea, by all means watch the Neil Jordan movie. But if you really want to learn something about the reasons things are the way they are, try to find a copy of this film. This won't be easy as it doesn't seem to exist in any commercailly available edition. My own copy was taped from a TV broadcast. I hope that one day it will be available for purchase.

This is a historical drama about the treaty negotiation of 1921 that founded the Irish Free State in 1922, later to become the Republic of Ireland. I found it fascinating for two reasons. Firstly it is striking how the two parties locked horns over words and issues which are totally irrelevant today. The importance of the oath of allegiance to the King and the notion that Ireland remain part of the "empire". How stupid it all was looking back. The really important parts, about protecting the rights of minorities and avoiding civil war, seem to be only minor issues to both sides. The Irish Nationalists were obsessed "Irish Freedom" and the British with their "Empire".The second reason I found it interesting is that it is an object lesson on how negotiations work. There is of course an inevitable comparison with Neil Jordan's epic "Michael Collins". In terms of budget, actors and drama "The Treaty" does not come close. However in terms of historical accuracy and educational value this is a far superior film. I found Jordan's film was far too coloured by his views on the Northern Ireland conflict. He took too much liberty with the historical facts. Watch "The Treaty" and you will learn far more about the events and people of the time.

For those who are interested in modern Irish history - this is for you. It gives the details of the Treaty which ended the War of Independence between Ireland and Britain, which, dry though it sounds, is interesting. It has been well scripted, and superbly acted. It is ironic to consider that here, Brendan Gleeson plays Michael Collins, and in 'Michael Collins'(1996) only the sidekick. Liam Neeson doesn't do the character justice, Brendan Gleeson does. He looks a lot like Michael Collins, and from eyewitness accounts, behaves a lot like him as well. Another interesting point about this film is that it is almost all factually accurate (my sole quibble would be the interplay between Michael Collins and Lloyd-George's wife (I hope that's correct, its a while since I have seen it, sorry if it's wrong)) If you are going to rely on a film for historical accuracy, then please use this as opposed 'Michael Collins'