Spielberg's Lincoln: In Three Paragraphs

[August1991]

First of all, I never liked Daniel Day-Lewis as an actor but I believed him in this movie. I'm also no fan of Sally Fields ("You really love me!") but I have to admit that she can make me believe. IOW, I don't know enough about Abraham Lincoln to know whether the story is outrageous, or merely a version of events. (Oliver Stone's JFK was outrageous; his Nixon was a version. Aaron Sorkin writes insideous versions of the truth.) What would an informed person from 1860 think of this political movie? I don't know. It seems to me that Spielberg has turned 19th century Republicans into modern day California Democrats. Watching these two in this movie, I sometimes thought that I was watching a late 20th century US political couple: Hillary & Bill, circa 1860. Nevertheless, nevertheless, as a political junkie, I loved this movie - and I strongly recommend others to see/rent it.

The movie's opening scene lost me, and then it became a recurrent theme. In Spielberg's 19th century America, all black people are good, wise, speak articulately and have clean, bright, white, straight teeth. Mark Twain, telling the truth, would have told a different story.

I envy Americans who have the money/market to make such movies. Nevertheless, IMHO, we Canadians have a richer history and our history is more complex and successful than America's. We Canadians had a conquest but unlike America, England, France, China or Russia, we never had a revolution or a civil war. The pieties of Lincoln aside, unlike America and most European countries, Canada still today manages to be a civilised, multicultural, bilingual, united society where minorities are distinct, and respected. It is unlikely that any modern Canadian movie would be so condescending if only because it would never be made, or never understood in the other language. If we ever face secession, we Canadians will likely do as Norway and Sweden.

Edited November 19, 2012 by August1991

[DogOnPorch]

I hear Lincoln is doing well in theaters...which historically isn't true.

(George Takei)

[Topaz]

I too, have heard nothing but postive things about the movie. I, also, finished a book written by Honore Morrow, who was recognized of being a authority on Lincoln and the book was written in 1927. I don't think one could find it in the libraries now but anything is possible, it was a fantastic read.

[Michael Hardner]

I'm not going to see it - based on one single review:

the inflated verbosity and overbearing sense of sanctimony make it prime for cloying, heavy-handed manipulation, as trademarked by the ever-patronizing Spielberg.

As stated early, Lincoln's achievements came in his second term (nudge, nudge) and required steadfast determination and focus. Working primarily with his Secretary of State (David Strathairn) and more reluctantly with the surly and pragmatic Thaddeus Stevens (Tommy Lee Jones), Lincoln had to slip abolitionism into an amendment promoted as a method to stop the ongoing Civil War.

With the occasional draining monologue from Mary Todd Lincoln (Sally Field) or quaint metaphorical story from Lincoln, this entirely dialogue-driven story proceeds to detail the endless manipulative power tactics and exploitive means Lincoln's camp used to get the 13th amendment through congress.

Everything else is just defensive justification for using shady means to gain a valuable outcome (although, how might we perceive it if someone used the same tactics to promote slavery?), as framed with humourless, self-righteous low angle shots that close in on a character, with a swelling score in the background, every time they say something progressive or historical.

Unintentionally laughable, this plodding, self-serving work of transparency works better as a drinking game. Every time someone says, "Abolition," or Lincoln tells a story, or someone says something racist, or Spielberg uses an ungracious heavy hand, you take a drink. It'll make insults like, "You fatuous nincompoop," that much more amusing.

http://exclaim.ca/Reviews/Film/lincoln-directed_by_steven_spielberg

My worst fear about this film seems to be realized: that it is an extended lecture against slavery. I'm not planning to own slaves anytime soon, so I won't be seeing this.

There's nothing that makes a film seem more adolescent to me than easy morals. That's the main complain I had with Cloud Atlas too.

[Moonlight Graham]

I hear Lincoln is doing well in theaters...which historically isn't true.

(George Takei)

I heard Lincoln was shot on location.

[DogOnPorch]

I heard Lincoln was shot on location.

[cybercoma]

First, let me just say, what the hell do you think this is, August? This is a message board!

And second, anyone that says...

I never liked Daniel Day-Lewis as an actor

... has absolutely no credibility to be writing reviews. He's one of the greatest actors of our time hands down.

[cybercoma]

My worst fear about this film seems to be realized: that it is an extended lecture against slavery. I'm not planning to own slaves anytime soon, so I won't be seeing this.

Unfathomable! How could a film about the passing of the 13th Amendment be an extended lecture against slavery?

I haven't seen the film, but I imagine it's probably a lot more nuanced than you're fearing.

[bush_cheney2004]

I envy Americans who have the money/market to make such movies. Nevertheless, IMHO, we Canadians have a richer history and our history is more complex and successful than America's. We Canadians had a conquest but unlike America, England, France, China or Russia, we never had a revolution or a civil war. The pieties of Lincoln aside, unlike America and most European countries, Canada still today manages to be a civilised, multicultural, bilingual, united society where minorities are distinct, and respected.

In other words, Canada's history is more boring and does not invite such cinematic effort. Hell, the Americans even made epic films about other nations' history (e.g. Russia), but not Canada. Yawn.....

It is unlikely that any modern Canadian movie would be so condescending if only because it would never be made, or never understood in the other language. If we ever face secession, we Canadians will likely do as Norway and Sweden.

Alas, this would not sell many tickets. Canada has no Washington, no Jefferson, and no Lincoln. But it does still have a monarch.

Edited November 19, 2012 by bush_cheney2004

[cybercoma]

In other words, Canada's history is more boring and does not invite such cinematic effort. Hell, the Americans even made epic films about other nations' history (e.g. Russia), but not Canada. Yawn.....

There's a movie in theatres right now about Canadian history: Argo. It was thanks to Canada that your people got out of Iran. Also the film Passchendaele (2008) was largely about a moment in Canadian history as well. Those are just two recent examples I can think of off the top of my head without looking into it. Edited November 19, 2012 by cybercoma

[bleeding heart]

First, let me just say, what the hell do you think this is, August? This is a message board!

Good catch.

He's one of the greatest actors of our time hands down.

He really is quite something. There Will Be Blood, Gangs of New York......he owns these films.

[cybercoma]

Good catch.

He really is quite something. There Will Be Blood, Gangs of New York......he owns these films.

Last of the Mohicans, Gandhi

He's an amazing actor.

[bush_cheney2004]

There's a movie in theatres right now about Canadian history: Argo. It was thanks to Canada that your people got out of Iran. Also the film Passchendaele (2008) was largely about a moment in Canadian history as well. Those are just two recent examples I can think of off the top of my head without looking into it.

Seriously? You really wish to hold up Argo as a shining example of Canadian history? I suppose that is appropriate, as nearly everythng else Canadian is defined in terms of American history. Argo's story came from a CIA mission. The CIA is American if you didn't know this.

[cybercoma]

Seriously? You really wish to hold up Argo as a shining example of Canadian history? I suppose that is appropriate, as nearly everythng else Canadian is defined in terms of American history. Argo's story came from a CIA mission. The CIA is American if you didn't know this.

If you want to talk about Argo, start another thread instead of derailing yet another post into a pissing match about US vs Canada. There's quite obviously a Canadian connection in Argo and that's really all there is to say about that.

[DogOnPorch]

Everybody knows that the best Canadian movie ever was Roadkill by Bruce McDonald.

[bush_cheney2004]

If you want to talk about Argo, start another thread instead of derailing yet another post into a pissing match about US vs Canada. There's quite obviously a Canadian connection in Argo and that's really all there is to say about that.

It is plain to see who brought up Argo....quite a leap from a Lincoln-esqe historical epic about Canada.

[cybercoma]

Ah yes. Those epic 3 weeks that Lincoln is about.

[bush_cheney2004]

The best American made film about Canada that I have ever seen is Death Hunt (1981). You gots your Northwest Territory, Yukon Territory, sled dogs, mounties, lots of snow and ice, fur clothing, frozen snow beards, the works! I wonder if this American film would pass the CanCon rules as it was actually filmed in the Canadian Rockies.

[Michael Hardner]

The best Canadian film is Fubar or perhaps Fubar II.

[bush_cheney2004]

The best Canadian film is Fubar or perhaps Fubar II.

Staying off topic, the best Canadian made film is Videodrome.

[Michael Hardner]

While on the topic. I have had two (exactly two) Americans ever ask me about Canadian cultural product.

One was an American (ex-British) cop who asked me about "Trailer Park Boys" in 2005. I was in Florida at the time, in a pub. He sure loved that show.

The next was last year on a desolate desert road on the way in to "Burning Man" in Northern Nevada. Some kid was selling bikes and asked us where we were from. I asked why and he said "You sound like those Trailer Park Boys on Netflix".

Apparently we Canadians are oblivious to the fact that Royal Ascent, Northwest Passage or Last Spike historical epics are worthless as entertainment. Americans love stories about our proletariat because... well... those guys are like *their* proletariat. Old English stock, you see.

I'm thinking of another few examples from way back: Red Green... also Bob & Doug McKenzie.

This is who we are.

All of these products are our best hope for the future.

[Moonlight Graham]

Last of the Mohicans, Gandhi

There Will Be Blood.

[cybercoma]

There Will Be Blood.

bleeding heart mentioned it in the post I replied to. I was adding to the list.

[bush_cheney2004]

....Apparently we Canadians are oblivious to the fact that Royal Ascent, Northwest Passage or Last Spike historical epics are worthless as entertainment. Americans love stories about our proletariat because... well... those guys are like *their* proletariat. Old English stock, you see.

But this analysis only continues the fundamental error....making such comparisons in the context of Americans, American culture, and their film industry. Will the real Canadians please stand up?

[cybercoma]

Fill your boots: http://www.nfb.ca