Thursday, November 15, 2012

Lincoln


Steven Spielberg’s Lincoln is a superbly acted historical drama about the most famous President in American history. It is gorgeous looking, impeccable sounding and unimaginably boring. In fact, when all’s said and done, Lincoln represents 150 of the most puzzlingly dull minutes I’ve spent in a movie theater this year. It wants (and tries and urges and pleads) to be excellent, which, given the talent involved in front of and behind the camera, it should be. But, alas, it remains anything but.

The film chronicles the seemingly impossible struggle of Abraham Lincoln’s attempts to pass the 13th amendment, which would abolish slavery. The Civil War is coming to a close and the time to end slavery is now, now, now, as Honest Abe repeats to his stingy cabinet ad nauseum. There’s certainly more going on in the film’s plot, but that’s essentially the story Spielberg has elected to tell.

Throughout Lincoln’s fight, we meet several historical figures who either oppose or fight for Lincoln’s amendment. Most of these figures are played by some of the best actors in the game and all of them (literally, every last one) nail their respective roles. David Strathairn, James Spader, Hal Holbrook, John Hawkes, Jared Harris and many many more all make the ceaseless grandiose monologues in this film somewhat worthy. To be clear: if it weren’t for the actors involved, Lincoln would’ve been a complete wash.

Anyone could make a very short, easily winnable argument that Daniel Day-Lewis is our finest living actor. The accolades he has received throughout his entire career have never been hyperbolic or extreme, simply because the man’s got it. Always. And as Lincoln, he certainly does not disappoint. His soft voice, his deliberately slow walk, his playfulness, his seriousness – Day-Lewis plays Lincoln as a man of upmost significance, and it is nearly as thrilling to watch as his incarnation of damned oilman Daniel Plainview from There Will Be Blood.
Tommy Lee Jones, as Thaddeus Stevens, also deserves specific mention. His Stevens is a gruff man willing to go pound for pound with anyone within earshot. It is one of the best performances Jones has ever given. Oscar nominations for both he and Day-Lewis should be expected.

So, as you can see, the actors aren’t the problem. The problem(s) lie in the film’s pacing and, dare I say, screenplay. There’s a scene in Lincoln in which the President is seated in a large room as a few people from his cabinet tirelessly oppose the 13th amendment. After a brief moment, Lincoln unexpectedly delivers an extended speech in which, by the end, everyone’s mind in the room has been changed. Now, change a few words around, and I’ve just described most of the scenes from this movie.

Maybe Lincoln had the power to immediately alter ways of thinking with his skills as an orator. In fact, that seems quite plausible. Thing is, I simply don’t need to be reminded of it upwards of 15 times in one two and a half hour film. Perhaps Lincoln, and the other characters’ verbose methods of speech, are what make the film feel double as long as it is. But no matter the reasoning, Lincoln is an ultimately failed passion project from a master director who hasn’t made anything masterful in a decade.
Scanning early reviews, which appear to be unanimously positive, it’s clear that many will disagree with me. That’s fair. I suspect for older generations, Lincoln will be a pleasant reminder that they still “make ‘em like they used to,” and perhaps others will be so enthralled with Day-Lewis’ work, that they’ll be willing to forgive the film’s unevenness. In general, I have no problem with long, historical, epic films, I simply like any movie that is good and can hold my attention for its duration (and hopefully a little while after that), which is something Lincoln did not do.

I’ll be spending this Thanksgiving with my grandmother, who is a great admirer of President Lincoln. Last night, my dad asked me if I’d like to see Lincoln with the family over Thanksgiving break. My response, “Pops, no disrespect to you or certainly to grandma, but you couldn’t pay me to sit through this movie again.” Sad but true. C-

Click here to read more about the cast of Lincoln

53 comments:

  1. I can't help but think I'll have a similar reaction to it. Nice review :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks. I'm expecting quite a backlash on this one, but damn, boredom is boredom, and I was bored out of my mind. So oh well.

      Delete
  2. Replies
    1. I didn't mean your review sucked, i meant Sucked. Nice review. Stupid phone.

      Delete
  3. You know, when I first saw trailer of Lincoln, my reaction was somewhat similar. I know it is little premature to dispose any movie based on its trailer but what can you do ?
    As you said, all the positive reviews around made me reconsider and I will get around to see it sometime(I still haven't seen War Horse to which I would have said something similar, a year ago. So, I do not know when but I will) but unless, it floors me like everyone else, I expect a reaction similar to you. :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I felt the same way by the trailer, no doubt. It's funny, I hadn't seen any reviews before I saw this movie, and I was kind of stunned that they are as positive as they are. Older generations will dig it for sure (as they did War Horse, which I hated) but hell, for me, Lincoln was a miss. Definitely cannot recommend it past its acting.

      Delete
  4. the trailer was more war horse than anything else. i really don't want to see this, but i think i might have to.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. See it for the certain Oscar nominations, but not to enjoy yourself.

      Delete
  5. I'm not very excited about this film, especially after last year's worst bP nominee - War Horse. I'll definetly see it for the actors, but on DVD, I'm in no rush to sit through this, though I enjoy historical films. However when they talk and talk and talk some more I can certainly understand why you were bored.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I had no idea you hated War Horse as much as I did. That film, yeesh. Thankfully, this is a tad better than that, but yeah, it basically equates to talk talk talk talk, and not much more. Waiting for DVD certainly isn't a bad idea.

      Delete
  6. Good review Alex. I mainly liked it a lot for Daniel Day's performance and the way Spielberg handled himself this time around, however, I will admit that it can be a tad boring at times and felt like Spielberg was trying a little too hard for a small, and slow film. Still, I have to say that it does grab your attention and that's mainly thanks to the cast, and especially most of all, Daniel Day himself who will definitely be looking at an Oscar nomination this year.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Dan. Yeah, we both agree, Day-Lewis and the rest of the cast completely killed it, but the film is a tad slow. A worthy effort, no question, but one I cannot in good conscience recommend.

      Delete
  7. Wow, alright now this I will defend more heartily than Cloud Altas. Now there is not much I can say to someone who just finds something Boring, to each his own. I will only express my feelings as I found the nuances in what Lincoln and the other politicians were saying, how they were saying it to be riveting. Now, I will preface this by saying I love it when filmmakers take the time to stylize the Dialog to the time-frame. Making one feel like they are in fact in the time depicted. If you've ever read Civil War letters you'll know this was the time for grand sweeping language, it comes across as over the top now of course but back then it was just the way they expressed themselves. To be honest, it's a thousand times better at getting the message across than what we have now. Anyway to your point of Lincoln gives a resounding speech and everyone changes their minds, rinse and repeat... that's not what happens every time. With one of the representatives over his brother, with the confederate representatives, with his own son. He was one of the greatest orators in history yeah he convinced people and changed people's minds, that's what happened Stanton even makes a joke about it in the war room "Not another one of your stories!" His cabinet was bitterly divided and constantly bickered, hence 'Team of Rivals', but by the end of his life Lincoln had the respect of everyone of them. Now listen I'm a giant Lincoln fan, I grew up in Illinois afterall, so I might just be doing a little hero worship here but I also think that makes me more of a critic for any Lincoln portrayal... and I'm telling you Lewis IS Lincoln, the orator, the jokester and the not so honest Abe. In the end I was captivated by every frame, and you weren't, there is nothing I can do to change that, but I only ask that when this comes out on DVD give it another chance. It's one of the best of the year, with THE portrayal of the 16th president.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Okay, first off, thanks so much for not biting my head off, even though we clearly disagree here. I love having open, honest film discussions without people getting shitty and/or offended. So, thanks for valuing my opinion, my friend.

      Everything you said in your comment, I completely understand. You loved it, and that's fair enough. A few points: I have no problem whatsoever with the accuracy of the language in the film. I just have a problem with the fact that none of it, to me, was enthralling. At all.

      I know that a few people weren't convinced by Lincoln's speeches, I was trying to make a point that, after a while, the 180 switch in policy got to be too much for me.

      Also, I apologize if my review took anything away from Day-Lewis performance, it is indeed as definitive as you say, and will go down in history as one of the great performances, no question. He rocked it.

      Delete
    2. Yes I understand that you weren't criticizing the way the speech was delivered, I was just stating why I was gripped by what the film was doing. However, I really feel you are selling your readers short by saying that this is really for an 'older' audience to appreciate. I admit it is a stage-play on screen, and at times it certainly feels like it, so I understand why some would not enjoy it. I happen to like a good stage-play, done well, once in while. I do not think everyone will appreciate it, but I think everyone should at least give it a chance for the performances and surprising humor. Even the Williams score is muted at times giving all the dramatic weight to the characters. It is good to see in a Spielberg piece. And yes I think we can all have reasonable discussions about disagreements without screaming at each other through our computer screens, I always appreciate any differing opinions on film so I'll still say it was a good review from you.

      Delete
    3. I was a tad apprehensive about that older generations bit, but I was just trying to appeal to why I think a particular group of people will enjoy it. I've heard from members of many demographics that they loved and hated this movie, so really, it's wide ranging. Most of the people that have asked me how this film was are over the age of 50, so I wanted to let them know that they will like it. Maybe.

      I did appreciate the restraint of Williams' score, which is curiously becoming more and more common.

      On another note, I can't wait until you read my Smashed review. I know we're going to agree there.

      Delete
    4. Hey that's great to hear! It made it all the way to your area. I only saw it because of Winstead (I dunno blame me for having a thing for tall, sweet-faced brunets) but was floored. Cannot wait!

      Delete
    5. Yep, randomly popped up at my two-screen indie theater for seven short days, so you can bet I was there the first night! Loved her, loved it.

      Delete
  8. I'm not expecting much, but I am looking forward to the performances. Should be seeing this and The Sessions this weekend. A "duds with great performances" double feature, if you will. ;)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ha, duds with great performances is right, at least in my eyes. I was terribly bored by both. Godspeed, my friend.

      Delete
  9. I've thought about seeing this hoping it will be better than the average bio-pic. Yet, I have my reservation towards Spielberg who I feel has become a filmmaker who has become too comfortable in his approach to storytelling. I want to see it because of Daniel Day-Lewis but turgid pacing definitely turns me off. I went through a similar experience watching Biutiful where I nearly went to sleep but Javier Bardem's performance kept me awake. I don't think I want to go through that again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I could not agree more with the closing bit of your first sentence - I too fear that Spielberg is getting a little too comfortable. DDL makes this movie worth it, no question, but the pacing to me is horribly off. Some will disagree, that's for sure. But I'd be curious to hear your thoughts.

      Delete
  10. Sometimes I tell people that a movie is worth seeing for the acting. I was hoping this wouldn't be one of them, but the trailer seemed like a bad omen about how the film would pan out :\

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was hoping that first trailer was just a mushy one for the old timers to harp on, turns out it is a perfectly accurate representation of the film. It is currently 90% on Rotten Tomatoes, but I'll be curious to see if that changes once it opens wide tomorrow.

      Delete
  11. The presence of Daniel Day-Lewis, frankly, would be enough to put me off this film. He struck me as a godawful ham in Gangs of New York and There Will Be Blood.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh really? Interesting. If that's the case, then I'd stay far away from this film if I were you.

      Delete
  12. You aren't the first reviewer to describe this film as overly long and dull. But I have a feeling I'll like it. I don't mind long, slow movies, and I really enjoy history. And I'd watch this one just for the cast. I'll be watching it alone though, because my husband and kids would probably rather be hit in the head with a 2x4 than sit through this. :-)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ha, fair enough. The cast definitely makes it worth it. I don't mind long, slow movies either, in fact, many of my favorite films can be described as such, but there's a HUGE difference between long and slow, and boring. You know?

      Delete
    2. I hear you. There's a lot to appreciate about a "slow" film -- "boring" is a while 'nother thing. I'm very curious about how I'll respond to this movie. I did enjoy The Conspirator, though I found the courtroom oratory over the top.

      Delete
    3. See, I really loved The Conspirator, gave it an A- I think. In my heart of hearts, I think Lincoln could've been paced a little more breezily like that film. Who knows though. I'll be curious to read what you have to say.

      Delete
  13. I am not happy that we have to wait so long for this one in Australia. I want to see it before Oscar nominations!

    I'd just started hearing heaps of good reviews for this one, so cheers for bringing it down to a realistic level!

    Maybe Argo does have a good shot at Best Picture after all with Lincoln hopefully not a contender? ;)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh this will definitely be nominated, but I seriously doubt it'll win. Once the sugar high wears off, I don't think this one will be highly regarded come Oscar time (aside from DDL's performance, that is).

      Bummer you have to wait so long to see it. I hope, for you, the wait is worth it!

      Delete
  14. I cannot help but respectfully (whole-heartedly) disagree, though I also must say your disagreements are gracefully stated which I appreciate.

    I found the whole film rather exciting. You agree that all the performances are outstanding, right, so I have to ask, don't you find performances this outstanding to BE exciting? The way Daniel Day Lewis repeatedly owns the screen without OVERTLY owning it (like he did in "There Will Be Blood") is just mind-boggling to me.

    I would also argue that there is much more complexity here than meets the eye. You wrote "After a brief moment, Lincoln unexpectedly delivers an extended speech in which, by the end, everyone’s mind in the room has been changed." The scene you describe - at least, the scene I think you describe - I thought was an instance less about Lincoln CHANGING their minds than essentially saying "I'm the President, screw you, do what I tell you" - just, you know, in a more P.C., Spielberg-friendly way. Minds are so rarely changed in Washington. You toe the party line. THAT'S so much of what this movie is about without screaming it from the mountain tops, the chicanery of the political machine.

    You have this mythic figure - brilliantly played - and using that myth to his advantage while still believing entirely in the righteousness of what he's saying and doing. That contrast, that complexity......that's just magnificent stuff.

    To me, anyway. To each his own.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey man, like Jeff, thanks so much for stating your case in a kind, articulate way, not by biting my head off or anything.

      Now, to answer your first question, I'm not entirely sure I'd call the performances in this movie exciting, more like steady. They're outstanding, no doubt, but not necessarily stand up and cheer with excitement exciting.

      Also, I definitely agree that's what Lincoln was doing in that one (or two, or three) particular scene, flexing his "Shut up, I'm the President" spell, but no matter how he got the votes, I have to admit that I was bored to tears by it.

      I think MANY more people are in your court on the film, I'm in the minority for sure, and that's cool. Like you said, to each his own.

      Delete
  15. Thanks for this! It definitely cleared that up for me. Even the trailer was having a hard time making it look enticing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No problem! Thanks for reading/commenting!

      Delete
    2. Yeah sure, it's my first time checking your blog and I'm impressed, it's thorough but accessible. I just started my own film blog, thisismyluckystar.blogspot.com Hope you like it!

      Delete
    3. Thanks! I was cruising yours a little earlier. Will give it a thorough read later tonight!

      Delete
  16. The screenplay is a triumph of writing. Some two reels in, when my brain had adjusted to the manner of dialogue, I became mesmerized by how much is said by what is said and not said. This is "how they used to make 'em" and it does demand some command of language. I think people who are bored sitting through "Lincoln" would be bored sitting through Shakespeare.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey man, at the end of the day, it all comes down to personal tastes. Was Lincoln well written? Of course it was, Tony Kushner is one of our best living writers, and I'm in awe of the apparent research he did to put Lincoln into words. But no matter, the film simply did not work for me, I found it overlong and tremendously dull.

      I've never been Shakespeare's biggest fan, so your comparison is a just one. That said, is Shakespeare a bad writer? Christ no, some of his stuff just isn't for me. You dig?

      Delete
  17. I will definitely see it for the cast, but I also think it will take a lot of will power to go through it, especially since I am not American. Great first paragraph, by the way, says everything we need to know!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks D, glad you dug the first graph (although MANY people disagree with me, obviously). I'll be curious to hear if this one fully works for you, from an "outsider's" perspective. You honestly couldn't pay me to sit through it again.

      Delete
    2. I just saw it last night. I have to agree with you on the pacing and I LIKE Shakespeare *sigh*. It just didn't work for me but I didn't realize it until I caught myself checking my watch about 48 minutes into it and thinking - oh my gosh - when will this end.

      My husbands likes it, my 12 year felt it was slow but it had some funny moments. The only line I even remotely chuckled at was when Mary Todd Lincoln said te the only thing people (history?) would remember about her was that she was crazy.

      I like good movies and I didn't enjoy this one too much. I think the worst movies I ever saw were Tank Girl and Ishtar - I was 20+ and had no sense so I rented them - no defense but my youth.

      I loved At Play in the Field of the Lords - that was slow too but more interesting to me. I loved Emperor of the Sun; it was beautifully done and wellwritten and told an engaging story.

      It might be that the Civil War era stories are just such a sad and blighted time in our histories. My favorite Civil war movie of all time is Glory. I thought it was a brilliant movie in that it made me feel so much - too much- I was not moved as much by this film.

      I really like the cast, except for DDL's performance. I just thought it was over done. The music would have the same up and over score with the exact same (to my untrained ears) bars at "important" moments and I felt it was heavy handed and leading me to discern when an event was supposed to be importantinstead of leading me to my own conclusions or allwing it to unfold in front of me.

      I didn't "get" the value add for Gordan-Levy's character; the eternal father-son struggle? Maybe some of that was left out? It didn't flow for me.

      My favorite character was Tommy Lee Jones' character. His facial expression conveyed so much more than dialogue. I thought James Spader was super in the way he played his role. Sally Field was good but over the top - a little too hytrionic for me.

      I felt like I coudn't see properly - the lighting - everything was so dark - maybe that went beyond the physical lighting of the times and was meant to reflect the mood and importance and heavyness of the decision at hand - it just irritated me because I felt half blind.

      My keyboard sticks so I hope I have spelled correctly, if not - sorry - I tried to go backand review what I wrote ; in case I missed any corrections.

      For those that enjoyed it - I wish I could have felt the same way - I had such high hopes when we went into the theatre and when we left - I thought - that is a few hours of my life I am never getting back.

      Delete
    3. I don't really know where to begin and continue and end with this one, except to say, thanks so much for leaving an insightful, different kind of comment. It appears we (mostly) agree on the movie, which I've had a lot of trouble finding. So that's cool!

      Delete
  18. People who call this movie "boring," are, in the inestimable words of Thaddeus Stevens used in the script of this movie, "fatuous nincompoops."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Or they're people with opinions, just like yourself. But thanks for the insult, very mature of you.

      Delete
  19. While DDL was brilliant (as expected), I has quite a bit of problems with Lincoln myself, including the pacing and that it is a "been there, done that" since there are already dozens of documentaries and such on Abraham Lincoln.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, same here. I haven't seen this film since first watching it in the theater. It's like... I get it, you know?

      Delete