2012: The Year in Film: "Lincoln" Review

I got lucky to catch a screening of this one Wednesday night.  Flicks don't come with a much better pedigree than this one. Daniel Day Lewis as Abraham Lincoln in a film called "Lincoln" directed by Steven Spielberg? That's a damn exciting flick on paper.  And whatever you may think about latter day Spielberg (I happen think he's an overly sentimental, broad corncob who wastes visual brilliance and competence on being "popular", uncontroversial and safe) you can guarantee that this flick is going to feature a star-studded cast, look incredible, and be an all-around solid flick. That's never the concern with Spielberg. You're never going to get a complete turd. The question is, and has been since Schindler's List, is he going to be TOO safe. I.e., will Spielberg take the requisite chances to make something truly memorable and accomplished, or will he keep it in "Oprah's Book Club" territory and make something everyone likes, but no one truly loves?

 Based on the book "Team of Rivals" by Doris Goodwin (which I have sitting on my shelf, but haven't read, sorry not sorry) that focuses on Lincoln's unique cabinet (he pulled together political rivals and opponents to lead the country through the Civil War), this flick features on the last few months of Lincoln's life and in particular the passage of the 13th Amendment, which abolished slavery for all time.  In that way, the title is somewhat misleading.  This is NOT a biopic on Lincoln the man, the myth, the legend, but rather a snap shot of a very specific, challenging and defining period in his presidency.

We open in January 1965.  The Civil War is winding down as the Confederacy finds itself with its back against the wall.  Lincoln has won re-election and enjoys a broad popularity after the long, turbulent grind of the last few years.  Desperate to both finish the war and push through with his political goals, Lincoln faces the tough task of balancing the diverse characters in Washington and elsewhere, especially the legal abolition of slavery in the entirety of the United States.  We all know how this one turns out for old Abe and for the nation as a whole.



The Good: there may not be a better director today at visually representing period than Steven Spielberg.  Between this and "Amistad", Spielberg has an obsessive master's eye for visually representing and recreating the gritty, earthy tones of the 19th Century.  This flick looks like a visual museum and I'm sure it will assume a role in history classrooms nationwide for decades.  The lead performance is simply astounding.  Not that we expected anything different from Daniel Day Lewis, but his Lincoln is warm, incredibly charming and often funny, but often wears the weight of the world on his shoulders.  This is a man who's been dealt an incredibly burdensome hand by the world, and rather than shirk from his lot rises to the occasion the way few ever have.  Lincoln's reserve, determination, wisdom and brilliance are borne out on Lewis' weary face and body language.  Sally Field (who I was admittedly worried about) is strong as Mary Todd.  Tommy Lee Jones is great as Thaddeus Stevens and will likely win Best Supporting.  James Spader tries his damndest to steal this one and absolutely owns every scene he's in.  When this film is focusing on Lincoln interacting with people or political intrigue both inside and outside of the Capitol Building and the White House it's great.  A top-notch political filler chock to the brim with historical nuance.

The Bad: I can't shake the feeling that Daniel Day Lewis is wasted in a role and a movie like this.  While no doubt he's given us a tender and complex depiction of Lincoln that will be remembered for years, Lincoln just simply doesn't offer the fiery bombast of a Daniel Plainview or Bill Cutting that really brings out the madman in DDL.  Maybe that's more a personal complaint than anything else, it's just that our finest living actor acts so rarely, it's disappointing when he doesn't give us something legendary.  The film tries to do too much re: Lincoln.  It tries to give us biographical details like a biopic, but the view and timeline is so short that it's not able to successfully do this.  The biographical scenes, including many scenes with Mary Todd and Robert Todd feel forced and shoehorned in.  In addition, this flick offers little nuance of the opposition to the 13th Amendment.  Those standing in opposition are depicted as cowards or worse.  There are scenes when the film is simply too broad.  Scenes like soldiers reciting the Gettysburg Address or soaring music with emotionally manipulative shots seem out of place in a film this honest.  Plus, the ending feels unnecessary and out of place.  An odd coda to what had to that point been a highly effective historical/political thriller.

In conclusion,  the film tries to do too much and falls short of its broad ambitions.  HOWEVER, it is extremely watchable, much funnier than you'd expect, and features a great historical story.  In addition, the star studded cast, top to bottom, is simply great.  Tommy Lee Jones, James Spader, John Hawkes and David Straithern particularly more than hold their own with the esteemed Daniel Day Lewis.  This film is very, very good, and will be remembered as such, but unfortunately it falls short of true greatness.  If you have any interest in American history, great acting or politics at all, see this movie.

8/10.

2012: The Year in Film: "War Horse" Review.

What if Forrest Gump was a smart horse instead of a dumb man? So I hung out with Mom and Dad this past weekend, and Mom REALLY wanted to see this one, so see it we did. My dad and I came to the agreement that the only thing worse than the trench warfare on the Western front of WW1 in human history was the Holocaust. Being a Spielberg flick, there are a few things it's helpful to recall about Mr. Spielberg. First, when it comes to visuals, Spielberg may not have a peer in the movie business.. James Cameron, Terrence Malick or Michael Mann might have grounds to argue, but no one does sweeping vistas and epic destruction the way that he does. Also, his flicks are always imbued with a certain (often emotionally manipulative) sentimentality. The man simply cannot resist soaring music and close reaction shots that are all but guaranteed to make the room PRETTY dusty. Have you watched ET as a grown up? Holy cow, I openly wept. Not that these are bad things, the man is undoubtedly a master filmmaker, they are just certain things you notice about someone when they've been very prominently artistically expressing themselves for more than 35 years. Oh, and there's the fact that this is a guy who manages to put a happy ending on everything - whether it's a movie about dinosaurs eating people. interplanetary warfare, a murderous shark, the holocaust, WW2, a lost alien or one archaeologist vs. nazi germany, things seem to work out for Steve's heroes. Once again, not a criticism.. simply a recognition of a certain cinematic style, a style that has become as integral to what makes movies "movies" as popcorn.

So War Horse, the film, is based on a best-selling British children's novel and stage/Broadway adaption of the same. Set in Britain and Continental Europe before, during, and briefly after the First World War, the story follows the son of an English farmer as he raises and trains a remarkable horse. The boy and his horse find themselves separated by war an circumstance, and a number of nigh-miraculous happenings lead to their reunion on the French battlefield. Along the way Joey (the horse) finds himself forced into the service of the English, German and French armies, adopted by a French jam maker and his granddaughter, and gains friends and admirers at every step.

It should come as no surprise that this film looks incredible. Much like Saving Private Ryan, the wartime battle scenes are as breathtaking as they are horrible. The sweeping visuals are reminiscent of classic Hollywood, where epic scenes were created with epic settings and hundreds of extras. In many ways, that's what this film feels like.. like an old hollywood epic western or war movie. There's no political point being made, if anything, all sides are treated more or less as equally reprehensible.

At the same time, this may be the most emotionally manipulative movie I've ever seen. I don't even like horses, in fact, I'm scared of them (I like being the largest animal in any given situation), but this flick tried harder than just about any other flick I can think of to get the waterworks going, and succeeded more than once. People know that animals elicit truer and purer emotional responses than humans do, as counter-intuitive as that may seem, so by depicting the horror of war through the eyes of an innocent, endearing animal, you idealize your subject while emphasizing the suffering. And the ending? Forget about it. The theater was full of sniffles.



This is an extremely watchable, artfully done and well-executed film. Technically? It may well be perfect. The action scenes are great, the color, lighting, camera angles, scenes, settings and costumes are perfect. It is well acted, featuring many recognizable English actors, although the structure of the film, being a series of vignettes that happen to a horse over the course of the war, means that no one actor or actors is really the focus. The focus is the horse, and the war. The plot is a bit strained in having Joey manage to see so many differing parts to this war.. but by the time he finds himself in the moonscape of no man's land, you find yourself not caring all that much. I made the comparison to Forrest Gump above, because that's what I found myself reminded of. Forrest Gump found himself a part of a number of historically significant moments due to no intention of his own but rather as a victim/beneficiary of circumstance, simply riding the wave of what came his way. Joey the horse is much the same in that way. He's sold to the cavalry, so he heads to war, where he changes hands as various riders/owners/thieves are killed or captured or separated.

So, in conclusion, I liked this film, but didn't LOVE it. The plot strained the limits of credibility a bit too much for that, but that's the kind of film that it is.. it's not aiming for documentary status here. Uplifting in parts, horrifying in others, it presents an earnest look at one of the worst calamities to ever befall the human race while also supplying a happy ending. There are certainly many worse things you could say about a film.

Technically perfect, emotionally stirring, extremely well done but unfortunately falling short of greatness, War Horse gets a solid 7.5/10. The rare watchable film that really is accessible to all audiences.