Lincoln: Sorry, everyone.
Spielberg’s love letter to Richmond, Virginia is finally ready to premiere. Some of us got a sneak peek at the bitter disappointment that is this film.
You remember Lincoln. It’s the film that came to town last year, increasing our chances of running into Joseph Gordon-Levitt at a bar by about 8,000%. Those heady days! Rumors flew that Daniel Day-Lewis had bought a house in Church Hill, was living without electricity, and had built a log cabin in its backyard with his bare hands as part of his famous commitment to method acting. Would Spielberg dine at Comfort? Would Tommy Lee Jones shop at Martin’s? Would the scruffy guy in the apartment next door to you get called back as an extra??
While Lincoln is a veritable “Who’s Who?” of Richmond beards, it doesn’t hold up as a legit historical political drama. Well, maybe that’s not fair. It certainly holds up against similarly sentimental, big-budget movies from the mid-90s. Spielberg gives the story of our 16th president’s bid for emancipation a classic Hollywood spin, complete with montages, comic relief, noble reveals, and swelling John Williams refrains.
Tired old devices aside, Lincoln sure does depict a whole lotta African-Americans with tears in their eyes, as they look lovingly at white dudes who’ve looked deep inside their own hearts and decided that they can tolerate black people being treated like human beings.1 At first, Day-Lewis’s Honest Abe seems as if he’s trying to put an end to the butchery of the Civil War with this anti-slavery amendment. But as the film drags on, things keep happening that make you start to think that maybe Abe’s doing all this BECAUSE HE ACTUALLY CARES. Lincoln may have broken a few rules, but, as we learn by parable, in order to make a perfectly noble omelet, you’ve gotta suspend a few habeas corpi.
Shhh. Now John Williams directs a French Horn to play an inspiring strain as the camera sweeps over the beards of 100 guys that look vaguely familiar to me.
Lincoln does do a lot for the South in two hilariously contradicting ways:
- Spielberg gives the world a glimpse of how awesome our town is, with its historic architecture, design, and general attitude of radness.
- With the exception of two close-ups on a couple of Virginia towns (including the Appomattox Court House), the South doesn’t really make much of an appearance.2 In addition, the movie makes it clear that the war wasn’t begun over the question of slavery. At no time is this more apparent than when Lincoln is trying to convince his Northern compatriots to set aside their inherent racism long enough to pass this bill. Basically, racism was (and still is) a national problem, not just a regional one.
I won’t spoil it, but let’s just say things don’t go too well at the theater for the prez and his first lady, Crazy Todd (to me, the best performance ever by Sally Field). But there’s still plenty of time for white and black Americans to rapturously murmur snippets from Lincoln’s speeches as Spielberg’s camera lingers poignantly on more sparkling tears in more pairs of eyes.
The sentimentality isn’t all that annoying on its own–but mixed with historical cherry-picking, torturously slow pacing, and the dangerous swamp of white guilt, it’s a force to be reckoned with.
— ∮∮∮ —
Why you should see this movie
Well, duh! You’re a Richmonder, and you enjoy seeing our beloved Capitol Building and other landmarks on display. Plus, you’re curious to see how everyone managed to cover up their tattoos.
Why you should stay home
You’re a Charlottesvillian, and your jealousy has made you spiteful.
— ∮∮∮ —
Footnotes
- Another story for another time, but there’s this one part where congress is debating the 13th Amendment, and they’re all like, “Oh no, this could lead to black people voting. Or, worse, WOMEN voting!” at which point the room leaps to its feet and roundly protests such effrontery. Cue audience’s knowing laughter. Suffrage wasn’t hilarious to women when, half a century later, they had to fight for their own enfranchisement. But I’m sure Spielberg will make his next movie about men fighting nobly for women’s rights. I can just see tears filling the eyes of senators as they become verklempt following a spirited speech by Susan B. Anthony. Right. ↩
- This comes with another benefit: no despicable fake accents to suffer through. ↩
-
Recommend this
on Facebook -
Report an error
-
Subscribe to our
Weekly Digest
Susan Howson
Susan Howson is managing editor for this very website. She writes THE BEST bios.
Notice: Comments that are not conducive to an interesting and thoughtful conversation may be removed at the editor’s discretion.
Not sure what movie you saw, but the Lincoln I saw Monday night was, hands down, the best movie I’ve seen this year.
I thought the scene where Lincoln takes his mother-in-law for brunch at Can Can was well done, though.
Seriously though, what was the last good movie Spielberg directed?
@Ross, this wasn’t a BAD movie, necessarily, just silly and dated.
Sounds like Amistad re-heated.
I think you’re very mistaken about this film. Often, you are way off in your critiques. You breeze through your review spouting hipster commentary and your personal pet peeves, without any actual discussion or understanding of the film’s themes, goals, or cinematic quality. In this case, your understanding of US History, and Lincoln himself, is probably the issue. If you are responsible for your publication’s film reviews, you should really attempt to be more professional. Lastly, it reflects very poorly on RVANews to publish your haphazard reflections on a major American pastime.
@Logan I’m surprised your comment made it past RVAnews’s filter given how carelessly you just dropped the h-bomb.
@ Logan – Couldn’t have said it better myself.
I’m all over the Amistad comment. Don’t leave a breath of quietness if John Williams can fill it with music. Amistad and War Horse are the reasons I am on the fence about whether I will be disappointed with this one. And, I love Lincoln. If it could be more like Saving Private Ryan or Schindler’s List, gritty and real, I’d be all over it. But I fear heavy handed lighting and music will prevail.
@Logan I never claimed to be a Civil War expert, so you’ll notice I don’t question any of the film’s facts. And critics’ personal pet peeves are what we’re paid to flesh out.
Regarding breezing through my reviews–I can’t stand reading reviews that give all but the very ending of the plot, so I try to stay away from plot summary, which makes up the bulk of a lot of published reviews. I believe my fellow critic, Ross, feels similarly. Our goal is to give you the gist, give you our opinions (as compared to the billion other movies we’ve seen and the knowledge gleaned from formal schooling we’ve had on the subject), and make you laugh.I feel like I pointed out the goals: depicting Lincoln in a maverick light, which is probably true. And the theme: sometimes you gotta break some rules to get things done. Oh, and the cinematic quality: well-directed, sure (it’s Spielberg, after all), but derivative, dated, and heavily sentimental.
I don’t know what hipster commentary is, but I’m interested in it. Is it like “putting some jokes in” (hopefully guilty) or is it like “wearing skinny jeans while writing” (definitely guilty) or is it like “quoting Jeff Buckley” (you’ll have to refer to someone else, all I know is that “Hallelujah” song). So you can write your own opinion of it with some supporting facts, which I would be pleased to read, as I love nothing more than talking about movies with respectful people. Or, we’ll just both accept that you’re more right than me. I’m OK with either one.
I think it’s a fair point, though, that it’s not really cricket to score off a historical drama’s plot points if you either don’t know or don’t like history. I’m pretty confident in saying that if anything, this film was seriously, deeply researched before it was made. We’re not meant to be comfortable with the things that are depicted.
@Jeb Surely. It was based on historian Doris Kearns Goodwin’s book. Not only is Goodwin cool enough to be a personal friend of my mother’s, BUT she is one of the country’s most respected historical writers. I have no doubt as to the appeal to those who are interested in history. You know why I have no doubt? Because I am one of those people! I learned a lot from this film, sure, and I haven’t read DKG’s book, but I don’t need to give a feature film a good review because the facts it contained were interesting. I’d give it a good review if the film was well-made, captivating, and if it resisted the urge to dumb it all down at the end with a simplistic Good Whites vs Bad Whites resolution and a hackneyed execution.
@Jeb Also, “not cricket” is the coolest expression and I am totally going to steal it.
serious answer @Ross: the last good movie Spielberg directed was Munich, 2005. Underrated film. If you didn’t like that, Catch Me If You Can, 2002.
Logan is dead-on…and the defensiveness of the author supports it. The hipster comment made me say “yes!” because although it was not the word I had in my head as I read, it explains my thoughts perfectly.
@Logan! @Mike! Guys! I am patiently waiting for your opinions on the movie! I get that you don’t like my writing style, noted! Lets discuss movies. When can we meet, and I am not kidding.
Is this you Susan? Ha!
Hipsters reject the culturally-ignorant attitudes of mainstream consumers, and are often be seen wearing vintage and thrift store inspired fashions, tight-fitting jeans, old-school sneakers, and sometimes thick rimmed glasses.
I saw the movie, and loved it. Susan, I completely respect your opinion, but I think snark is your shtick, and its hard to relate in this case. I enjoyed the film and was sincerely moved by it. But perhaps it’s because I wasn’t looking at it from a reviewer’s eyes, or from the perspective of a consistently sarcastic, humorous writer (which you are good at!!). Deference to those who see the film from a wholly other disposition should be extended, so those of us (who are still intelligent and thoughtful) don’t feel like sentimental slugs because we thought it was great.
@Becca Now THIS is a comment I can work with! You are certainly not a sentimental slug if you enjoy Spielberg. His specialty is to hit you in the heart, and there’s nothing wrong with that, per se. And regarding intellect, to even get through the movie, which is extremely complicated, you absolutely have to have a big, working brain! I definitely think everyone should go see the movie (as I do actually say in the review!), but it wasn’t my cup of tea.
Just in case you’re still worried that you’re a sentimental slug…I cry at heartfelt commercials. On the regular. Thanks for commenting!!
The headline of your story says…Sorry Everyone. There is no need to apologetic because it is what it is. I have heard some of my friends that our civil war historians call it complete hogwash. We will all form our own opinions. I like Susan’s reviews even though she bagged on Wes Anderson a couple of months ago and she wears old school sneakers.
This can’t get a bad review, Daniel Day-Lewis was in it….DANIEL DAY-LEWIS.
DANIEL….DAY…..LEWIS.
@Matt I know! I love him! I mean he was fine. He’ll be nominated for Best Actor for sure.
@Steve I WISH I could wear old-school sneakers. They make me look like a clown. I’m too short. I’m exclusively a heels lady. Size 7.5, if anyone wants to tie one to a brick and throw it through my window!
Just FYI the Appomattox scenes were not shot in Appomattox. They were filmed in a fake Appomattox built at Maymont Park. Surprised you didn’t know that…
a little snarky, don’t you think, for an opening day review? i say let’s give folks a chance to at least see this & decide for themselves. now some ppl will stay away on the basis of your review. but i hope not. for sure, i’m going anyway. then i’ll submit my own review for consideration.
It seems to me that some folks here are unclear about the role the movie review plays. A review is a stated opinion, which is distinct from criticism which is, or should be, an arbitration on quality, largely unmuddied by personality. Leave Susan alone! (Hi, Susan.)
You reviewed the movie like a middle school book report.
Whoops, that part of my review isn’t really clear. I meant that the South doesn’t show up much as a character (figuratively speaking). Within the story, we don’t see much of the South. Clearly, in real life, we are actually seeing nothing but!
@scott I might disagree with you there. Here’s how I would have reviewed the movie like a middle school book report:
http://library.thinkquest.org/4155/
Only replace Peter with “Abraham Lincoln” and his sister with “the Constitution” and dollar bills with “amendments.”
Guys. I saw Lincoln at midnight when it opened. Honestly, a lot of people were laughing at the movie instead of with it. I know a lot of people liked it, but a lot of people find it to be pretty corny as well, and for good reason. Why is it a revelation that Spielberg is corny?
People criticizing movie reviewers always crack me up.
Enjoyed the movie. No need to bash the reviewer, but it is ok to disagree. My wife and I are planning to see it again, soon!
I dont like the CGI backdrops dreamworks employs to save money. Actual sets are better. I though saving private Ryan had merit but it also suffered from the CGI backdrop cost cutting and the consequent washed out color used to meld the film and computer imagery.
I think you blew Moonrise Kingdom too. I just read your reviews for the vociferous comments.
I always thought Spielberg made boring overwrought sappy movies. And I hate John Williams. Waiting for Netflix. 2¢
@Louie I write them for the same reason! We should hang. I stand behind Moonrise Kingdom review. I do love tons of movies, btw, and I didn’t hate this one. Just didn’t like it. I wonder if people are as rude to their friends when they dislike a movie!
Excellence in Broadcasting (RVA Reviewing)
Lois: I think you just got to be in the “out” group. Whoever’s on top, whoever’s in power, whoever’s successful, you gotta be on the other side or you don’t feel like the smartest guy in the room. All you are, my dear, is a contrarian.
Brian: Oh, please, you could not be more off base.
Lois: Oh, yeah? Let me ask, what did you think of the movie Titanic?
Brian: Horrible, one of the worst movies ever made.
Lois: Mm-hm, what about Slumdog Millionaire?
Brian: Overrated, just a terrible movie.
Lois: Cocktail.
Brian: Actually, not a bad film. You know, as classically structured cinema, Cocktail was one of the best films of its era.
Lois: You make me sick, Brian.
as promised, i saw Lincoln w/my DH yesterday afternoon. we had the best seats in the house, front center a few rows back & the theater was sold out. the crowd was very quiet & non-reactive to much that was shown. but we laughed, cried & clapped a little too loudly at the end. the audience only gave up scattered polite applause. i was very disappointed not to notice much of Richmond locales actually used. other than that i felt the major actors did a great job & like always, the sound track was too loud even for an old deaf woman like myself, the booming bass really bothers me but that’s an ongoing problem. anyway, Lincoln still gets 2 thumbs up. tyvm & hope my check’s in the mail.
I thought it was an okay movie that had excellent performances with slow scenes and heavy-handed storytelling. It was made for Oscars, almost entirely created of those “movie magic” montages compiled for Oscars broadcasts. However, I would love to watch a movie just of fat James Spader going about town.
haven’t seen the movie yet, but I love to read the comments of everything. I always picture the participants as arguing thier points as if the whole world’s fate was determined by the one percieved as victorious by the masses. You are all major characters in my sunday morning entertainment, and I thank you for that.
Yes! I agree with @Kelly! And most entirely with the reviewer! Spielberg, Cameron, etc…as a filmmaker, I am offended by your hackneyed, overly-sentimental visual storytelling. It’s frankly lazy and speaks of how out of touch these filmmakers are, just making big budget movies to put their names on something and rack up another Oscar (as if those things really define our modern national cinema!) Of course I was happy to go see it and see friends and Richmond/Petersburg in it! Reviews = Opinions, if you don’t like ’em, don’t read ’em!
In general, I agree with downtownwatch about Spielberg, but not this time. I thought this movie was exceptional. I was riveted. I felt like I had a front seat watching one of the most pivotal and interesting people in American history. I totally forgot to look for Richmond. As far as I was concerned it was 1865, Washington D.C.
Susan, If you want to discuss the film, seriously, that is what you should have done. I really enjoy your content, but this film deserves more. My wife and kids saw it on Friday, and thought it was fantastic through and through. The only thing that drew my attention was maybe the last seen, with Tommy Lee Jones and his live in housekeeper (no spoilers here),…so I looked it up. Yes that may have been an embellishment, him taking the original copy, but the rest was probably close to what might have happened.
What strikes me is how open and honest folks were with each other back then. If our political process could be so raw, naked and passionate, without as much rhetoric and hype.
Not just Richmond, but Petersburg should be beaming as well.
@R day – I agree with so much of what you are saying, especially politics now being a collection of soundbytes. I found the political process in the movie really interesting (did anyone else see similarities between this and the movie 1776??), I just found everything else to be all flash and no fire.
And who said anything about discussing it seriously?? :)
Sally Fields was good in the film, but I couldn’t stop thinking of her as Gidget playing Mary Todd in high school play.
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51GUp74wX2L._SX500_.jpg
While I think this was still a bit harsh of a review, I can see the overly-sentimentalness that you were rallying against Susan. The thing that I fear sadly will go underrepresented in reviews is DDL’s incredible Lincoln. Sure Tommy Lee Jones wore a wig, and was great, and Sally Field played her heart out as Mrs. Lincoln, but it seems like DDLs method dedication to becoming someone else will be swept under the rug with this one, while the jokes and rumors of his quill pen usage last longer than the accolades for his performance. The picking and choosing of the visual styles was jarring (the poor transition/flashback at the end, the canted worm’s-eye view shot of JGL, complete with jarring, sudden sun-flare), also distracting were the few shots with modern conveniences in the background; I didn’t realize they had PVC pipe back then.
Overall I found Lincoln entertaining and moving and full of a bunch of great performances and recognizable beards. And it was the perfect thing to lure my parents to the mall on a crowded Saturday to enjoy together.
Just saw this last night, came online desperate for an antidote, and here you are, thank you ever so much. You expressed precisely what I felt for two and a half hours, sitting among the giggles and gasps and tears.
IMO (if anyone cares)…I didn’t like it. I think it’s overrated. I think everyone likes Lincoln so let’s “like” the Lincoln movie. And, it is Steven Spielberg. Within the first 20 minutes I was thinking, OMG…two more hours. It was boring. It felt like something I had to watch in middle school social studies. Yes, the actors were good, however, the story was long and dull. I don’t think even a little nudity could save it (LOL)!!. For best actor, I think Daniel D Lewis will win because he was good, however, I also really enjoyed Bradley Cooper in Silver Lining Playbook. However, both movies are so different, it’s hard to compare the acting. How can you compare someone who acts in a rom-com with some who acts in a drama as large as Lincoln?? That’s why I think DDL will win, regardless if he is the better actor or not. The whole package of the Lincoln movie will carry him to the oscar.
Did not like the movie at all. It was about freeing the slaves and nothing more. The movie should have been called that. Snore, snore. It was basically a bore and Daniel Day Lewis’s performance was a snore too. Saw Argo, Zero Dark Thirty, and last, Lincoln and all three were equally boring and not one deserved an Academy award. I could have waited for the 3 to be on network TV.
Stephanie, dont you worry…I’m sure there is a Bruce Willis movie on the horizon for you!