Lincoln...wow!

SteveFord · « **Reply #20 on:** 25 Nov 2012, 12:38 am »

I just took the wife to see it; I had no idea that Abe Lincoln was the one who actually invented the Internet and invented break dancing!

Seriously, it was very well done but it's one of those films that you have to be in the right frame of mind to see.
If you're expecting a serious historical drama then this is it.
Blood and guts and action,there's a little bit right off the bat and that's it.
Honest Abe, Vampire Slayer, well, you'll have to wait for the sequel.

satfrat · « **Reply #21 on:** 3 Dec 2012, 02:59 am »

Surprisingly, Lincoln is sticking around for another week around here so I do have an opportunity to see it afterall.

Must be a pretty good historical movie to garner 90/88(critcs/audience) ratings at Rotten Tomatoes but how ironic is it to have 2 Lincoln based movies appear at the theaters so close together?

I bypassed the Vampire Slayer flick, I'll wait for HBO on that one.

Cheers,
Robin

Folsom · « **Reply #22 on:** 3 Dec 2012, 05:32 am »

I've been uninterested due to the historical inaccuracy of the not-recorded debates and reasoning, motives, of the entire beginning to end of everything surrounding the civil war. There is just so much bullshit taught to kids, and perpetuated by movies like this one.

Thing is I might get a lot of emotion, a good natural response, despite my historical reservations, from this movie.

A few friends have told me about it. Funny stuff like purposeful "race dropping" similar to "name dropping", on the north side, etc. Although I'd love to see the scene where they get really pissed off about the idea of women voting.

Votes: women < salves.

Tyson · « **Reply #23 on:** 3 Dec 2012, 05:50 am »

How does it end?

jimdgoulding · « **Reply #24 on:** 3 Dec 2012, 05:58 am »

Quote from: Tyson on 3 Dec 2012, 05:50 am

How does it end?

We be nippin a little tonite?

ajzepp · « **Reply #25 on:** 3 Dec 2012, 07:12 am »

Quote from: Destroyer of Smiles. on 3 Dec 2012, 05:32 am

I've been uninterested due to the historical inaccuracy of the not-recorded debates and reasoning, motives, of the entire beginning to end of everything surrounding the civil war. There is just so much bullshit taught to kids, and perpetuated by movies like this one.

Thing is I might get a lot of emotion, a good natural response, despite my historical reservations, from this movie.

A few friends have told me about it. Funny stuff like purposeful "race dropping" similar to "name dropping", on the north side, etc. Although I'd love to see the scene where they get really pissed off about the idea of women voting.

Votes: women < salves.

I understand that your position may result in a lack of interest, but with regard to the bullshit that is taught to kids, this is a movie, not a documentary. Ultimately the goal is to entertain. I don't think it's really all that fair to place a "teaching" burden on a high dollar movie playing at the cineplex.

Tyson · « **Reply #26 on:** 3 Dec 2012, 07:13 am »

Quote from: jimdgoulding on 3 Dec 2012, 05:58 am

We be nippin a little tonite?

I wish! Can't tolerate any hard alcohol anymore, causes my GERD to go crazy

Scotch, Cognac, Bourbon, doesn't matter, can't even get a single glass down anymore without significant discomfort.

Nah, I just have a strong dislike for Spielberg. He's like a genius level after-school-special director.

Rclark · « **Reply #27 on:** 3 Dec 2012, 07:33 am »

Quote from: ajzepp on 3 Dec 2012, 07:12 am

I understand that your position may result in a lack of interest, but with regard to the bullshit that is taught to kids, this is a movie, not a documentary. Ultimately the goal is to entertain. I don't think it's really all that fair to place a "teaching" burden on a high dollar movie playing at the cineplex.

When you're going to call a movie "LINCOLN", and the lead actor is as painstakingly chosen and trained as possible, and there are no unicorns or transforming robots in it, it is fair to say it might be considered a historically accurate piece or a high dollar documentary rather than a low dollar documentary.

ajzepp · « **Reply #28 on:** 3 Dec 2012, 07:42 am »

Quote from: Rclark on 3 Dec 2012, 07:33 am

When you're going to call a movie "LINCOLN", and the lead actor is as painstakingly chosen and trained as possible, and there are no unicorns or transforming robots in it, it is fair to say it might be considered a historically accurate piece or a high dollar documentary rather than a low dollar documentary.

You guys better not watch JFK then!

Rclark · « **Reply #29 on:** 3 Dec 2012, 07:42 am »

... good point.

Rclark · « **Reply #30 on:** 3 Dec 2012, 07:43 am »

Either way none of us know anything.

ajzepp · « **Reply #31 on:** 3 Dec 2012, 07:45 am »

Or better yet, maybe just consider that Spielberg himself refers to the film as "historical fiction" and a "dream".

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/quora/how-historically-accurate_b_2198656.html

wushuliu · « **Reply #32 on:** 3 Dec 2012, 08:52 am »

Quote from: ajzepp on 3 Dec 2012, 07:42 am

You guys better not watch JFK then!

Love that movie. Some of the best performances of people's careers in that one: Bacon, Costner, Pesci, frickin' Jack Lemmon on and on... and Richardson's cinematography is brilliant. Richardson was my favorite cinematographer until Roger Deakins (Coen Bros, Skyfall, and many more). Janusz Kuminski is terrific as well as evidenced by Lincoln.

wushuliu · « **Reply #33 on:** 3 Dec 2012, 08:54 am »

Quote from: Tyson on 3 Dec 2012, 07:13 am

like a genius level after-school-special director.

So true. He scales it back in Lincoln though, honest. It is centered on performances and the script. It's like watching really great theater, really. Let me say how great it is to see Spader having so much fun. Got to see him in a Mamet play on B'way a few years ago and he was terrific. Relishing not having to play smarmy weirdos no doubt (boy was he wasted on the Office).

ss397 · « **Reply #34 on:** 3 Dec 2012, 02:05 pm »

I thought this was a very good movie, which is becoming a rare thing to find. It was just a few weeks or months in the life of Lincoln, during some of the most crucial times in our history. It was very dramatic, but lacking in effects and visuals. They did not attempt to portray Lincoln as a comic book super hero, which seems to be the path to success of modern films. It impressed me how much things have changed since then. Citizens used to be able to just show up and talk to the folks in charge and lobby them, what a thought.

Letitroll98 · « **Reply #35 on:** 3 Dec 2012, 04:00 pm »

From Wiki:

"The film is based in part on Doris Kearns Goodwin's biography of Lincoln, Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln, and covers the final four months of Lincoln's life, focusing on Lincoln's efforts in January 1865 to have the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution pass the United States House of Representatives."

It's not "The Life of Lincoln" so has nothing to do with the origins of the war, but rather a pertinent comment on the political wranglings we see today between the two parties. What is remarkable is the performance of Daniel Day Lewis as Lincoln. It was quite frankly stunning. For comparison Sally Fields was excellent as Mary Lincoln and will probably be up for an Oscar, but you always knew it was Ms. Fields playing Mary. With Lewis you had no feeling it was an actor playing a part, it was Lincoln brought back, in the flesh, on the screen in front of you.

ajzepp · « **Reply #36 on:** 3 Dec 2012, 06:42 pm »

Quote from: Letitroll98 on 3 Dec 2012, 04:00 pm

you always knew it was Ms. Fields playing Mary. With Lewis you had no feeling it was an actor playing a part, it was Lincoln brought back, in the flesh, on the screen in front of you.

This is why I'll never consider guys like Bruce Willis, Denzel Washington, Ben Affleck, and some of the other more popular actors of the day as "great actors". They make films that people enjoy, and they tend to do a solid job in their roles, but they are not great character actors by any means....and I tend to put the character actor on a higher pedestal. You just explained my criteria PERFECTLY...for those two hours, you dont' think for a minute about the actor you're watching...you only think of, and you only see, the character. Daniel Day Lewis...Cate Blanchett...Phillip Seymour Hoffman...Dustin Hoffman...Meryl Streep....DeNiro (back in the day...not so much anymore)...etc. These are all actors who have successfully immersed into a role to the degree where they transcended themselves, so to speak lol.

Chazro · « **Reply #37 on:** 3 Dec 2012, 07:29 pm »

Whether the movie is historically accurate or not is irrelevant (IMO it isn't). It's simply a great movie. Fantastic performances and doesn't insult my intelligence? That's a win-win!

jimdgoulding · « **Reply #38 on:** 3 Dec 2012, 10:08 pm »

Quote from: ajzepp on 3 Dec 2012, 06:42 pm

This is why I'll never consider guys like Bruce Willis, Denzel Washington, Ben Affleck, and some of the other more popular actors of the day as "great actors". They make films that people enjoy, and they tend to do a solid job in their roles, but they are not great character actors by any means....and I tend to put the character actor on a higher pedestal. You just explained my criteria PERFECTLY...for those two hours, you dont' think for a minute about the actor you're watching...you only think of, and you only see, the character. Daniel Day Lewis...Cate Blanchett...Phillip Seymour Hoffman...Dustin Hoffman...Meryl Streep....DeNiro (back in the day...not so much anymore)...etc. These are all actors who have successfully immersed into a role to the degree where they transcended themselves, so to speak lol.

Well said, zepp. I, too, think this guy is a great actor. Now, I suppose I'll see the movie.

Russell Dawkins · « **Reply #39 on:** 3 Dec 2012, 10:29 pm »

I heard a reviewer say Spielberg had discovered his "earnest bone" before making this movie. It was the most "earnest" movie she had ever seen - and that includes all the Canadian movies! I guess Canadians have a rep for that - who knew?!

She didn't like it much.