When A Good Premise Goes Astray

Rating: 4/10 (12 December 2012)

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter seemed destined to be a good film. It was based on a New York Times bestseller with a fantastic central idea that wonderfully blended real history with the supernatural. It seemed even more so since the writer behind the novel was adapting it for the screen. Yet as a film, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter seems to be lacking what made its book counterpart so good.
Before delving into the main problem with the film, let's look at the casting. At first, most of the casting works especially Benjamin Walker's Abraham Lincoln and Mary Elizabeth Winstead's Mary Todd both of whom do well. It's when the characters age that they run into trouble. Be it the laughable makeup to age them up or their performances I'm not sure, but what I am sure of is that the two of them are utterly unconvincing once the film makes its jump to Lincoln being elected and heads towards its conclusion. More successful are Dominic Cooper as Lincoln's vampire hunting mentor Henry Sturges and Rufus Sewell as the over the top vampire villain Adam. There is one character that is ill served by the film which is Anthony Mackie's Will Johnson but more on him later. The cast overall then is good for the most part, if a bit off after a point.
The production values are mixed as well. Between the production design François Audouy and the cinematography of Caleb Deschanel, the film looks rather good. Audouy's sets do fairly convincing takes on early to mid-1800s America but while Deschanel's cinematography gives the film a polished and sleek look. Sadly other parts of the film don't hold up as well, especially the frequent and mainly unconvincing CGI work that hampers two of the films biggest action sequences. The film is also hurt to a certain extent by its editing which causes sections of the film (including action sequences shockingly) to drag. The results are mixed at best.
Where the film really lacks though is in the script. Seth Grahame-Smith adapted his own novel into the script but frankly it could have been anyone. While initially faithful for the most part (if only in its broad strokes), the film diverges more and more as it goes on often to its detriment (there's a plot twist later in the film involving one of the character's that is revealed immediately upon that character's introduction in the novel). After Lincoln becomes President though, Grahame-Smith seems to have thrown out his own book for the most part, especially in the transparently obvious and over the top climax to the film. It also doesn't help the film that there's a new and completely unnecessary character (Anthony Mackie's Will Johnson) crudely inserted into it, something that hurts both the actor's performance and the film as a whole. One of the novel's pluses was that it blended fact and fiction into what was "plausible" while the film (and shockingly the writer of both) seem to have forgotten that. The result is a cool premise (and a good book) that is torn to shreds for reasons that aren't quite clear.
Ultimately, the film version of Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter is a disappointment. It forgets what made the book work so well and tries to bury it under an ill-fitting action move skin and casting that initially works and then doesn't. If you've read the book, skip the movie. If you haven't read the book, go read it. As a wise man once said: "The book is much better."