spellbinding or boring...

Rating: 6/10 (19 December 2012)

While watching Steven Spielberg's "Lincoln" tonight, I tried not to get too bored and so from time to time I would pinch my arm, reminding myself that this is an important, historical epic. Fidgeting slightly, I thought to myself that what I really should have done was bone up on my history BEFORE going into the theater so that I could write a though provoking review afterwards. I mean, I don't mind films like this one as long as I can approach them from the proper frame of reference. And so let me just say this to anyone interested in going to see this film: It is deep and political. You have to actually listen to the dialogue and challenge yourself to think. Otherwise, there is no point in you being in the theater.
But is it worth it? Taking on that challenge? Well, the film did not succeed in stirring up a lot of emotions and feelings inside of me. I wanted to feel proud or patriotic when I left the theater, but I didn't. Scenes showing crowds celebrating after the 13th amendment passed didn't bring on the goose bumps. So, in a nutshell, all of that effort I put into listening and understanding what was going on didn't really lead to any payoff. So here's the deal...
"Lincoln" is about a man, and as a story about a man it excelled on many levels. Daniel Day- lewis was exceptional in his portrayal of Lincoln with all of his shrewd political talent mixed with humble roots. He truly gave Lincoln heroic qualities and succeeded brilliantly in setting the man apart from his contemporaries. it was all there: the gentleness and kindly soft spoken manner. The humor and self depreciation. The oratorial skill, shrewd politicking and occasional fire and bombast. Simply put, Day-Lewis's Lincoln was every bit the brooding, humble, towering figure we all know and love from our history books. Well done, everyone.
But unfortunately, "Lincoln" was not so much a biography as it was a film about the passage of the 13th amendment to the constitution abolishing slavery. Pretty dry stuff, in other words, which was unfortunate. I mean, as a story, there was not a lot there. OK, you need votes. You need to wheel and deal a little bit. And of course there are other players too - some of whom are on your team, and some of whom are not. So, but If you enjoy courtroom antics, politicspeak and legal debates, perhaps this might have kept you entertained throughout most of the movie. Unfortunately, I don't that much though. And the ending is a foregone conclusion despite attempts to hype it up. The amendment passes and everyone goes home, right? So now what we have is not a stirring biography about a man but a not-so-stirring story about an historically important political victory. IMHO, that was a shame. So with that in mind, how could the movie have been improved?
Well, to tell you the truth, I really don't know. The problem is that treating the slavery issue sympathetically but without any pandering, condescension nor "bleeding heart" sentimentality is not easy. To Spielberg's credit, black's appearing in the film are given understated roles and treated with great dignity and respect. White senators on the other hand are often shown to be grimy, disreputable, tempestuous and rowdy. OK, I get the point. But still, something was missing here, and to me that was context, i.e. no one really showed us what a world with slavery was like and how it would be so much better without it. We do see scenes from the civil war, and the carnage there forms an important backdrop to what is going on in the White House. But that is somewhat divorced from the slavery issue itself. The reality went sort of like this: Slavery lead to the war which lead to the 13th amendment. But in the movie we just see the war and the 13th amendment. Tie ins to slavery are there, but they are somewhat of an abstraction. You don't FEEL the tie in in other words. I think that is my point. And without a tie in, I didn't get that feel good vibe when they counted the votes in the end. Could the movie have benefited from having a more prominent black character? Possibly, but it would have had to have been handled delicately to avoid the "bleeding heart" problem. I guess I don't know who would have been up to the challenge here. You would think though that Spielburg would have been if anyone was.
But anyway, so Lincoln is a movie that is a bit hard for me to recommend and comprehend at this point. Maybe I need to sleep on it. As a portrait of a man and a time, it often succeeds very nicely, and you will smile at the humor, the sets and choreography, and the knowledge that a master of the cinema is behind it all. But the plot revolving around the 13th amendment was static, predictable, and devoid of any real tie in to the very issue it was attempting to address. Stepping back a bit and doing a better job of relating what was going on inside the offices with what was going on in the surrounding countryside would have given the plot more meaning. I mean, I'm all for senators negotiating, debating and trading barbs, but an entire movie devoted to that can get a bit tedious.
EDIT: and one final point - these days any movie about a world not of our own (Sci-Fi, fantasy, historical, etc) ought to include at least some CGI, IMHO. Show us a CGI panorama of DC, in other words. We do see fragments of the city, but you don't really get a sense of place here. Just my opinion..