Steven Spielberg’s Lincoln
is a superbly acted historical drama about the most famous President in
American history. It is gorgeous looking, impeccable sounding and unimaginably
boring. In fact, when all’s said and done, Lincoln
represents 150 of the most puzzlingly dull minutes I’ve spent in a movie
theater this year. It wants (and tries and urges and pleads) to be excellent,
which, given the talent involved in front of and behind the camera, it should be. But, alas, it remains anything
but.
Throughout Lincoln’s fight, we meet several historical
figures who either oppose or fight for Lincoln’s amendment. Most of these
figures are played by some of the best actors in the game and all of them
(literally, every last one) nail their respective roles. David Strathairn,
James Spader, Hal Holbrook, John Hawkes, Jared Harris and many many more all make
the ceaseless grandiose monologues in this film somewhat worthy. To be clear:
if it weren’t for the actors involved, Lincoln
would’ve been a complete wash.
Anyone could make a very short, easily winnable argument
that Daniel Day-Lewis is our finest living actor. The accolades he has received
throughout his entire career have never been hyperbolic or extreme, simply
because the man’s got it. Always. And as Lincoln, he certainly does not
disappoint. His soft voice, his deliberately slow walk, his playfulness, his
seriousness – Day-Lewis plays Lincoln as a man of upmost significance, and it
is nearly as thrilling to watch as his incarnation of damned oilman Daniel
Plainview from There Will Be Blood.
Tommy Lee Jones, as Thaddeus Stevens, also deserves specific
mention. His Stevens is a gruff man willing to go pound for pound with anyone
within earshot. It is one of the best performances Jones has ever given. Oscar
nominations for both he and Day-Lewis should be expected.
So, as you can see, the actors aren’t the problem. The
problem(s) lie in the film’s pacing and, dare I say, screenplay. There’s a
scene in Lincoln in which the
President is seated in a large room as a few people from his cabinet tirelessly
oppose the 13th amendment. After a brief moment, Lincoln
unexpectedly delivers an extended speech in which, by the end, everyone’s mind
in the room has been changed. Now, change a few words around, and I’ve just
described most of the scenes from this movie.
Maybe Lincoln had the power to immediately alter ways of
thinking with his skills as an orator. In fact, that seems quite plausible.
Thing is, I simply don’t need to be reminded of it upwards of 15 times in one
two and a half hour film. Perhaps Lincoln, and the other characters’ verbose methods
of speech, are what make the film feel double as long as it is. But no matter
the reasoning, Lincoln is an ultimately
failed passion project from a master director who hasn’t made anything
masterful in a decade.
Scanning early reviews, which appear to be unanimously
positive, it’s clear that many will disagree with me. That’s fair. I suspect
for older generations, Lincoln will
be a pleasant reminder that they still “make ‘em like they used to,” and
perhaps others will be so enthralled with Day-Lewis’ work, that they’ll be
willing to forgive the film’s unevenness. In general, I have no problem with
long, historical, epic films, I simply like any movie that is good and can hold
my attention for its duration (and hopefully a little while after that), which
is something Lincoln did not do.
I’ll be spending this Thanksgiving with my grandmother, who
is a great admirer of President Lincoln. Last night, my dad asked me if I’d
like to see Lincoln with the family
over Thanksgiving break. My response, “Pops, no disrespect to you or certainly
to grandma, but you couldn’t pay me to sit through this movie again.” Sad but true. C-
Click here to read more about the cast of Lincoln
Click here to read more about the cast of Lincoln
I can't help but think I'll have a similar reaction to it. Nice review :)
ReplyDeleteThanks. I'm expecting quite a backlash on this one, but damn, boredom is boredom, and I was bored out of my mind. So oh well.
Deletesucked review
ReplyDeleteThanks, and good grammar too.
DeleteI didn't mean your review sucked, i meant Sucked. Nice review. Stupid phone.
DeleteHa, well then, fair enough.
DeleteYou know, when I first saw trailer of Lincoln, my reaction was somewhat similar. I know it is little premature to dispose any movie based on its trailer but what can you do ?
ReplyDeleteAs you said, all the positive reviews around made me reconsider and I will get around to see it sometime(I still haven't seen War Horse to which I would have said something similar, a year ago. So, I do not know when but I will) but unless, it floors me like everyone else, I expect a reaction similar to you. :)
I felt the same way by the trailer, no doubt. It's funny, I hadn't seen any reviews before I saw this movie, and I was kind of stunned that they are as positive as they are. Older generations will dig it for sure (as they did War Horse, which I hated) but hell, for me, Lincoln was a miss. Definitely cannot recommend it past its acting.
Deletethe trailer was more war horse than anything else. i really don't want to see this, but i think i might have to.
ReplyDeleteSee it for the certain Oscar nominations, but not to enjoy yourself.
Deleteman fuck the oscars
DeleteI'm not very excited about this film, especially after last year's worst bP nominee - War Horse. I'll definetly see it for the actors, but on DVD, I'm in no rush to sit through this, though I enjoy historical films. However when they talk and talk and talk some more I can certainly understand why you were bored.
ReplyDeleteI had no idea you hated War Horse as much as I did. That film, yeesh. Thankfully, this is a tad better than that, but yeah, it basically equates to talk talk talk talk, and not much more. Waiting for DVD certainly isn't a bad idea.
DeleteGood review Alex. I mainly liked it a lot for Daniel Day's performance and the way Spielberg handled himself this time around, however, I will admit that it can be a tad boring at times and felt like Spielberg was trying a little too hard for a small, and slow film. Still, I have to say that it does grab your attention and that's mainly thanks to the cast, and especially most of all, Daniel Day himself who will definitely be looking at an Oscar nomination this year.
ReplyDeleteThanks Dan. Yeah, we both agree, Day-Lewis and the rest of the cast completely killed it, but the film is a tad slow. A worthy effort, no question, but one I cannot in good conscience recommend.
DeleteWow, alright now this I will defend more heartily than Cloud Altas. Now there is not much I can say to someone who just finds something Boring, to each his own. I will only express my feelings as I found the nuances in what Lincoln and the other politicians were saying, how they were saying it to be riveting. Now, I will preface this by saying I love it when filmmakers take the time to stylize the Dialog to the time-frame. Making one feel like they are in fact in the time depicted. If you've ever read Civil War letters you'll know this was the time for grand sweeping language, it comes across as over the top now of course but back then it was just the way they expressed themselves. To be honest, it's a thousand times better at getting the message across than what we have now. Anyway to your point of Lincoln gives a resounding speech and everyone changes their minds, rinse and repeat... that's not what happens every time. With one of the representatives over his brother, with the confederate representatives, with his own son. He was one of the greatest orators in history yeah he convinced people and changed people's minds, that's what happened Stanton even makes a joke about it in the war room "Not another one of your stories!" His cabinet was bitterly divided and constantly bickered, hence 'Team of Rivals', but by the end of his life Lincoln had the respect of everyone of them. Now listen I'm a giant Lincoln fan, I grew up in Illinois afterall, so I might just be doing a little hero worship here but I also think that makes me more of a critic for any Lincoln portrayal... and I'm telling you Lewis IS Lincoln, the orator, the jokester and the not so honest Abe. In the end I was captivated by every frame, and you weren't, there is nothing I can do to change that, but I only ask that when this comes out on DVD give it another chance. It's one of the best of the year, with THE portrayal of the 16th president.
ReplyDeleteOkay, first off, thanks so much for not biting my head off, even though we clearly disagree here. I love having open, honest film discussions without people getting shitty and/or offended. So, thanks for valuing my opinion, my friend.
DeleteEverything you said in your comment, I completely understand. You loved it, and that's fair enough. A few points: I have no problem whatsoever with the accuracy of the language in the film. I just have a problem with the fact that none of it, to me, was enthralling. At all.
I know that a few people weren't convinced by Lincoln's speeches, I was trying to make a point that, after a while, the 180 switch in policy got to be too much for me.
Also, I apologize if my review took anything away from Day-Lewis performance, it is indeed as definitive as you say, and will go down in history as one of the great performances, no question. He rocked it.
Yes I understand that you weren't criticizing the way the speech was delivered, I was just stating why I was gripped by what the film was doing. However, I really feel you are selling your readers short by saying that this is really for an 'older' audience to appreciate. I admit it is a stage-play on screen, and at times it certainly feels like it, so I understand why some would not enjoy it. I happen to like a good stage-play, done well, once in while. I do not think everyone will appreciate it, but I think everyone should at least give it a chance for the performances and surprising humor. Even the Williams score is muted at times giving all the dramatic weight to the characters. It is good to see in a Spielberg piece. And yes I think we can all have reasonable discussions about disagreements without screaming at each other through our computer screens, I always appreciate any differing opinions on film so I'll still say it was a good review from you.
DeleteI was a tad apprehensive about that older generations bit, but I was just trying to appeal to why I think a particular group of people will enjoy it. I've heard from members of many demographics that they loved and hated this movie, so really, it's wide ranging. Most of the people that have asked me how this film was are over the age of 50, so I wanted to let them know that they will like it. Maybe.
DeleteI did appreciate the restraint of Williams' score, which is curiously becoming more and more common.
On another note, I can't wait until you read my Smashed review. I know we're going to agree there.
Hey that's great to hear! It made it all the way to your area. I only saw it because of Winstead (I dunno blame me for having a thing for tall, sweet-faced brunets) but was floored. Cannot wait!
DeleteYep, randomly popped up at my two-screen indie theater for seven short days, so you can bet I was there the first night! Loved her, loved it.
DeleteI'm not expecting much, but I am looking forward to the performances. Should be seeing this and The Sessions this weekend. A "duds with great performances" double feature, if you will. ;)
ReplyDeleteHa, duds with great performances is right, at least in my eyes. I was terribly bored by both. Godspeed, my friend.
DeleteI've thought about seeing this hoping it will be better than the average bio-pic. Yet, I have my reservation towards Spielberg who I feel has become a filmmaker who has become too comfortable in his approach to storytelling. I want to see it because of Daniel Day-Lewis but turgid pacing definitely turns me off. I went through a similar experience watching Biutiful where I nearly went to sleep but Javier Bardem's performance kept me awake. I don't think I want to go through that again.
ReplyDeleteI could not agree more with the closing bit of your first sentence - I too fear that Spielberg is getting a little too comfortable. DDL makes this movie worth it, no question, but the pacing to me is horribly off. Some will disagree, that's for sure. But I'd be curious to hear your thoughts.
DeleteSometimes I tell people that a movie is worth seeing for the acting. I was hoping this wouldn't be one of them, but the trailer seemed like a bad omen about how the film would pan out :\
ReplyDeleteI was hoping that first trailer was just a mushy one for the old timers to harp on, turns out it is a perfectly accurate representation of the film. It is currently 90% on Rotten Tomatoes, but I'll be curious to see if that changes once it opens wide tomorrow.
DeleteThe presence of Daniel Day-Lewis, frankly, would be enough to put me off this film. He struck me as a godawful ham in Gangs of New York and There Will Be Blood.
ReplyDeleteOh really? Interesting. If that's the case, then I'd stay far away from this film if I were you.
DeleteYou aren't the first reviewer to describe this film as overly long and dull. But I have a feeling I'll like it. I don't mind long, slow movies, and I really enjoy history. And I'd watch this one just for the cast. I'll be watching it alone though, because my husband and kids would probably rather be hit in the head with a 2x4 than sit through this. :-)
ReplyDeleteHa, fair enough. The cast definitely makes it worth it. I don't mind long, slow movies either, in fact, many of my favorite films can be described as such, but there's a HUGE difference between long and slow, and boring. You know?
DeleteI hear you. There's a lot to appreciate about a "slow" film -- "boring" is a while 'nother thing. I'm very curious about how I'll respond to this movie. I did enjoy The Conspirator, though I found the courtroom oratory over the top.
DeleteSee, I really loved The Conspirator, gave it an A- I think. In my heart of hearts, I think Lincoln could've been paced a little more breezily like that film. Who knows though. I'll be curious to read what you have to say.
DeleteI am not happy that we have to wait so long for this one in Australia. I want to see it before Oscar nominations!
ReplyDeleteI'd just started hearing heaps of good reviews for this one, so cheers for bringing it down to a realistic level!
Maybe Argo does have a good shot at Best Picture after all with Lincoln hopefully not a contender? ;)
Oh this will definitely be nominated, but I seriously doubt it'll win. Once the sugar high wears off, I don't think this one will be highly regarded come Oscar time (aside from DDL's performance, that is).
DeleteBummer you have to wait so long to see it. I hope, for you, the wait is worth it!
I cannot help but respectfully (whole-heartedly) disagree, though I also must say your disagreements are gracefully stated which I appreciate.
ReplyDeleteI found the whole film rather exciting. You agree that all the performances are outstanding, right, so I have to ask, don't you find performances this outstanding to BE exciting? The way Daniel Day Lewis repeatedly owns the screen without OVERTLY owning it (like he did in "There Will Be Blood") is just mind-boggling to me.
I would also argue that there is much more complexity here than meets the eye. You wrote "After a brief moment, Lincoln unexpectedly delivers an extended speech in which, by the end, everyone’s mind in the room has been changed." The scene you describe - at least, the scene I think you describe - I thought was an instance less about Lincoln CHANGING their minds than essentially saying "I'm the President, screw you, do what I tell you" - just, you know, in a more P.C., Spielberg-friendly way. Minds are so rarely changed in Washington. You toe the party line. THAT'S so much of what this movie is about without screaming it from the mountain tops, the chicanery of the political machine.
You have this mythic figure - brilliantly played - and using that myth to his advantage while still believing entirely in the righteousness of what he's saying and doing. That contrast, that complexity......that's just magnificent stuff.
To me, anyway. To each his own.
Hey man, like Jeff, thanks so much for stating your case in a kind, articulate way, not by biting my head off or anything.
DeleteNow, to answer your first question, I'm not entirely sure I'd call the performances in this movie exciting, more like steady. They're outstanding, no doubt, but not necessarily stand up and cheer with excitement exciting.
Also, I definitely agree that's what Lincoln was doing in that one (or two, or three) particular scene, flexing his "Shut up, I'm the President" spell, but no matter how he got the votes, I have to admit that I was bored to tears by it.
I think MANY more people are in your court on the film, I'm in the minority for sure, and that's cool. Like you said, to each his own.
Thanks for this! It definitely cleared that up for me. Even the trailer was having a hard time making it look enticing.
ReplyDeleteNo problem! Thanks for reading/commenting!
DeleteYeah sure, it's my first time checking your blog and I'm impressed, it's thorough but accessible. I just started my own film blog, thisismyluckystar.blogspot.com Hope you like it!
DeleteThanks! I was cruising yours a little earlier. Will give it a thorough read later tonight!
DeleteThe screenplay is a triumph of writing. Some two reels in, when my brain had adjusted to the manner of dialogue, I became mesmerized by how much is said by what is said and not said. This is "how they used to make 'em" and it does demand some command of language. I think people who are bored sitting through "Lincoln" would be bored sitting through Shakespeare.
ReplyDeleteHey man, at the end of the day, it all comes down to personal tastes. Was Lincoln well written? Of course it was, Tony Kushner is one of our best living writers, and I'm in awe of the apparent research he did to put Lincoln into words. But no matter, the film simply did not work for me, I found it overlong and tremendously dull.
DeleteI've never been Shakespeare's biggest fan, so your comparison is a just one. That said, is Shakespeare a bad writer? Christ no, some of his stuff just isn't for me. You dig?
I will definitely see it for the cast, but I also think it will take a lot of will power to go through it, especially since I am not American. Great first paragraph, by the way, says everything we need to know!
ReplyDeleteThanks D, glad you dug the first graph (although MANY people disagree with me, obviously). I'll be curious to hear if this one fully works for you, from an "outsider's" perspective. You honestly couldn't pay me to sit through it again.
DeleteI just saw it last night. I have to agree with you on the pacing and I LIKE Shakespeare *sigh*. It just didn't work for me but I didn't realize it until I caught myself checking my watch about 48 minutes into it and thinking - oh my gosh - when will this end.
DeleteMy husbands likes it, my 12 year felt it was slow but it had some funny moments. The only line I even remotely chuckled at was when Mary Todd Lincoln said te the only thing people (history?) would remember about her was that she was crazy.
I like good movies and I didn't enjoy this one too much. I think the worst movies I ever saw were Tank Girl and Ishtar - I was 20+ and had no sense so I rented them - no defense but my youth.
I loved At Play in the Field of the Lords - that was slow too but more interesting to me. I loved Emperor of the Sun; it was beautifully done and wellwritten and told an engaging story.
It might be that the Civil War era stories are just such a sad and blighted time in our histories. My favorite Civil war movie of all time is Glory. I thought it was a brilliant movie in that it made me feel so much - too much- I was not moved as much by this film.
I really like the cast, except for DDL's performance. I just thought it was over done. The music would have the same up and over score with the exact same (to my untrained ears) bars at "important" moments and I felt it was heavy handed and leading me to discern when an event was supposed to be importantinstead of leading me to my own conclusions or allwing it to unfold in front of me.
I didn't "get" the value add for Gordan-Levy's character; the eternal father-son struggle? Maybe some of that was left out? It didn't flow for me.
My favorite character was Tommy Lee Jones' character. His facial expression conveyed so much more than dialogue. I thought James Spader was super in the way he played his role. Sally Field was good but over the top - a little too hytrionic for me.
I felt like I coudn't see properly - the lighting - everything was so dark - maybe that went beyond the physical lighting of the times and was meant to reflect the mood and importance and heavyness of the decision at hand - it just irritated me because I felt half blind.
My keyboard sticks so I hope I have spelled correctly, if not - sorry - I tried to go backand review what I wrote ; in case I missed any corrections.
For those that enjoyed it - I wish I could have felt the same way - I had such high hopes when we went into the theatre and when we left - I thought - that is a few hours of my life I am never getting back.
I don't really know where to begin and continue and end with this one, except to say, thanks so much for leaving an insightful, different kind of comment. It appears we (mostly) agree on the movie, which I've had a lot of trouble finding. So that's cool!
DeleteWhat. The. Fuck ^^^
ReplyDelete...yeah.
DeletePeople who call this movie "boring," are, in the inestimable words of Thaddeus Stevens used in the script of this movie, "fatuous nincompoops."
ReplyDeleteOr they're people with opinions, just like yourself. But thanks for the insult, very mature of you.
DeleteWhile DDL was brilliant (as expected), I has quite a bit of problems with Lincoln myself, including the pacing and that it is a "been there, done that" since there are already dozens of documentaries and such on Abraham Lincoln.
ReplyDeleteYeah, same here. I haven't seen this film since first watching it in the theater. It's like... I get it, you know?
Delete