Lincoln Movie - Your Reviews

[Ham920]

I'm new to this group, but I'm not new to Lincoln or the Civil War. I became interested in the Civil War when I was in 4th grade and my teacher said everyone had to have a hobby. I had an American Heritage Golden Book on the Civil War and then read Catton’s “Stillness At Appomattox” and as they say, the rest was history. That was about 50 years ago. My fascination with the Civil War is not its blood and guts, but rather the personalities of the period; Lincoln, Davis, Lee, Grant, Sheridan, Longstreet, Sherman, Stuart, Custer, Forrest, McClellan, Hood, Johnston; I could go on and on.
 
My wife and I saw Spielberg’s Lincoln when it came out and this is what I thought of it:

Within the last decade or so movies concerning the Civil War have included Ted Turner’s “Gods and Generals”, “Gettysburg” and Robert Redford’s “The Conspirator.” As a Civil War enthusiast I’m always in favor of these types of movies because I often hear people say, “I wish I would have paid more attention in history class.” These movies relate, educate and explain our nation’s history, but unfortunately movie critics don’t always render positive reviews and people subsequently don’t always fill the seats to see these movies.

That wasn’t the case when we went to see Lincoln. It was the first time I can remember when an usher came in and told everyone to remove their jackets from any vacant seats because the movie was sold out. Maybe Obama’s references to Lincoln have generated a renewed interest in “Father Abraham;” maybe he has always been in hearts of Americans; maybe it’s the 150th Anniversary of the Civil War (1861-1865); or maybe it was just because it was produced by Spielberg, that generated the interest in the movie.

Daniel Day-Lewis, who portrays Lincoln, is as good as any Lincoln as I’ve seen. According to a Meet the Press interview with Doris Kearns Goodwin, who wrote “Team of Rivals” on which the movie is partly based, Day-Lewis told Spielberg he needed a year to study Lincoln and he actually went to Springfield with Goodwin to study Lincoln. The text of Goodwin’s interview can be found here:

(http://movies.broadwayworld.com/article/...-20121115)

When I first heard about the movie I was concerned that Lincoln would be portrayed in a typical one-dimensional saintly format as “The Great Emancipator,” but Day-Lewis puts flesh and personality into his portrayal of Lincoln. He brings out his deep sadness and depression that afflicted Lincoln as well as the homespun stories and humor he used to make a point. Historians say that Lincoln had a high pitched voice and he walked methodically putting one foot in front of the other. Day-Lewis captured both these traits.

The movie is not about the Civil War itself; it’s about what drove us into Civil War and Lincoln’s desire to address the problem that the Founding Father’s sidestepped – slavery. He had an understanding and passion about America – he was America’s poster child for upward mobility that is a result of the freedom we enjoy to not follow in our father’s footsteps. Similar to today’s Clintons Abe Lincoln came from a poor family, whereas Mary Todd’s father was a banker in Lexington, Kentucky and was raised in comfort and luxury. Bill Clinton is from a poor family and Hillary was raised in the comfort of Park Ridge, Illinois. Just like Hillary and Bill, what drew Abe and Mary together was their mutual love of politics.

Lincoln was a very shrewd politician and, as the movie illustrates, was willing to wheel and deal to get what he wanted. After all, Lincoln was famous for suspending the writ of habeas corpus. Although the Supreme Court told him he didn’t have the authority to suspend habeas corpus, even in times of war, Lincoln defied the court and ignored their ruling and continued to jail people without the writ of habeas corpus.

I thought Sally Field did an admirable job as Mary Todd Lincoln, but her part in the movie is relatively minor. As all of us on this symposium probably know, Mary Todd was a handful. The Lincolns’ lost a child in Springfield and another child in D.C. during Lincoln’s presidency. She was sitting next to Lincoln when he was assassinated and her third son “Tad” (or Thomas), died in 1871 at about 18 years old, six years after Lincoln was killed. Only their first son, Robert (“Bob”), portrayed by Joseph Gordon-Levitt, lived into manhood and became President James Garfield’s Secretary of War in 1881. During the War, Mary Todd held séances in the White House to try to connect with her deceased children. She was known for her excessive spending on what Lincoln called “flub dubs” (carpets, furniture, drapes, glassware) as well as her mood swings, fierce temper, and public outbursts. In 1875, her surviving son, Robert, committed her to a private asylum in Batavia, Illinois. Some historians and psychologists speculate that Mary suffered from what we call today a “bipolar disorder.”

In Mary Todd’s defense, the White House had deteriorated during the prior President James Buchanan's term; he was a bachelor. Mary went from room to room, finding the furniture broken down, the wallpaper peeling, the carpeting worn, the draperies torn and the basement filthy and rat-infested. She was determined to make the executive mansion a national showplace and to convince Washington Society that a “westerner” could serve as the First Lady. The movie touches on the relationship between Abe and Mary as when he gives into her wishes regarding Robert (“Bob”) Lincoln. Bob wants to join the army, but Mary won’t have it. In the end Lincoln arranges for Bob so serve as an aide on General Grant’s Staff and we see him at Appomattox when Lee surrenders. In fairness to Spielberg and Sally Field, the movie would have had to have been 3 hours longer to more fully illustrate the Lincoln marriage.

The movie only covers the period after Lincoln wins the 1864 presidential election and begins his second term in office, but the movie is very timely because one can draw a parallel to Obama’s current situation. The Emancipation Proclamation was a war measure that only freed the slaves in the areas held by the Confederacy. Once the War ended the proclamation would no longer be effective. Therefore, Lincoln wanted to amend the Constitution before the end of the War, but he faced Congressional opposition because there were still many, even in the North, who thought the War was fought to reunite the Union – not free the slaves. Similarly, Obama has recently won reelection and is facing a hostile Republican controlled House of Representatives.

I noted only a couple of minor historical liberties taken in the movie. First, in one scene Lincoln rides over a battlefield strewn with dead soldiers. Lincoln was actually on an active battlefield when the Rebels attacked the outskirts of D.C. in July 1864. Also, after the fall of Richmond in April 1865, he and his son Tad toured the city and he sat in the Confederate President Jeff Davis’s chair. I am unaware of any other time when Lincoln may have toured a battlefield that was still covered with dead bodies. Second, Lincoln is shown on his deathbed after he is shot at Ford’s Theatre. Day-Lewis lies in the bed with his legs bent. Actually, history relates that Lincoln was laid out on the bed diagonally to accommodate his 6’4” height; the bed was too short for his tall frame. His legs were straight, not bent. Again, a very minor point.

It’s easy to get lost in the political discourse, but Day-Lewis’s portrayal of Lincoln is outstanding. The spirit of the man, his compassion, his sadness, the weight of a War that cost more American lives than all of this nation’s Wars combined, his humor, his determination to end slavery, his handling of political rivals and his relationship with Mary Todd and his son Robert are all, in my opinion, accurately depicted.

In summary, see Spielberg's Lincoln; you'll be glad you did.