Lincoln

Warts and all.

It looked as if our local multiplex wasn't going to show Lincoln, but it finally showed up. There were moments of true movie greatness in it, a rare thing that Spielberg hits sometimes, a thrill that only movies can deliver. As they say, I can't describe it but I know it when I see it.

We were subjected to several very unattractive coming attractions first, which were an ordeal to watch and thought provoking in the wrong way, as they were full of weapons and  people threatening and shooting each other.  You would think we'd be ashamed.

I think we, as a country, ought to solve the problems that Lincoln was grappling with so long ago. It's been a lot of years since the Civil War was over, but some citizens are still fighting it. 

I want to see Lincoln  again before it leaves town, because it was hard to follow everything that was going on in such a complex situation. Maybe then I can explain what it was that made Lincoln such a great movie.

More: Brilliant as this movie was, it still did not give Blacks agency (nor women, of course).  Here is a critique:

Lincoln is an idealisic liberal fantasy film [and one might say, well every other group has its fantasies, so why not us?]In a critical online editorial, Matthew Rothschild, editor of the Progressive Magazine, asks, "Where oh where. was Frederick Douglass? noting that "Lincoln had an important friendship with the great black freedom fighter, an amazing figure unto himself, but there is no Frederick Douglass in this film--and for that matter no strong African American who is neither a soldier or a house servant, with all of them postitioned in subservience." Blacks are welcomed into the House gallery during the vote on the amendment that would ensure their freedom from enslavement, but they are passive witnesses..."

Yes. However, I think leaving Douglass out at least spared us a dramatization of the tiresome duo that Leslie  Fiedler complained about, of the homoerotic bonding between a black man and a white man, in his classic work of criticism, Love and Death in the American Novel.  Also, leaving his attachment to Douglass out of the film serves to emphasize Lincoln's isolation and centers him as the hero of the piece, probably a good thing from the dramatic standpoint. Fiedler also mentions domesticity as a burden on American men which they flee from for the great matters of the day, and that attitude is all over this film. Poor Mary Todd Lincoln! What a mess!

But what emerges as the depiction of Black men and women in the film is one of the subalterns who tug their forelocks and weep tears of gratitude at the benevolence of the white man and even a black women who offers a white man some no-strings attached bedly comfort. And that is a liberal (male) fantasy, all right.

But it is definitely a white man's world. In a way, I wonder if people don't like this depiction of a male dominated society where Blacks and women are kept in their place. Where you can load a film with white male character actors and have just a few roles for anyone else.

However,  this is an American film with American themes, which can both be enjoyed and also be seriously critiqued.  And it's really worth seeing for the pleasure of how well it is done. Getting inside people is very difficult in film, but Spielberg can do it with the great cast he has assembled here. Daniel Day Lewis and Sally Field were fantastic.

Comments

[Brandon]

So you saw it tonight then? I figured it would finally come to Hilo around the time of the Oscars (I think that's when Pulp Fiction came to Hilo, months after it premiered nationwide) but, no, it was listed in the movie schedule in today's paper. Even if it leaves the Prince Kuhio Cinemas, it will likely be at the Kress for a while.

[Hattie]

Brandon: interesting.
Cop Car: I accidentally deleted your post. Could you repost it?

[Musings]

I really thought the film was put together beautifully, but I did look for Frederick Douglass and was surprised he wasn't in the film too. You really had to pay attention to this film because it had so much in it. Daniel Day Lewis and Sally Field did a great job.

[Hattie]

Kay: Yes, I want to see it again just to figure out who was who and what the ins and outs of the political manipulations were.

[Cop Car]

Hattie--I would gladly oblige had I any idea what I may have input. Surely not worth worrying about.

[wisewebwoman]

Am interested in seeing this. And hope that my cinemas (which cater to the demographic of 19 year old boys) will bring it to us.
have read the critiques but am curious.
XO
WWW

[Poppa Zao]

I don't know if people like the depiction (maybe some) but it was definitely a white man's world.

From Louis Proyect's harsh but informative review:

http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/11/30/paternalism-and-ass-covering-in-spielbergs-lincoln/

According to Guyora Binder, the author of “Did the Slaves Author the Thirteenth Amendment? An Essay in Redemptive History” (Yale Journal of Law & Humanities, Vol. 5, 1993), the Black soldier did a bit more than imploring:

[O]nce the war was won, the presence of a large number of blacks under arms continued to exert pressure on federal policy. Black soldiers were willing to remain mobilized longer than whites and hence played a greater role in maintaining the military occupation of the South after the Civil War. By constituting a substantial portion—in many areas the bulk—of the occupation army, blacks were suddenly in a position to influence the terms of the peace. This was a situation that Northern and Southern whites alike found acutely uncomfortable, impelling efforts to speed the demobilization of black troops: “In addition to charges of incompetence and insubordination, Union generals charged that black troops were hostile and insulting to Southern whites, threatening to white women, and encouraged militancy and insolence among civilian blacks.” Mary Frances Berry has argued that the quickest way literally to pacify these armed guardians of black liberty was to constitutionalize emancipation by passing the Thirteenth Amendment.

[Toni]

I agree that DD Lewis was great in this role--but he is in every role he plays. I also want to see the film again to better understand the many dealings in getting the amendment passed. I was startled by the moral dilemma that Lincoln grappled with--if he pursued the peace that was being offered and ended the war then the southern votes would have defeated the amendment.

I recently heard an interview with a feminist who remarked that the sign of progress in the movies will only be when two women actually have a conversation with each other that lasts for more than 60 seconds. I've been trying to find such a movie--only "The Help" comes to mind.

[Kay Dennison]

Thanks!!!!!!! I want to see it but it will have to wait. There's too much month at the end of my money. Sigh.

Hope your holidays are joyous!!!!!

[Hattie]

wisewebwoman: The way to get it to your theater is to point out to the management that the moviegoing public has matured and wants more serious fare. This seems to have worked here.
Brandon: That is a fair, if angry assessment. I don't agree with him about the screenplay, though, which was brilliant. When you are looking at a Spielberg movie it is important to understand how he feels about America, where he has become successful and rich. So to him, America is the salvation of the human race, a point of view of his that I do not share. And, as they always say, it's just a movie.
Toni: And a conversation that is not about men!
Kay: Hey! Nice to hear from you. Have a wonderful holiday!