Lincoln just might be one of Steven Spielberg’s least Spielbergian films. I don’t say this as any particular knock against him or the film either. It is no secret that I am a fan of Spielberg and I consider him to have made several masterpieces, my favorites being Jaws, E.T., and A.I. There are so many great films in his canon though. However this one may be least typical. He is often complained of showing too much sentiment and being too telegraphed in his approach..... some feeling he panders too much to the masses. Perhaps last year’s War Horse was the most debated film in recent memory regarding this aspect. Lincoln however often prefers to view things from the periphery, and even at times dares to be boring. Yes Spielberg has attempted making films with historical perspective before: The Color Purple, Schinder’s List, Amistad, Saving Private Ryan, Munich. But this one feels different and not so akin to those in that list.
Lincoln takes a look at the last few months of Abraham Lincoln’s life,
mainly as it focuses on his attempts to ban slavery through the passing of the
13th amendment. It is based upon the book “Team of Rivals” by Doris Kearns Goodwin and
the script was adapted by Tony Kushner. This is not a story unfamiliar to us,
as far as history goes. But, I found myself engaged in the proceedings far more
than I expected. One of the film’s greatest strengths, is the way that it
brought history to life for me. Lincoln, and the attempts to pass the amendment
through political maneuverings and underhanded deals, feels very modern, as if things really haven’t
changed that much in 150 years. Even though there is the burden of historical
inevitability in films like this, somehow the script and the actors make the
story suspenseful and prescient. I was incredibly surprised with how the film
spends a good deal of time showing us Lincoln’s attempts to basically buy
votes, at one time even exclaiming how he’s the President of the United States
and SHOULD be able to achieve the buying of votes. Kushner’s script also allows
for us to comprehend and understand Lincoln’s own self-doubt, as he admits on
more than one occasion to not fully understanding if he has politically and
legally overstepped his bounds. In another of the film’s most dramatic angles,
we are brought into Lincoln’s very difficult moral conundrum of whether to
postpone the Rebel surrender in order to allow time to pass the 13th
amendment. It is this element in particular, that made the film very personal,
as we realize the gravity of the stress and personal struggle which Lincoln
faced on a daily basis.
As I mentioned earlier, Spielberg avoids much of what could be
considered direct scenes of audience satisfaction in favor of oblique moments
of poignancy. Yes at times, John Williams’s score swells and we see glimpses of
the Spielberg that haters love to hate. For the most part though, Spielberg
does not give the masses what they would expect. There are three cases of which
I will mention. One, is the moment when the House of Representatives is
tallying the final votes and instead of showing us the ensuing celebration,
Spielberg cuts to a long scene of Lincoln alone in the White House. He soon
hears bells off in the distance and we realize along with him what has just happened.
Yet it is that quiet moment of solitude where the focus is laid, not on the
outburst of emotion in the House of Representatives. Another moment where
Spielberg subtly avoids cliché, is the scene of surrender at the Appomattox
Courthouse. Instead of showing us a scene where Lee and Grant are in the house
together, with the requisite protractedness and predictability, we are not
shown any of this at all except a tip of the cap from Lee and the Union
soldiers as Lee gets on his horse. The final moment I will discuss (and what
appears to be somewhat controversial from some dialogue I have engaged in on
the blogosphere) is the assassination of Lincoln, which is not filmed at all
and instead the moment is filmed from Lincoln’s young son
Tad’s point of view, as the announcement is made while he watches a play
at a different theater that night. His ensuing display of emotion is the focus
of attention, instead of what would likely have been a predictable moment of
John Wilkes Booth’s shot and ensuing melee. I appreciated this point of view
for the reason in particular that throughout the film, young Tad had been
trying to vie for his father’s attention and it was never enough for him. His
realization that his father may be dead and the focus on those left behind is
consistent with the overarching tone of the film up until that point.
Spielberg also seems to have taken notes from William Wyler and Sydney
Lumet. It is far more an actor’s film than a director’s, and both of those
talented men were known for their ability to cultivate the elements necessary
to allow for wonderful performances to come through in the actors. There are so
many actors here that can chew the scenery. Daniel Day Lewis literally IS
Abraham Lincoln as one would expect nothing less from
him. Kushner’s script relies greatly upon jokes and stories that Lincoln tells,
and although one could tire of such moments, I found them to be a great example
of how a man like this has gotten to this position, through relating to people
and learning from others. Sally Field as Mary Todd makes us feel the pain of
a woman who can literally not let go of past failures. She obsesses over the
death of her son Willie and is on the verge of a nervous breakdown for much of
the film, brought on by anxiety and depression. That centerpiece argument
between Lincoln and Mary Todd as they attack each other over the topic of their
son Robert’s enlistment is a direct reminder of how much strain this family was
under. There are others though, from the brevity provided by Tommy Lee Jones as
Thaddeus Stevens and James Spader as W.N. Bilbo, to the stern condescension provided by
David Strathairn, the film is loaded with lots of acting moments. Janusz Kaminski's low-light cinematography adds the right stylistic elements to a
film shot mostly in dark, back rooms. It is not a flashy kind of work, but the photography allows a humble, knowing artistry to present
itself.
This is a film that is not easy to do well. On one hand, it dares to be
boring, enacting a chamber drama attitude toward a topic that the general
public expects to be more bombastic and far reaching. I could see how if one does not pay distinct attention the
whole time, one could lose one’s way. For those viewers looking for more
artistic liberties to be taken on this topic, they will not find it here. It is
a film that is remarkably balanced, often restrained, towing the fine line of
historical accuracy, whilst maintaining a propulsive, yet understated brand of
entertainment.
