Lincoln

Reviews and commentary on books, films, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
Pat Holscher
Website Admin
Posts: 26767
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2000 6:51 pm
Medals: 2
Last Name: Holscher
Location: USA
:
Society Member Donation - Origin
Contact:

Wed Apr 17, 2013 5:52 am

Lincoln

2012. Director: Steven Spielberg

No doubt everyone has heard of this movie, so I"m not going to really review it, but having seen it just a couple of days ago for the first time, I thought I'd note the successful inclusion of horses on a casual basis. Well done.

A lot of older movies that aren't horse dramas, so to speak, don't always handle this well. Indeed, prior movies on Lincoln do not do it all that well, but this movie shows horses and horse drawn items on a casual and correct basis. This is so much the case that you soon get used to it, and hardly notice it, although the scene in which Lincoln rides through a battlefield remains a bit of a shock for some reason. Perhaps just the idea of a mounted President out on an inspection tour seems strange to us now.

Also, along these lines, this film gets casual details about mid 19th Century life correct in a subtle fashion. The film takes place during the cold months of the year and note that even inside public buildings people are dressed heavily or even have blankets with them A telegrapher wears fingerless gloves, inside. All the private rooms of the White House are shown with fireplaces in use.
Pat

Animadvertistine, ubicumque stes, fumum recta in faciem ferri?
User avatar
browerpatch
Society Member
Posts: 429
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 7:44 pm
Medals: 1
Last Name: Brower
Location: Bangor, Alabama
:
Society Member

Wed Apr 17, 2013 6:45 pm

Glaring or subtle inaccuracies are like out-of-tune instruments in a symphony. You may not actively notice the subtle ones, but there is a slightly uncomfortable discordance what lessens your pleasure at the performance. The glaring ones can make you grit your teeth. I can forgive this somewhat in older films, as getting the little things 'right' wasn't as important as the story, and sometimes the story just wasn't that good. I can enjoy older films, because I enjoy the performances of the players, and the background things sometimes seem like part of it, like static in old radio recordings, or dust-pops on old records. They are a product of the times in which they were made. I'm less forgiving of modern productions. Spielberg is apparently a director determined to get it right as often as he can, but even he isn't perfect, and nor are his productions.

That being said, I watched "Lincoln" on the big screen, and it's in my Netflix queue. I enjoyed it in the theater, and I expect to on the small screen. The casual things, the little things, the background of this movie didn't give any hint of discordance on the first viewing, so I don't intend to nitpick it. I thought the performances were excellent, the script well-written, and the casting seemed spot on.

There probably were inaccuracies, but if so, they were insignificant. See it, if you haven't.

Frank
Frank
Post Reply