Finally, an honest Abe

New York Post ^ | Nov. 25, 2012 | Harold Holzer

[T Ruth]

Director Steven Spielberg, whom I introduced last week [in 2012] at Gettysburg at ceremonies marking the 149th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s greatest speech, said he was deeply humbled to be delivering an address on that history-making spot.

***

… Daniel Day-Lewis gives the definitive portrayal of our time, perhaps ever, of Honest Abe.

For people like me, who have spent their lives studying Abraham Lincoln, the film is chilling — as if he’s really come to life.

Day-Lewis does it by avoiding the traps most Lincoln actors fall into, the stoic, “Hall of Presidents”-esque stereotype that probably most Americans imagine.

There are no moving pictures of Lincoln, no recordings of his voice. But after his death, everyone was Lincoln’s best friend, and there are descriptions of everything from his accent to his gait.

The most important thing is the voice. Far from having a stentorian, Gregory Peck-like bass, Lincoln’s was a high, piercing tenor. Those who attended his speeches even described it as shrill and unpleasant for the first 10 minutes, until he got warmed up (or his endless stories managed to cow them into submission).

***

Few great people are appreciated in their time. And it’s good to remember that, no matter how right the decisions seem now, they were hard-fought then.

“I wanted — impossibly — to bring Lincoln back from his sleep of one-and-a-half centuries,” Steven Spielberg said at Gettysburg, “even if only for two-and-one-half hours, and even if only in a cinematic dream.”

***

Harold Holzer is one of the country’s leading authorities on Abraham Lincoln. ...

[At the end of the article Holzer gives thumbnail reviews of all prior Lincoln films, ranking them from worst to best, which Holzer considers to be Spielberg’s.]

---

TOPICS: Arts/Photography; History; TV/Movies
KEYWORDS: abrahamlincoln; danieldaylewis; greatestpresident; haroldholzer; lincoln; newyorkpost; spielberg; stevenspielberg

[T Ruth]

Posted in remembrance of President Abraham Lincoln's birthday, tomorrow, February 12.

The movie is Lincoln (2012), PG-13, 2h 30m.

[Opinionated Blowhard]

I know this is an article about Lincoln and how great he was, which is appropriate. But it also is a reminder of what a great actor Daniel Day-Lewis is. He is head and shoulders above the rest with his range and ability to inhabit the character.

[gibsonguy]

“this is an article about Lincoln and how great he was”
Someone from the south may see it differently.

[sima_yi]

Watching the movie, one doesn’t see Daniel Day-Lewis, one watches Abraham Lincoln. Day-Lewis has him exact.

[DiogenesLamp]

“this is an article about Lincoln and how great he was” Someone from the south may see it differently.

Or someone not from the South who actually learned a lot of the history behind what he did and what happened.

He deliberately started a war which killed 750,000 people, and he destroyed the original federalism which the founders had left us.

He created the ever expanding leviathan state and he enshrined the corruption into our government which is now known as the "deep state" and otherwise known as the corruption industrial complex.

[Miami Rebel]

While Day-Lewis got the Academy Award, the fact that the very mediocre Argos received one over Lincoln is matched only by Shakespeare in Love beating Saving Private Ryan as examples of absurd thefts, and both of them were suffered by Steven Spielberg.

[Mouton]

Right on both counts.

[russdawg]

what you said!

[delchiante]

And yet, the nation is nearing 250, and maybe closer to a birth of some kind that was conceived in liberty in 1776.

Or closer to a late term abortion...

Probably depends on if Govt of the Swamp, by the Swamp, for the Swamp perishes from this earth or wins the war.

[FrankRizzo890]

Abe was my 1st cousin a bunch of generations removed. (Of course).

[Organic Panic]

Hear hear!!! “Lincoln saved the republic”

Why? If it was about slavery the North could have bought every slave and freed them for a lot less money and blood shed. Even though the confederate constitution enshrined slavery, slavery was becoming obsolete and would have been phased out as mechanization would have made slaves too expensive to keep. The Southern states would have been squeezed economically to end slavery anyway with trade agreements between Europe and the northern states.

BUT. We are to blindly celebrate another mortal man just because we are told to. Lincoln. FDR, Barry Soetero, MLK, Ghandi. Nelson Mendela. Just worship them. Don’t ask questions because muh racism.

[BipolarBob]

Yeah, but other than that I’m sure he was a nice guy.

[DiogenesLamp]

Why? If it was about slavery the North could have bought every slave and freed them for a lot less money and blood shed. Even though the confederate constitution enshrined slavery, slavery was becoming obsolete and would have been phased out as mechanization would have made slaves too expensive to keep.

The issue of the civil war was not slavery, but whether states had a right to independence, as the Declaration of Independence asserted they did.

The Southern states would have been squeezed economically to end slavery anyway with trade agreements between Europe and the northern states.

One of the things that has convinced me the civil war was wrong was the economics of that period. The South was producing 72% of the total tax revenue for the US Federal government. They were doing quite well financially, and it was literally impossible for the Northern states to do anything about it other than invade them and destroy their industry. (Which is what they actually did.)

BUT. We are to blindly celebrate another mortal man just because we are told to. Lincoln. FDR, Barry Soetero, MLK, Ghandi. Nelson Mendela. Just worship them. Don’t ask questions because muh racism.

Yeah, I don't like mortal worship either.

[cowboyusa]

Here we go again. It is very regrettable that he humbled around for 3years, and that he was a Whig.

[cowboyusa]

The movie takes place in 1865, when he had been re- elected. It is rumored that he was Born Again in office.

[cowboyusa]

“The Tariff controversy was but the subject, and not the object. The object is a Southern Confederacy. The next subject will be the Slavery question.” President Andrew Jackson. 1833.

[Ditto]

Someone from the south may see it differently.

Only if they are historical morons. Any one who has studied our history realizes how damn lucky we were to have Lincoln. Things could have and would have turned out far worse without him.

[Ditto]

.. slavery was becoming obsolete and would have been phased out as mechanization would have made slaves too expensive to keep.

Often repeated but a provably false statement. I have reminded many that the first mechanical cotton picker was not invented until the 1940s, and it was not really a practical machine until the 1960s. Other crops such produce are still hand picked. And I remind you that the first African slaves were brought to the new world for mining. We have no shortage of mining ventures today.

Would slavery have lasted up until our day. I doubt it. I think there would have been a slave rebellion in the South before too much longer. It would not have been pretty and probably taken many more lives than the Civil War. But don’t for a minute think that mechanization would have brought a quick end to slavery. It would not have. There was still a demand for it.

[Ditto]

The South was producing 72% of the total tax revenue for the US Federal government.

You still spouting that crap? You know damn well it isn’t even close to being true.

[gibsonguy]

I think your view has merit. There is certainly two sides when one takes an honest look at Lincoln. Especially when you consider the savage brutality Sherman inflicted on the south.