Plan B Forum

And Tati told me she wants to see it...(It's gotten really good reviews)

So I'm going to take her...

I explained to her that this is not the type of movie that she and I usually go to see...(It's not a cartoon or an animation, or a science fiction or adventure film)

I told her that this is the kind of movie I usually take her Grand Mother to see...that she might find it "boring"...

And she said, "No daddy, we're studying the Civil War (The War Of Northern Aggression) and I'd like to see that movie"...


And then she added, "and I don't get bored by serious stuff as much as you think I do"....

That's ma girl:

Good for her! (Good for you too.)

Not enough car chases in it for me.

It needed the Michael Bay touch...

Abraham Lincoln: Robot Slayer!

I read once that Lincoln owned a horse named Kennedy.

It will very likely be in the movie.

Isn't it going to be a little scary for your young'n Jim?

Lincoln has gotten terrific reviews from the Liberal press, like Mick Le Salle. It was written by Tony Kushner (of "Angels in America" fame).

yrs,
rubato

rubato wrote:Lincoln has gotten terrific reviews from the Liberal press, like Mick Le Salle. It was written by Tony Kushner (of "Angels in America" fame).

yrs,
rubato

So that means it's a good movie? And if the Conservative press gave it terrific reviews? Would that mean it's a bad movie?

I'd be interested to hear at least one conservative's opinion of the movie. LJ?

I thought it was a little to the left politically...

But it was a well crafted film, and Daniel Day Lewis was frankly phenomenal as Lincoln... I can't imagine anyone else getting Best Actor...

I'm a huge War Of Northern Aggression buff, and I have to say as popular cinema goes, that was a very well made film...

From a theatrical standpoint, if there was one sore thumb, it was probably Sally Fields...Her portrayal was a little melodramatic, and she's gotten a bit long in the tooth...

But when my 13 year old daughter can be held in rapt attention for nearly 3 hours watching a film based on a Doris Kearns Goodwin book, I count that a victory...

I saw "Lincoln" at Disneyland at the "Main Street Opera House".................not the same, I suppose.

That mechanical monstrosity gave me the creeps way back in '67.

.not the same, I suppose.

No...

Not the same at all....

Jim--my biggest concern is that Lincoln has achieved almost mythological status in the US--do you think it showed him fairly as a human being with faults or did it get swayed by the myth (as Spielberg often does)?

Jim--my biggest concern is that Lincoln has achieved almost mythological status in the US

Well, in terms of trying to say "Who was the greater President, Lincoln or Washington?" my view has always been Lincoln, for one simple reason...

We had a glut of talent at the time of the Revolutionary War; an embarrassment of intellectual riches....(We were blessed in that respect; Enlightenment Thinkers by the cartful...)

At the time of the Civil War, Lincoln was the only man of quality....

He was surrounded by men who could be best defined by their mediocrity....

Simple minded careerists...

Which is why I've always ranked Lincoln above Washington.....

(Though now that I know the story of Washington being driven down to less than 3000 troops, I have a better conceit of him....)

Lord Jim wrote:From a theatrical standpoint, if there was one sore thumb, it was probably Sally Fields...Her portrayal was a little melodramatic, and she's gotten a bit long in the tooth...

Mary Todd Lincoln was prone to erratic behaviour, which has led to the belief that she was probably bipolar, so perhaps (not having seen it) Field's portrayal was not that far off the mark.

Lord Jim wrote:

Jim--my biggest concern is that Lincoln has achieved almost mythological status in the US

Well, in terms of trying to say "Who was the greater President, Lincoln or Washington?" my view has always been Lincoln, for one simple reason...

We had a glut of talent at the time of the Revolutionary War; an embarrassment of intellectual riches....(We were blessed in that respect; Enlightenment Thinkers by the cartful...)

At the time of the Civil War, Lincoln was the only man of quality....

He was surrounded by men who could be best defined by their mediocrity....

Simple minded careerists...

Which is why I've always ranked Lincoln above Washington.....

(Though now that I know the story of Washington being driven down to less than 3000 troops, I have a better conceit of him....)

On the other hand, Lincoln had the decades of peaceful transition between Presidents and governments to guide his thinking and his actions. Washington had the stature and ability to make a huge power grab and didn't do it - which speaks volumes about his ideals, his ethics, and his vision for the country. For that reason, I rank him above Lincoln.

Washington had the stature and ability to make a huge power grab and didn't do it - which speaks volumes about his ideals, his ethics, and his vision for the country.

Yes, and you're right, it does indeed speak volumes for the man....

George Washington was the only man in American history, who could have become a true dictator if he'd wanted to....

And declined to do so....

If he had taken that opportunity, as many other men would have, American history would have been very different...

At the time, no one would have blamed him for seizing that opportunity; Afterall, at the time there was no template for the construction of a nation/state that didn't involve a strong Sovereign....

But given the opportunity to become a dictator, he refused to do so...

And that, probably more than anything else, truly makes Washington unique...

And why we owe him such a great debt....

He was an inspiring military commander, but he really wasn't that much as a President...

We don't remember much from Washington's terms as President, except for one very important thing....

After two terms as President, he left Office....

Legally, voluntarily....

He could have clung to power; but that just wasn't George...

He established a precedent for the rule of law, when he didn't have to...

LJ, that's a bit extreme - surrounded by men of mediocrity? Both Seward and (especially) Stanton were far from that. Gideon Welles was hardly mediocre as Secretary of the Navy. Montgomery Blair did very well in the position that Lincoln assigned him as PMG.

Bates, Chase, Cameron.... there's a point there.