LINCOLN TRAILER IS HERE

It's so strange to have spent a childhood simply assuming that Lincoln's voice was one of POWERFUL WISDOM and then to learn later on that it probably didn't really sound like that.

 

Then it's another thing for a powerful actor such as DDL play him (in a role that was once meant for Liam Neeson, who also has that kind of voice), and use a voice that sounds almost mundane.

 

It's like a series of cognitive dissonances.  

 

The trailer didn't have too much impact on me, but I'm definitely interested.

Written by Tony Kushner. Ok, I'm in.

fuckin' white people.

It's funny to read all of the "Why doesn't Lincoln have a deep, booming voice? HISTORICAL INACCURACY!" online, when DDL's interpretation of the voice is probably one of the most historically accurate takes of any actor to portray Lincoln on film.

I remember first reading about Lincoln's voice in Timeline, the Crichton novel. The CEO of the time travel company says that tourists would be surprised and disappointed to hear Lincoln deliver the Gettysburg Address in his thin, small voice.

So that has been my mental conception of Lincoln for a while now, and DDL seemed to perfectly capture that in his delivery.

If the film is half as good as trailer then it'll be awesome... I just hope Spielberg can recapture some of his magic from Schindler's List and Saving Private Ryan lore. ...

Looks great, been looking forward to this for a while.

 

...but the first time through the trailer I raised an eyebrow at TLJ's wig....the second time I outright snickered....the third time I googled Thaddeus Stevens and found he wore a horrible wig...phew.

If this is really good, I'll consider this a comeback of sorts for Spielberg. Haven't been completely satisfied by one of his movies since the double does of awesome that was "Catch Me If You Can" and "Minority Report".

Thaddeus Stevens

Tommy Lee Jones as this guy?? Was Peter Weller's phone disconnected or somethin'?

Trailer makes the film seem....real shiny. But love DDl's voice for Lincoln.

Definitely looking forward to this.

I'd say he's a dead ringer for Robert Duvall.

He's so... angry at me.

 

 

 

 

 

           "Ray... we'd like to shoot the monster, could you move, please? Ray?"

 

 

This movie looks like full blown worthy schmaltz, I'm not sure I have any use for it.

Seeing the world's greatest living actor playing a role of such magnitude should be enough of a draw for anyone.
 

Yeah, that whole slavery thing, and Americans killing each other by the thousands, and the Republic almost being destroyed... just so schmaltzy.

 

I get the distinct feeling I'll have to avoid threads about this film in order to keep my blood pressure down.

After the one two punch of Tintin and War Horse last Christmas, I can't see how anyone can doubt Spielberg's still not on the top of his game. And with Daniel Day Lewis? Forget about it!

Reminds me of the Prometheus Space Jockey with a wig.

 

I'm looking forward to the movie but how on earth can someone watch that trailer, with its massive injection of Spielberg, and not understand how people might think it looks schmaltzy? 

Because it didn't?

Eh.  I really liked the trailer and what it showed of DDL's portrayal of Lincoln, which I'm sure will be excellent, but I can see why some would have their concerns.  There are a few shots that concerned me (although it's too early to judge how they reflect the final film, so I'm withholding judgment), and the music is very "uplifting Spielberg".

There's a difference between earnest and schmaltzy.

 

This one-size-fits-all analytical approach of many internet commentators seems to crave the death of variety.

And where one person sees earnest, another sees emotionally manipulative schmaltz. People have different tolerances for these things. It's an arguments that's raged since Spielberg started making historical epics.

Perhaps the trailer was over-wrought? My anticipation for this is huge, but the trailer didn't strike me as unusually effective. Fortunately, most people have realized by this point that movie trailers aren't destiny. DDL as Lincoln putting the righteous finger poke on people? I'm there, man.

I would argue that the film looks potentially manipulative, which I think is in a different class, but I think everyone who's a fan of cinema should still be excited to see one of the great directors direct one of the great actors in a story about one of America's great presidents.

Yeah, because god forbid the story of arguably our greatest president facing and overcoming the greatest challenge of his presidency should be uplifting...

The only thing that is really not working for me is the score, which sounds like Williams is just conducting an arrangement of his greatest hits. It's Amistad by way of JFK. I'm hoping the film has a unique sound when it gets to theaters, and this is place holder music.

 

As Tintin's soundtrack showed, Williams has still very much got it, so I'm hoping he does something a little more with the score here as well.

Well, I'll take your word for it. I don't remember a single bar of music from Tin Tin. The film on the whole didn't make much of an impression on me though.

 

"Uplifting" and "manipulative" are two different things, though. Of course it should be uplifting. I don't think anyone is concerned about it looking "uplifting", though. And besides that, I think it's perfectly valid to wonder if the film is merely just Oscar bait. 

 

That said, I do think it's foolish to immediately write off Spielberg. Like I said, anyone who loves cinema should generally be excited for this picture.

 

Williams really isn't in his liet motif phase anymore.  I'd argue he hasn't been since he wrote the Potter theme and left that series.  So his music, while still good, just doesn't have that catchy humability that his classic 80s scores did.

I just think it's funny that after nearly forty years, people still seem to be waiting for this dark, pessimistic Spielberg to finally show himself, and hold it against him when he continues making films in the same vein he has for his entire career.

 

It's a film that the man's been waiting to make for over a decade, starring one of the richest and most talented casts in years, telling the story of the most respected President in the nation's history. Wondering if it's "just Oscar bait" seems kind of insulting.

If this was just soulless Oscar bait, Spielberg would squirted this out in 2003 in five months. Or more accurately, would've passed it off to Rob Marshall to direct.

Here's the problem about people wondering if it's just Oscar bait.  If you thought War Horse was just Oscar bait, then you don't understand Spielberg as an artist.  Just because a drama has a stylized point of view, an obvious "art" to it, that doesn't mean it's simply schmaltz.

 

Would we criticize Shakespeare for his historical tragedies not hewing close to reality?  For having big, inspirational speeches?  People have forgotten that drama is not about depicting reality.

 

Anyone who is hoping this film by Spielberg and Tony Kushner won't have big emotions that it wears on its sleeve might wanna sit it out.

     Quote:

 

Well, I'm not waiting for that version of Spielberg to make his grand entrance. I just want him to make good films in the same vein. I'm a career worrywart, though. I went into War Horse feeling very, very nervous based on the divisive response on CHUD. I wound up really digging it. So I'm hoping that Lincoln hits the same way that film did, though I wouldn't much mind echoes of Munich in here, either.

 

 

Framed that way, maybe so. But it's hard to deny that the way that trailer is cut screams "for your consideration", regardless of Spielberg's better intentions.

 

I mean, my ass is already in the seat at the press screening in my head. It's not like I don't want to see the movie.

 

 

I'm repping this, but it's so eloquent and perfect and succinctly said that it needs a quote, too.

So, since Spielberg is a world-class shmaltz peddler, we should just be giving him a pass because that's what he does? So when he remakes LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL with DDL, that's cool, and like, it's the holocaust so it can't be shmaltzy? 

 

Spielberg seems intent on becoming the Norman Rockwell of cinema and considering the breadth of his talent, that is sad. 

 

He already did, and made Munich.

 

I'm definitely looking forward to this, if mostly for DDL's performance. (Hell, I'd watch the man read the phone book.) "Schmalzy" and "Oscar bait" seem a bit extreme, but "reverential" (potentially "over-reverential") seems a lot more likely. I haven't seen more of War Horse than the trailer, which came of as, well, schmalzy, and I'm getting a bit of that feeling from this trailer too, but time (and the movie itself) will tell. Few living filmmakers know how to tell a story like Spielberg does, so, as I said, I'm looking forward.

 

And as for the voice, it may take some people some getting used to, but for me DDL totally sells it. He completely hooked me with that "now-now-now." I mean, if people think this sounds weird, they should hear big barrel-chested Rough Rider Teddy Roosevelt, whose voice we actually do have recordings of.

That's if you consider what he does schmaltz.

Is there another word for overly cloying, spoon-fed sentimentality?

"Schmaltz" implies that the emotions being depicted are unearned, and I can't recall the last time a Spielberg film felt that openly manipulative.

 

It seems as though some folk are so pessimistic and cold about their approach to cinema that positive catharsis, no matter how well it's created and paid off, is something to be shunned as "false". Approaching a film as a chess opponent looking to trick emotion out of you is such a weird stance to take.

 

 

Comparing Spielberg to Norman Rockwell is so lazy, and borders on completely disingenuous.  Is Spielberg not about the gray areas in our perception of morality?  Is Spielberg only about getting by on sentiment and an appeal to nostalgia?  If you think those things, you haven't been watching his movies lately.

 

That's a bingo. You put it much better than I did.

 

OK, fuck right off with that shit. THE GREY devastated me because it was honest and earned while WAR HORSE failed to because it was cheaply manipulative. Hell, UP reduced me to tears. There's good catharsis and there's cheap catharsis. If Spielberg's amber hues and swelling John Williams scores reduce you to a blubbering mess that's great, but don't call me a cold pessimist just because I'm not so easily manipulated. 

Oh, grow up. "Reducing me to a blubbering mess"?

 

Did you actually see WAR HORSE? It has one of the most understated closing shots you could possibly want. No swelling music, no teary eyes or sobbing - a quiet, warm scene of happiness and reunion. I stand by what I said - you're looking for a film to sneak up on you and trick you into an emotional response. A film that wears its emotions on its sleeve is not by definition "cheap".

 

And without going into spoilers, claiming that THE GREY and UP are examples of wholly positive catharsis seems skewed as all Hell. Coming to terms with loss is bittersweet at best, surely.

Well, Spielberg is famous for having the largest privately held collection of Rockwell paintings in the world, so it doesn't seem like an entirely off base comment to make.

 

Huh?  That's awful reasoning.  Watch his movies.  They're nothing like Rockwell paintings.  Even War Horse was filled with moral conflict that Rockwell never depicted in his paintings.  Rockwell was a humorist.  Spielberg is a humanist.  Big difference.

 

Yes, I did see WAR HORSE. My sides still hurt from the two and a half hours of constant emotional rib-jabbing.