“Lincoln” (2012) directed by Steven Spielberg takes the audience on a thrilling journey through Abraham Lincoln’s final months in office in which he strived to pass the 13th Amendment, forbidding the practice of slavery in the United States of America, and end the bloodshed of the Civil War. The movie is put together cleverly, and really well received by the audience. Albeit no movie will be 100% in accordance with the happenings of 150 years ago, there are some elements of the movie that are not entirely airtight to provide a dramatic effect. Despite these faults, “Lincoln” successfully undertakes the daunting balancing act between historical accuracy and dramatic effect.
“Lincoln” deserves 4.75 out of 5 stars for the breathtakingly accurate portrayal of “The Great Emancipator” by Daniel Day-Lewis. Nailing the higher register of his voice, the style of his walk, and the lightheartedness of the telling of his stories, many critics and historians acclaim that this movie captures the most authentic portrait of Abraham Lincoln in a film yet. The screenplay by Tony Kushner exceeds all the expectations for the plot of a good movie, while at the same time tackling an honest imitation of the events in the life of America’s most-respected President.
Obviously, the conversations between characters were not worded for word, but there are some fabricated scenes in the movie that were made in the interest of the viewer to understand the relationships between characters and their motives. At the time of the Civil War, the significance of the Gettysburg Address was not fully recognized. It wasn’t until the 20th century that the impact of the famously short speech on the end of the war was realized. At the very beginning of the movie, Lincoln meets with two Union soldiers who recite to him lines from the address. While emphasizing on the devotion of the soldiers to preserve the Union, it is unlikely that the speech would have been memorized. Throughout the movie, Mary Todd Lincoln has several encounters with Thaddeus Stevens. In multiple meetings, she sat in the gallery of the House of Representatives to keep a close watch on Stevens. In addition, she publicly scolds his investigations into her budget at a White House function. Because of the social constructs of the day, the First Lady would not have watched the House’s assemblies, nor would she have verbally attacked Stevens for it would have been embarrassing to Lincoln. The film depicts a black delegation of soldiers meeting the peace commissioners of the Confederacy in Union territory, arguably a major insult to the commissioners, but it is unlikely that this would have happened, for fear that it would thwart the fruition of the peace talks. Proceedings on the House floor in the movie consisted of verbal attacks between representatives, but House Rules would not have allowed that to occur as members must address the Speaker, not each other. The directly most likely chose this style to help viewers understand how difficult it was to gain votes from the Democratic side.
Steven Spielberg may have expended too much of the credit of the passage of the 13th Amendment to Lincoln. The amendment was proposed and largely advocated by abolitionists such as Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Harriet Tubman, and Frederick Douglas before Lincoln took it as a necessary step in ending the Civil War. In fact, Lincoln’s stance on abolition fluctuated over his time in office. In his 1860 campaign, he promised that he would not emancipate the slaves as the right to property in the Constitution protected the institution. By contrast, the 1864 campaign was characterized by the drive to pass the 13th Amendment. No abolitionists played a major role in the movie.
Many of the historical inaccuracies of “Lincoln” are justified by providing the movie with simple explanations of historical characters. The writers of the movie had to allow some creativity in order to complete a coherent story. Thaddeus Stevens was accused of having a mulatto mistress by anti-abolitionists. While never proven, the movie determines it likely by including a scene where he borrows the bill so that his housekeeper can read it. This provides a sweet and plausible explanation for Steven’s radical views about slavery. By many accounts, there was only one factual error in the movie. During the roll call vote, two representatives of Connecticut voted against the amendment, while in fact, all four members voted “yay”. It’s easy to forgive this error, as making a spotless historical movie is a feat not attempted by many directors.
The title “Lincoln” can be quite misleading, as it infers that the movie will cover all parts of Lincoln’s life, not just a few months of it. Although a great movie to understand the character of Abraham Lincoln and the impact he had on the 13th Amendment, I would not recommend this movie alone to watch in order to fully grasp his life. While the all-black 54th regiment is rarely directly referred to, the movie makes multiple implications regarding its existence and the existence of other all-black regiments. However, the coming about of the 54th regiment after the Emancipation Proclamation is never explained. As a matter of fact, the movie only features the few months leading up to the passage of the 13th Amendment, glazing over the years of hard work and strife of abolitionists to get it written and passed by the Senate. I would recommend that anyone wanting to learn about the Constitutional amendment forbidding slavery to watch this movie. “Lincoln” encompasses a true story about a true patriot and an American hero.
Comments