Lincoln, directed by Steven Spielberg, with screenplay by Tony Kushner, depicts "honest Abe" (brilliantly portrayed by Daniel Day Lewis) during the push to ratify the 13th Amendment in 1865. Delivered in a gorgeously somber and subdued palette with sepia emphasis, Lincoln toggles between elated hagiography and serious historical detail. And although Spielberg interferes in his usual manner by telling us how to feel (with John Williams as his annoying musical sidekick), the combination of an intelligent, witty and heartfelt script, superb casting, and Daniel Day Lewis' deep, warm and wise portrayal makes for a very compelling and intriguing film.
Daniel Day Lewis is lit in nearly the same manner in every scene, so that both his halo and his humanity are easily and consistently perceived. ( Janusz Kaminski is, once again, Spielberg's highly skilled DP) Domestic interactions with Mary Todd Lincoln (a very touching Sally Field) are lit more brightly or kept in near darkness. Daniel Day Lewis towers and shrinks, murmurs and pounds, cajoles, convinces, jokes and soothes. Could a President really have been this kind and wise? I think we all hope so, and if not, it is a myth worth imitating.
A subplot of Lincoln's relationship with his son Robert is an unfortunate distraction that adds nothing to our comprehension of either Lincoln or his times. And, as is typical with Spielberg, the film is about 20 minutes longer than it needs to be, with an ending that appears tacked on and merely gilds the lily. Still, this is an impressive portrait of a President who, embattled from within and without, managed to hew to a course that changed the future of our nation, and offers perspective for our continuing conversations of race, rights, balance of power and humanity.
Friday, December 28, 2012
The Hobbit
If there is a Dwarf Anti-Defamation League, they are likely girding their legal loins sons of Gloins for The Hobbit, in which dwarves are depicted as greedy grudge-holding guys with bulbous noses and extravagantly bad hair. Their leader, Thorin Oakenshield (Richard Armitage, the film's obvious choice of heart throb), breaks the aesthetic mold by sporting a normally sized schnozz, and hair that responds to grime as though dirt is a styling product. The bulbous bad hair bunch, meanwhile, resist individual identification, and would benefit from names like Grumpy, Stumpy and Dumpy. Middle Earth could do with some shampoo and a few name tags.
So here we have a wee, small book (The Hobbit) swollen and bloated with back story, future story, swirling aerial time filling camera work, and stirring music that does not substance make. In other words, the studios have plumped for a blockbuster. Be gone nuance and comprehensible narrative! Get ready for thrills and spills and Indiana Jones in Middle Earth. For goodness sake, I read the entire book at age 12 in a day. The film requires 3/4 of an hour before Bilbo even leaves Bag End!
Yes, there are some memorable sequences. The three trolls/stooges with culinary aspirations and cannibal preferences offer humorous relief, although the scene is muddied beyond the source material's relative simplicity. The Gollum and Bilbo meeting has more nuance than any scene in the film, and more pathos. It is a shame that the 48 frames per second film technique distracts with unnecessary detail from this crucial conversation. I would far rather attend to Bilbo and Gollum than admire the textures of every damn pebble in the cave. And, it is fun to be back in Rivendale for some time, given that Elves are less melodrama driven than the dwarves. What Galadriel is doing in this scene is a question I will leave to the story bloating experts. My guess is all the faves from LOTR will show up in the Hobbit trilogy by hook or by crook.
Wargs chasing Radagast in a cart pulled by wily wabbits just begs for Looney Tunes music. Well, Warner Brothers is one of the studios for The Hobbit, and I guess that if caves of goblins begin to pale, a cartoon reference might entice.
Mostly, Peter Jackson has drifted into the Spielberg method of melodrama: heart stopping escapes that, after many repetitions, dull the pleasure of production quality. The Lord of the Rings had a basic moral underpinning, without the complication of much character development. The Hobbit mixes greed for gold with righteousness and glory. Not a combination of motivations I personally want to endorse, and seemingly reflective of the studio's interest in, well, piles of gold.
At least there is a glimpse of that greedy great gold lover Smaug, surely a teaser for two more plot-padded films to come.
So here we have a wee, small book (The Hobbit) swollen and bloated with back story, future story, swirling aerial time filling camera work, and stirring music that does not substance make. In other words, the studios have plumped for a blockbuster. Be gone nuance and comprehensible narrative! Get ready for thrills and spills and Indiana Jones in Middle Earth. For goodness sake, I read the entire book at age 12 in a day. The film requires 3/4 of an hour before Bilbo even leaves Bag End!
Yes, there are some memorable sequences. The three trolls/stooges with culinary aspirations and cannibal preferences offer humorous relief, although the scene is muddied beyond the source material's relative simplicity. The Gollum and Bilbo meeting has more nuance than any scene in the film, and more pathos. It is a shame that the 48 frames per second film technique distracts with unnecessary detail from this crucial conversation. I would far rather attend to Bilbo and Gollum than admire the textures of every damn pebble in the cave. And, it is fun to be back in Rivendale for some time, given that Elves are less melodrama driven than the dwarves. What Galadriel is doing in this scene is a question I will leave to the story bloating experts. My guess is all the faves from LOTR will show up in the Hobbit trilogy by hook or by crook.
Wargs chasing Radagast in a cart pulled by wily wabbits just begs for Looney Tunes music. Well, Warner Brothers is one of the studios for The Hobbit, and I guess that if caves of goblins begin to pale, a cartoon reference might entice.
Mostly, Peter Jackson has drifted into the Spielberg method of melodrama: heart stopping escapes that, after many repetitions, dull the pleasure of production quality. The Lord of the Rings had a basic moral underpinning, without the complication of much character development. The Hobbit mixes greed for gold with righteousness and glory. Not a combination of motivations I personally want to endorse, and seemingly reflective of the studio's interest in, well, piles of gold.
At least there is a glimpse of that greedy great gold lover Smaug, surely a teaser for two more plot-padded films to come.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)