Lincoln (2012)

While browsing through Netflix for a movie to watch, I zeroed in on Lincoln, a movie helmed by Steven Spielberg and top-billed by Daniel Day-Lewis. Perhaps, I was still reeling from our visit to Abraham Lincoln's memorial or I was just hooked by seeing Spielberg's name attached to the movie... so I went ahead and clicked play.

Oh boy, it is one of the best movies I've seen; I found it even more riveting than 2008's Frost/Nixon. The Michael Sheen starrer was, back in 2011, my top pick for a real-life movie about a president.  Meanwhile, Heneral Luna and Goyo: Ang Batang Heneral, movies about 19th century Filipino war heroes, paled in comparison to Lincoln. 

What got my undivided attention while watching Lincoln?

The performances.

I have to admit that I couldn't take my eyes off Daniel Day-Lewis because I couldn't see the actor behind the performance... I only saw Abraham Lincoln: dignified, witty, frank... and most importantly, human: The toll of a father losing a son while maintaining the strong and dignified public persona of a president was so palpable in his performance; the difficulty of dealing with his eldest son who was determined to enlist into the Union Army during a war that his government could have led either to the preservation of the young nation or to the failure of the self-governance experiment; and the dedication to his wife who also went through the same familial losses and who was going through moral dilemmas brought about by the political and cultural changes happening during Lincoln's presidency. My favourite thing about Day-Lewis' portrayal was the contrast between Lincoln's gravitas as a president (and persuasive when needed) and the tender moments he shared with his children. Such a powerful performance.

The reason why Day-Lewis' understated performance was so spectacular (aside from him being a really great actor... this movie has made me a fan) is because the rest of the cast also did a great job in their respective roles. 

Sally Field was such a great Mary Todd; her portrayal showed what it must have been like as a First Lady during those trying times. Todd was the perfect example of the quote, "Behind every great man is a great woman." In the movie, she was at the deliberations and the vote concerning the ratification of the 13th Amendment. She was constantly accompanied by her seamstress and confidante, Elizabeth Keckley, a black woman who bought her freedom and became a successful entrepreneur. 

Tommy Lee Jones, on the other hand, used his strong, sarcastic, and commanding persona to portray Thaddeus Stevens, a Republican Congressman from Pennsylvania who adamantly fought against slavery and the discrimination of African Americans. But at a critical point in the deliberations, he willingly made his stance more moderate: that the amendment made every man equal in the eyes of the law instead of declaring true equality. When confronted about it, he said that he was willing to do anything that would get the 13th Amendment ratified. Unlike Day-Lewis who I couldn't see behind the Lincoln façade, I could clearly see Jones through his performance; it must be because I saw similarities between his performance of Stevens and of Kay (Men in Black); both authoritarian and sarcastic. Nevertheless, his was a stellar performance as a legislator that matched Day-Lewis' commander-in-chief persona.

The story.

I expected the story to revolve around the Gettysburg Address because that's what I've always associated Lincoln with. Instead, I learned something new because the eponymous movie focused on Lincoln's second term and the struggles to get the 13th Amendment ratified. This amendment to the U.S. Constitution called for the abolition of slavery at the federal level (i.e., slavery is illegal, except as a form of punishment, in all states in the Union). Lincoln wanted the 13th Amendment ratified before the war ended and the Confederacy reinstated into the Union. He also wanted a swift end to the four-year old armed conflict that had killed thousands of soldiers and in which his eldest son became involved in (as a staff member to General Ulysses S. Grant). 

Slavery was finally abolished but at what cost? More than 600,000 people died in the bloodiest military conflict involving the U.S. Their deaths are not in vain because they redefined the United States of America, a legacy that not all martyrs in armed conflicts could say they have. They changed the course of history because slavery was made illegal as a result. Abraham Lincoln was assassinated and was forever made a martyr and regarded as one of the greatest presidents of the U.S. 

It's fascinating to see how Spielberg and Tony Kushner (screenplay) wove scenes from Civil War battlefields into the story of the opposing sides of the abolition debate as if one conflict mirrored the other. They seemingly placed Grant and the Confederate General Robert E. Lee in the sidelines to put Lincoln and the legislators front and centre. In other discussion on the Civil War, it's typical to zero in on the two opposing military giants. The brilliant use of lighting further conveyed the devastating effects of war, with lots of grey and sepia tones in the battlefield; the emotional, more human side of politicians, with soft light in scenes where Lincoln or Stevens was with his family; and the struggle to negotiate enough votes for ratification through the play of light and shadows inside the Oval Office, in the House of Representatives, and inside the restaurant where the people tasked with the groundwork covertly met first with Secretary of State William Seward and then with Lincoln.

The legacy.

The challenge of creating a movie about a well-known and highly respected historical figure is that it will undoubtedly raise questions about the accuracy of the movie to actual history. Lincoln definitely portrayed the president as a role model. He seemed like a saint (talking peace and reconciliation with Grant), a doting father (he spent a lot of time with his youngest son), a loving husband (he was affectionate with Mary in the buggy ride). He was also portrayed as a decisive president, who wanted to get the amendment ratified as soon as possible. In real-life though, the Civil War dragged on for so long and Stevens was worried that Lincoln would dilly-dally or even change his mind about emancipating the slaves. Lincoln did not have universal support from legislators, as depicted in the movie. He had a hard time getting the 13th Amendment passed in Congress.

Some people say that the popular reading of Lincoln has transformed the man to legend. Probably similar to Jose Rizal and his famous overcoat... people have actually founded a religion that regarded him as a god! Until I watched Lincoln, I did not know that he was shot on Good Friday (April 14) and he died on Black Saturday (April 15). The timing must have made a lot of people believe that the Civil War was by divine intervention. Ambeth Ocampo leads the task of humanising Rizal, making him more relatable to the common tao. In Lincoln's case, the alternate view is that Lincoln was actually a racist and did not support the abolition of slavery. I bet that such claims have made a lot of people disgruntled. It runs counter what mainstream history says about the man because Lincoln clearly wanted to go beyond slave emancipation by publicly supporting voting rights (albeit limited) for African Americans. He even died because of this goal. 

Through my visit to Washington, D.C., watching Lincoln, and reading revisionist views about him, I think that Lincoln (the president) was a man who truly believed in the tenets of the Declaration of Independence. His politics and his rhetoric appear to have evolved over time, presenting us with two extremely different versions of the same president; the Great Emancipator on the one hand and a white supremacist on the other.

It is clear that I will have to read up more to understand his legacy better.