Follow us on Twitter

Podcasts - Lincoln - Audio Review

As the Civil War continues to rage, America's president struggles with continuing carnage on the battlefield and as he fights with many inside his own cabinet on the decision to emancipate the slaves.

Tags: movie review, audio, spill, spill.com, daniel day-lewis, sally field, tommy lee jones, joseph gordon-levitt, hal holbrook, lincoln, steven spielberg

87 Comments for 'Lincoln' - Audio Review

January 27, 2013 at 9:18 PM, said ...

My Review of Lincoln http://www.ryanhawbecker.com/2012/11/lincoln-movie-review.html?spref=tw …
November 22, 2012 at 3:16 AM, said ...
November 21, 2012 at 9:31 AM, said ...

Y'all have never heard of question time? prime ministers questions?
it's how politics should be handled: in the trenches. politics is war without bloodshed and war is politics with bloodshed.
November 20, 2012 at 7:31 PM, said ...

I agree to disagree. There didn't need to be more fighting or a continuation of the war. There was still government forced violence after the civil war. Telling land owners to let their slaves go free hardly seems like a "major reform" especially after just beating the South.

The country still grew after the war, sure there was a slow down and the economy was shot. But life still moved on. Keeping slaves after the war was still a treasonous act. So what's the point of a huge war in that one of the major factors was the abolishment of slavery, then to not enforce it after the war is won? I mean Abe could have taken a few naps and send over a few union soldier to make sure the agreement was upheld. Since he is one of America's greatest presidents... or Johnson or Jackson could have, too. But in my best Kanye West voice "19th century politicians don't care about Black people!"
November 20, 2012 at 7:12 PM, said ...

We'll just have to agree to disagree I guess.

The War left Lincoln completely drained and I doubt that he had enough fight left in him to make the major reforms you are alluding to. If you look at his pictures and contemporary accounts it's clear that the events of 1861-65 had taken out most of the fight that he had in him. So, we can't really be sure what he would have done. The same goes for America in general. Once the South had capitulated, most people just wanted a return to peace as the economy of the United States was in shambles and too many families had been shattered as it was. Few people had expected the war to drag on for so long and most Americans were more than ready to accept an imperfect peace than continue quarrelling about issues of principle which could just as easily be ironed out during peacetime.

Regarding slavery, I said that it was "all but gone" not that it was stamped out completely. My point was that there is no comparison between the slave trade before and after 1865.
November 20, 2012 at 6:40 PM, said ...

@Dredd

I feel what you are saying is that, what they did was unavoidable aftermoving forward with the victory over the southern states. That if Lincoln lived everything would have been the same. I disagree.

And I not mistaking cheap labor for slavery. You can look it up, slavery still existed years are abolition. There a lot of stories of black people dying in slavery years after that proclamation.

And when you said that I said, "they could do more" it was in the sense if Lincoln was alive and not assassinated. Not after his assignation in which they used Union forces in other ways like killing Indians to make way for railroad productions and so forth.
November 20, 2012 at 6:25 PM, said ...

@ clove_art

Andrew Johnson was Lincoln's VP, not Jackson. Jackson was president a few decade's before the Civil War.

Anyways, you ARE saying that they could have done more. Aren't you reading your own posts, man? Look, same post:

"I never said he could do more.

[...]

Hindsight or whatever, if there were still slavery after abolishment, they could have done something about it."

Same post! Total incoherency. I'm not trying to make fun of you or anything, I know you're being civil but I can't stand it when someone says "I didn't say that" and then goes on to say it again and again. So, better nip it in the bud.

Your argument is completely bogus imo. Lincoln and his successors could have done more? Easy to say now. Let's flip your argument on its head, shall we?

Lincoln could have done nothing. He would have had a quiet presidency. Maybe the occasional abolitionist disturbance to quell, but nothing that would have imperilled his presidency. It was clear that the US was slowly, but surely heading towards abolition, yes. New free states were joining the Union, turning pro-slavers into a minority. But in 1861 they were only 2 to 1 at best. He could have just left the issue on the backburner, let a few more territories organise themselves into free states and let a future president tackle the matter when public opinion was more strongly anti-slavery. But, he didn't. Don't you see? A third of the nation rebelled against him, but he pushed ahead!

He decided that enough was enough and the rest is history, as they say. I think that people see history in a linear manner, like "yeah, it was bound to happen eventually." Maybe so, but every now and then you have people like Lincoln who are not ready to wait when they know that something is wrong.

One final point, you are wrong regarding slavery. There was cheap labour and discrimination after 1865, but slavery was all but gone in the U.S. after the War. I won't go into it here as my post is already huge as it is, but there is ample information about this issue.
November 20, 2012 at 3:57 AM, said ...

Leon, man, Who gives a fuck if it looks like Lincoln saved black people, He had a big part in helping out. Can't really change it to a black guy doing everything, It's History!
November 19, 2012 at 8:46 PM, said ...

@ Dredd. I never said he could do more. Just questioning the sensationalism of Abe's personality and thought process. And despite Andrew Jackson's presidency there were still slaves for many years after the abolishment of slavery, those are the facts. It had nothing to do with who was president at what time for how long.

And what I meant by winning the civil war, they could have continued to hold influence over those southern states in which they did not. Hindsight or whatever, if there were still slavery after abolishment, they could have done something about it.
November 19, 2012 at 6:43 AM, David Ortega said ...
November 19, 2012 at 3:06 AM, said ...

Full Price for me. I didn't need to see the battles. The way the politicians and generals described the battles was good enough. Your imagination is more terrifying than seeing someone else's take on it (though I would really love to see a Steven Spielberg Civil War Movie). Same goes for not showing slaves (though you saw his son viewing the pictures of the beaten slaves, so you knew what was at stake anyway). But I will agree with Leon on one thing, I don't think that ending was needed. They should have shed 5 minutes off. Would have made a better impact in my opinion. But anyway, full price!
November 19, 2012 at 2:21 AM, Daniel said ...

@OdO Obviously Lincoln
November 18, 2012 at 11:13 PM, said ...

@B.Bally I completey agree! Im just glad this film came out first though. If a film about Lincolns bad ass early years was released right after "Vampire Hunter" I doubt people would have believed that film was actually historically accurate, lol. That being said, Lincoln was a badass in his early years, and I would love to see a film about those parts of his life within the next couple years. That would be cool :)
November 18, 2012 at 8:37 PM, B.Bally said ...

I want to see a movie about Lincoln's early years before he became President, there are actually stories of Lincoln kicking ass in Catch Wrestling bouts in his home town
November 18, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Dr. Detfink said ...

Well, I should hope it's his best film in over a decade because he milked every top actor he could buy, used a comfortable budget for the sets, and chose one of the most sympathetic plights in human history, that being the end of slavery...I mean, you can't give him any more of a shot to get get Oscar attention. I think Stevie learned his lesson, upgrading from a horse to Daniel Day Lewis.
November 18, 2012 at 4:00 AM, said ...

Lincoln is the best work Spielberg has done in at least a decade. I do get the feeling that Im in 1865 thanks to the set designs and performances. About the arguements for more battle scenes, this film isnt really about the battles they fought but the abolition of slavery. Now I would want to see at least one scene where it shows why lincoln was opposed to slavery (even Vampire Hunter showed why.) But overall, spielbergism aside, its a full on price for me.
November 18, 2012 at 2:17 AM, Peter Ohara said ...

Leon Tony Blair hasnt been in politics since 2007 so clearly you havent watched british tv in a long time lol
November 18, 2012 at 1:36 AM, said ...

Pinter333 (Harald Helgrim)Yes I totally agree with you ;)
November 18, 2012 at 12:26 AM, said ...

@ASIM
Yes, Leon has disagreed with the rest of the crew alot lately. But you know what, he backs up his opinion so well, that I don't think he's jaded. He just see things from a different perspective, which I appreciate greatly.
November 17, 2012 at 7:09 PM, said ...

LINCOLN LOGS!!!
November 17, 2012 at 12:26 PM, said ...

I've noticed recently that Leon has disagreed with the crew a lot and I keep thinking is he jaded?, but no, to his credit he has to watch films all the time and just wants something to reinvigorate his mind and as he said in the Resident Evil review to cut new grooves into his brain. It must be hard to sit and watch some of the balls Hollywood churns out. But I think its great to get different angles on a film and I feel the Spill crew do that brilliantly. Also I feel that indie films and European films like French, Spanish, Polish, Asian and of course UK films give more character development and make you think a hell of a lot more and are not as reliant on formula and special effectsx
November 17, 2012 at 8:55 AM, Tony Beers said ...

@Leon You're welcome sir.
November 17, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Michael Giustini said ...

I'm surprised Leon did not like it. It seems to fit perfectly in his age demographic, that is the demographic of people who lived trough the Civil War. Just kidding. But in all seriousness what is with Steven Spielberg movies these days that make me want to fall asleep during them. Admitedly I haven't seen this yet but I remember when I watched War Horse I popped the Blu Ray in, started watching and then 10 minutes later opened my eyes and the end credits were rolling. I was shocked to see that two and a half hours had passed. And I am getting some War Horse vibes from this trailer. Although the acting does seem much better in this.
November 17, 2012 at 5:31 AM, said ...

HOOOOOW DAAAARRREE YOOOUU!
November 17, 2012 at 3:07 AM, said ...

As good as you guys normally are you really need a historian guest when you review historical films like this. Hey, I'm a historian!

Showing 25 out of 87 comments View All

Connect With Spill