Americas 250th Birthday Cinemathon #20: Abe Lincoln in Illinois (1940)

 

Abraham Lincoln is one of the greatest figures in American history, no matter what your opinion of him is. He was an instrumental player in one of America’s great transition points. Abe Lincoln in Illinois is an adaptation of the play of the same name, which in turn was heavily derived from Carl Sandburg’s Prairie Years volume of his Lincoln biography. Thus it charts Lincoln’s life from the 1830s up until the 1860 election. Running at a little under two hours, it commits one of the common sins of biopics, which is trying to cover too much of a person’s life. Thus I was surprised to not only enjoy the film, but be legitimately invested in much of it, especially towards the end.

Raymond Massey was famous for playing Lincoln in the stage version, and he reprises his role here for an Academy Award nomination. Massey was well into his forties, so the earlier scenes seem a bit off. For example, we first see him being sent off by his mother to make something of himself in the world. Massey’s aged face makes the scene somewhat comical. As the film progresses, though, I do get more comfortable with him in the role, and his age definitely fits in the last act.

Massey’s Lincoln is a good-natured, self-deprecating county boy who wins the hearts of almost everyone around him. He goes from taking odd frontier jobs to becoming a lawyer. He’s also consistently reluctant to get involved with politics, first being pressured into becoming a local politician, then a congressman, and finally running for the presidency despite his self-doubts. While this does humanize him much more than some rather hagiographic depictions, I’m going to have to call foul on its accuracy. Lincoln may have had humble origins, but he definitely had an ambitious streak and I don’t think he needed everyone to keep prodding him towards his destiny. Because of time’s sake, the movie also skips over his railroad lawyer career. The railroad industry in 19^th Century America was notoriously corrupt, so it’s possible Lincoln had to get dirty despite his “Honest Abe” appellation.

Americas 250th Birthday Cinemathon #19: Harriet (2019)

 

One of the great heroines of 19^th Century history is Harriet Tubman, a Maryland slave who, after escaping to Pennsylvania, headed back south to rescue other African-Americans from bondage. Sadly, some of the awesome stories about her are likely the results of oft-fictionalized 19^th Century biographies, but she’s still a woman worth celebrating. Her story has been told on television, most notably in the 1978 miniseries A Woman Called Moses (I would have watched this one if I didn’t already have many 3-4 hour movies coming up). Surprisingly, it wasn’t until 2019 that we got a theatrical depiction in the simply titled Harriet.

The movie was actually considered back in the 90s, but shockingly a Hollywood executive, believing a black female lead couldn’t carry a movie, suggested that Tubman be played by Julia Roberts! Anyways, Cynthia Ervo would get the role when the movie finally swung into production. She does a good job, playing an initially frightened runaway slave before becoming a determined and tough heroine. Also, unlike in 12 Years a Slave, we get a good dose of the slaves’ Christianity. Tubman’s head was once struck and split open, whereupon she received visions. She claimed they were from God, and some sources claim that they indeed helped her successfully evade capture when guiding slaves to freedom. I was pleased to see that they had a scene of her threatening to shoot a runaway when he wants to go back to his master. This actually happened a few times in real life. Harriet knew that if a slave had second thoughts and went back, he could endanger the whole group.

Americas 250th Birthday Cinemathon #18: How the West Was Won (1962)

 

How the West Was Won is an epic multi-generational western filmed in the rarely used Cinerama. Cinerama was even wider than widescreen, and required a special set-up to show. While this made for a grand viewing in theaters, the image is so stretched that no TV can show the full images without black screens. On the blue-ray I watched almost half the screen was the black bars on the top and bottom.

The original plan, believe it or not, was even more epic, with six segments and more historical characters coming in and out. The final product was only five segments and only the middle has any real historical figures, but was still grand with wonderful cinematography and a slew of major stars and character actors, not to mention three directors dividing the segments (John Ford among them). The casting is mostly great, the problem being a couple actors who are too old for their role. The worst case is James Stewart, a middle-aged man playing someone who’s supposed to be young. They didn’t even bother dyeing his hair! The segments themselves are not terribly original in their storylines, but do have aspects that make them somewhat fresh, whether it be original stunts or, in the case of “The Plains”, switching out the usual squeaky clean heroes for a gambler and a showgirl.

There’s not a central plot, but the movie does follow a family through 50 years of western history. There are two characters that can be said to have leading roles. Debbie Reynolds is the one who goes coast-to-coast, starting as one of the two daughters of the Prescott family (Lilith Prescott) and becoming a cool old lady at the end. I’d say she’s my favorite. George Peppard doesn’t appear until “The Civil War”, but becomes the male action lead for the rest of the movie, being a soldier and then a lawman. Linking all the segments together is the narrating voice of Spencer Tracy.

Americas 250th Birthday Cinemathon #17: Jeremiah Johnson (1972)

Jeremiah Johnson is, quite simply, a movie about Jeremiah Johnson, one of the most legendary mountain men of the old American West. Going west to tough it out in the gold and fur trades, he somehow got into a blood feud with the Crow. He earned the nickname “liver-eating Johnson,” based on the rumor that he would cut out the liver of each Crow warrior he killed. The movie doesn’t include the liver part, so don’t worry about any violence in that respect.

Jeremiah Johnson is based on two books, the non-fiction Crow Killer: The Saga of Liver-Eating Johnson and Vardis Fisher’s historical novel Mountain Man, with a few inventions of its own. The real Jeremiah Johnson’s life is sketchy in areas, with gaps often filled by possibly legendary inventions and embellished facts. The movie definitely adjusts his beginnings. He’s simply portrayed as a Mexican War veteran, when in real life he actually deserted and changed part of his name. The movie likely does this to make him start out as a more innocent and out-of-his-depth man.

Americas 250th Birthday Cinemathon #16: 12 Years a Slave

 

12 Years a Slave, directed by Steve McQueen, is one of the more in-depth looks at what it was like to be a slave. It’s based on the memoir of Solomon Northup, a free black living in New York who was attracted by a fiddling job in Washington DC, only to be drugged and wake up in a slave pen. He found himself transported along with other kidnapped blacks (and a lot of slaves who were also abducted or were being resold) to New Orleans. For the next 12 years (1841-1853) he served under several masters, experiencing different degrees of slavery. Eventually he found a sympathetic white Canadian, Samuel Bass, who got word of where he was to his family, and Northup was freed. Understandably, he became a prominent abolitionist.

There is actually a debate about the veracity of Northup’s memoir. The debate arises form several passages which seem to express white views of slavery and race and others which had uncanny similarities to other slave narratives. The explanation for these bits is that Northup wrote his memoir via dictation through a white writer. The white writer likely decided to make some alterations to make the book more sellable.

Americas 250th Birthday Cinemathon #15: Amistad (1997)

 Steven Spielberg finally makes it to my watchlist with Amistad. Amistad is one of his less known movies and thus also his most underrated. It’s a high-stakes court drama, based on the story of the Spanish slaver Amistad. As in real life, the slaves on board manage to slaughter most of the crew. The two surviving Spaniards, however, don’t take them back to Africa, but land in Connecticut. With the slave trade legal for Spain, but not America, there is a long legal battle. President Martin van Buren, seeking reelection, is worried that if the slaves are freed he’ll lose the southern vote, so he twice has the trial done again in a higher court. He also has to deal with the Spanish government, which insists that the slaves are their property and should be punished for killing most of the slavers.

The movie is chockfull of real historical characters and follows the events closely for the most part. The main character is Cinque (Djimon Hounsou), a man kidnapped and sold into slavery. The real Cinque actually had a different name that was anglicized into his more familiar one, but the movie simplifies things. His defense lawyer is Roger Sherman Baldwin (Matthew McConaughey), who was a well established legal figure in real life, but is turned into an ambitious low-level one to give us more of an underdog story. The big hurdle for the defense team is the language barrier, but gradually this is overcome with the discovery of James Covey (Chiwetel Ejiofor), a sailor who was born in West Africa and knows some of the different tongues.

Americas 250th Birthday Cinemathon #14: The Alamo (2004)

 

Among the more filmed moments of American history is the Battle of the Alamo. To those who don’t know the story, Mexico, trying to popular their largely unsettled northern territories, invited Americans to depart the United States and come to Texas. Naturally, letting thousands of Protestants, many with their own unique beliefs of what a society should be, flood into a Catholic held land caused many social problems. I can’t claim to understand the dizzying Mexican political scene of the 19^th Century, which was constantly shifting and saw frequent revolts and revolutions. However, the United States best remembers the Texas Revolution of 1836, which featured the legendary last stand of under 200 men at the Alamo in San Antonio. With no option for surrender, they fought to the last man and inflicted over thrice their number in Mexican casualties.

If I include Disney’s Davy Crockett series, I’ve seen only three of the Alamo adaptations. I considered trying a new one, but decided to rewatch the last of them, the 2004 effort directed by John Lee Hancock and produced by one of Disney’s many production companies. The movie was a big bomb. While I can see how it might not connect with audiences, I think the cause was the historical debate about the event that was happening. There was some revision going on, some of it well-researched and credible. I remember people in right-wing media and in my social circles thinking the movie was going to be a left-wing retelling that would paint the Alamo defenders in a negative light or worse vilify them. Actually, while the movie gets rid of some of the admittedly ludicrous glorification (I’ll discuss a couple aspects of this) it still paints the Texan Revolution in a fairly positive light. In fact it removes a couple facts that would undercut the heroism. On the other hand, production issues led many people to decide it was a bad movie before it even came out, so that didn't help.