Daniel Day-Lewis is so brilliant in “Lincoln” that the rest of the movie almost doesn’t matter. It’s as if he first became Abraham Lincoln and then showed up for the filming. Good actors can recreate the manners, gait, voice, and emotions of a character, but few can dig down deep enough to the core of a being and then on top apply countless layers one by one. In Lincoln, what Day-Lewis is to acting, Vermeer is to painting.
Lincoln’s dialogue in the movie is so superior to that of the other characters, that on reflection I began to wonder if Day-Lewis contributed to it. The answer appears to be yes:
Kushner said he “picked over words” in the final script with actor Daniel Day-Lewis, who plays Lincoln in the film, “trying out different sentences–what if we did this, what if we did that.” Kushner called the back-and-forth a lot of fun.
The complexity, intelligence, and humanity of Day-Lewis’ Lincoln is realized fully enough that it should dispel any doubts about Lincoln’s greatness in the minds of viewers. Sadly, only the cinematography (and possibly the sound) is as “pitch perfect” as Day-Lewis. Fortunately, Day-Lewis didn’t allow the shortcomings of the script and Spielberg to interfere with his work. He reached for and achieved the sublime. Had others on the project upped their game halfway between what they delivered and what Day-Lewis delivered, “Lincoln” would have been a great movie worth watching for more than possibly the greatest performance in movie history.
It would have been helpful if Spielberg had set aside his well-known personal tics, and if he and Kushner had taken off their 2010 liberal lenses. With the exception of Sally Field, the casting was good enough Not that most of the actors had much to work with. Still, Tommy Lee Jones performance was lazy.* To realize a somewhat more accurate and believable Mary Todd Lincoln, an actor closer in age to the depicted forty-five year old character would have been preferable to one that’s sixty-five. Sally Field is a decent actor, just not in a league with Day-Lewis. Finally, the dialogue and depiction of Mary in the script is dreadful and at that more suited to the stage than a movie; so, Fields gets more applause and less criticism than she deserves.
It’s almost as if “Lincoln” were two movies. One melodrama with enough historical manipulations and inaccuracies to put it in the category of fiction. The other stepping back in time for an hour long encounter with Abraham Lincoln. Once is more than enough of the former, and twice will likely be too little of the latter for me.
*For me, Tommy Lee Jones is always worth watching. After hearing of the raves for his performance in “Lincoln,” I expected to join those that were disappointed that he lost out to Christoph Waltz for the Supporting Actor Oscar. IMHO, the Academy got this one right and it wasn’t even much of a contest.
