Young Mr. Lincoln - Review

Young Mr. Lincoln

You can really tell the difference between today's fiction movies based on history and those of the ones during the days of golden cinema. Today, directors and writers are more concerned with retellings, shockers, and radical outlooks. Take for example the 2004 film, "King Arthur". This was a dramatic retelling of the classic tale of King Arthur. It has had a radical outlook on how it wanted to show Arthur in a historical standpoint. You could also point to the movie "Alexander" of a shocking historical fiction tale. These grandiose tales come from an age where people are looking for shock and "updates" to some of the classic moments of history. Contrast this with films of old and you see that the films were used to make characters based in history as human and real, but at the same time make them the "larger than life" characters they are seen as.

This movie, through and through, oozes with talent. First of all start with the superb and greatly talented director, John Ford. Has there been a movie his fingers didn't touch that wasn't pure gold? I mean, this is the same genius who filmed "How The West Was Won", "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance", "The Searchers", "She Wore A Yellow Ribbon", "My Darling Clementine", "The Grapes Of Wrath", "Stagecoach", and on and on and on. Mr. Ford is my absolute favorite western director. The man can tell you a story without needing to use words. When he shows you a character in careful reflection, you know each word that's going through his mind. The way he uses angles and lighting to show you so many aspects of the film, whether it be drama, action, sadness, or pain, is top of the line film making. This is the man who took the old "cowboys and Indians" routine and gave it an artistic flare and a flare for the dramatic rather than just the action. In this movie, he doesn't let us down at all.

Henry Fonda plays Abraham Lincoln and a quarter of the way through the movie you stop seeing Henry Fonda playing Lincoln but you swear that you are watching a pre-President Lincoln. Fonda captures all the great aspects of Lincoln's character as well as some of his shortcomings and downfalls. It is a credit to Fonda's early days of his acting career and you see an early start to one of the best actors of all time. Fonda has been in other Ford movies and it's always great to see two iron giants doing what they do best on the same picture.

The story is an account of a fictionalized trial that a pre-political Abraham Lincoln is the defense attorney. A man is killed and two brothers are arrested and tried for his killing. Lincoln, of course, doesn't believe the boys did it. This is the central plot of the story but you get so many other storylines and none of them feel out of place or rushed or boring. Each shows an aspect of Lincoln's character and shows you how he became the man he would soon become. We get to see Lincoln's loss of his first love, Ann, when she dies. We see his introduction to his future wife Mary Todd. We also learn that he learned about the law from teaching himself from a book and he soon takes over his mentor's defense attorney business when his mentor dies. We are also treated to a stellar scene in which Lincoln singlehandedly talks down an angry mob wanting to lynch the two boys accused of murder.

Grade - A+

Even knowing this is a fictitious story of Lincoln, I couldn't help loving the man more. Ford and Fonda capture a man who seems almost out of place in history, a little bit slow for being someone who is so smart, and the early start of where Lincoln got his morals and drive and passions. Lincoln's character definitely has the famous wit history records of him. There are many times in the trial scenes where you are laughing just as hard as the other people in the court. The drama of the trial is excellent as well and we are treated to guessing how Lincoln is going to get the two accused off, if at all! You feel so much for the character that when he does something you'd be embarrassed if you did it, that you feel embarrassed for Lincoln. However, you don't see the embarrassment from Lincoln. He truly does seem like he's a bit slow with his picking his words and talking slowly, but you also realize that that is almost just a facade that Lincoln puts on to throw off his opponents. Fonda does a great job showing that "slowness" but at the same time that smart, sharp, quick wit and humor and intelligence. This movie is great every time I watch it.

Twelve Angry Men - Review

Twelve Angry Men

Today's drama movies have nothing on old classics. Sure they might have some decent actors and some fancy twists, but they still fall short. Older movies have great actors and fancy twists as well. They also have one more thing - original story ideas. That's why Hollywood has to reuse and reuse and reuse ideas from the golden age of cinema. When given the option to watch these classic giants, take it upon yourself to add a little class to your life.

While most of the time I tend to credit the writers or the directors for making a film what it is, it rarely is the case where the actors carry the main gusto on the movie. Just another difference between today's movies and those of yore; today's movies have to throw in sex scenes or random violence to appease an audience. It's not that this movie is badly written or directed (written by Reginald Rose and directed by Sidney Lumet) but it is nothing compared to the acting of all twelve people in this film.

The actors who played the jurors, in there respected juror numbers are the following: Martin Balsam, Lee J. Cobb, E. G. Marshall, Jack Klugman (of Quincy fame), Ed Binns, Jack Warden, Henry Fonda, Joseph Sweeney, Ed Begley, George Voskovec, and Robert Webber. Each and every one of these roles were perfectly filled and perfectly executed.

The story is pretty simple. A young Spanish-American man is on trial for the murder of his father. The audience is thrown into the story after both sides have rested and the judge gives the jury their instructions. It seems like a cut and dry case and all the jurors seem to agree to the boys guilt and want to get out of there as quickly as possible. All except one low juror. Henry Fonda plays the one lonely, dissenting voice. Now he has to try and convince not only everyone to listen to him, but to prove to them why he thinks the boy is innocent.

There are two problems I have with this movie I want to cover before I get to the grade and explanation. While this movie was shot wonderful and acted wonderfully, there are two deep, glaring inconsistencies this movie can't get away from.

First of all when Henry Fonda tells them about knowing the layout of the area the murder occurred. He tells everyone that what was reported by one of the witnesses was inaccurate. When you are chosen for a jury you are told that whatever facts you know about an area or a person before the trial starts must not come into play. You must only go by the information that was entered to in evidence. This would have been cause for a probably mistrial.

This next problem would not have only caused a mistrial but would have gotten Henry Fonda thrown into jail. The murder occurred with a knife that was supposedly very unique. The jurors make the point about how there couldn't be another knife and the defendant was known to carry that same knife. It's a great scene when Fonda opens a knife and slams it down on the table. It's a very dramatic scene. He then goes on to explain that he was in the area that the murder occurred and found this type of knife being sold. The two problems with this is that a jury is sequestered and is definitely not allowed to visit the place of the murder area unless if the entire court goes with instructions from the judge. Second of all, a juror is not allowed to do his/her own investigation must way the facts and evidence that were laid out in the trial only.

These are two small points, and only a movie snob like myself would get flustered by these facts.

Grade - A+

When I say this movie is a drama I mean that each and every sinew and fiber is thrice coated with a layer of drama and each copy of the film is dripping with it and lays in a pool of its own drama.

There isn't a bad actor in any of the twelve people I listed. Henry Fonda outshines the others, but I don't want to detract from their talent. This movie also refers to the characters by their juror numbers. The interesting thing about this is that you get to know the characters pretty well. You get to know who they are, their motives for their decisions, and a lot of personal information. Yet you don't get to know their names. At the very end, you do learn a few of their names. It really leans on the idea of showing the entire "world's a stage and all men and women players". There isn't much more I want to say about this movie because it would detract from the viewing experience. I will say that if you're a fan of some intense drama - this movie is for you.