Basically, this is being one great history lesson! And it's also a very welcome one, since it's an absolute fact most people will have no interest in reading any books or watching any documentaries, regarding this movie its subject. So in that regard this movie is also being a very relevant and important one, about a piece of history that changed and formed America.

You need to realize one thing; this is not a biopic about Abraham Lincoln, even though its title still would suggest otherwise. The movie its main focus is Lincoln's efforts to pass in the United States house of representatives the thirteenth amendment to the United States constitution that would formally abolish slavery in the country. So you could say it's more of a political movie than anything else really! There are very large portions of this movie in which Lincoln isn't present at all.

The movie still does a good job at humanizing Lincoln. He's not just a movie character or an embodiment of the Lincoln we all are familiar with and accustomed to seeing in movies normally but he truly gets depicted as a real human, with human flaws and emotions to him. Of course it helps a tremendous lot he gets played by Daniel Day-Lewis, who never just plays a character but truly commits himself to a project and his character.

Still the biggest key as to why the movie works out as well as it does is because it's being a subtle and humble movie. Sure, it's all about an important piece of history but it never puts the emphasis on the gravity and importance of it all, by going over-the-top, or by exaggerating things. This even shows with the John Williams musical score, that's mostly playing in the background and never gets to the foreground to needlessly and forcefully make things dramatic or heavy, with the exception of one or two moments, which suited the movie well by the way. Guess Spielberg has learned from some of his previous recent dramatic productions, such as "War Horse", "Amistad" and to some extend also "Munich".

And since it's a more subtle movie, it's also more pleasant to follow, even though the movie basically in essence is just about a bunch of old men bickering and insulting each other with fancy words. It all works out fascinating due to the way it got written and brought to the screen. It's interesting to see to process, of passing the thirteenth amendment and how political games are played by certain representatives, with each their different own motives for being all for or against the proposition. For that reason alone this is already being a must-see for those who enjoy and appreciate good political movies.

And there really are plenty of other reason as well, why the majority of people should be able to like and appreciate this movie. Besides its fine acting and writing, it also is a great one to look at. I feel that the movie did a great job at recreating the atmosphere of 1865's America, down to the littlest detail. You should of course also thank cinematography Janusz Kaminski, for providing the movie with a great and strong look!

So whether you enjoy great film-making, storytelling or acting, this is a wonderful movie for you to watch!

9/10

Watch trailer

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. From: IMDb.com

Directed by: Steven Spielberg

Starring: Daniel Day-Lewis, Sally Field, David Strathairn and others

Current release date: November 16, 2012

Centered on a new CIA operative in the universe based on Robert Ludlum's novels. From: IMDb.com

Directed by: Tony Gilroy

Starring: Jeremy Renner, Rachel Weisz, Edward Norton and others

Current release date: August 3, 2012

(Review originally written at 29 January 2008)

One thing that the Bourne movies also really learned us is that magazines, books and towels can be more lethal weapons than guns or knives. I mean with this that the Bourne movies mostly redefined the action genre by having the guts to be different and original.

Still I am glad it's the last out the Bourne series, also because this one is definitely the least out of the Bourne series. They with this movie obviously ran out of ideas and this movie is also mostly a rehash of the previous two Bourne movies. It's really more of the same and actually made me realize how much alike all of the Bourne movies actual really are to each other. The story is actually quite similar to the second movie, also because halve of this movie is set at the same time the second movie was set in (getting confusing?). There again is also an assassin on Jason's tail and his superiors once more want to see him dead to cover up illegal secret mission and.

Just because you have lots of shaking camera-work and fast editing doesn't mean you have a good action movie as well. It makes the movie fast paced but in my opinion they could had gone a bit more easy on its style. Paul Greengrass already sort of overused this with the previous movie "The Bourne Supremacy". The shaky cam and all works great for its action sequences and more realistic moments, such as in the other Paul Greengrass movie "Bloody Sunday" but making an entire action movie, with an obvious fictitious over-the-top action story is a whole other thing. The same goes for the overall same gritty visual style. This visually has as a result that Madrid looks absolutely the same as New York, New York looks like Moscow and Moscow looks like Tangiers. A reason why I think they could had gone a bit more easy on its consistent visual style.

As a matter of fact once you really start thinking about it, this movie isn't even really THAT action filled, in terms of having lots of fights, chases and explosions.

The main reason why this movie is in my opinion the least out of the Bourne series is simply because of its story. This movie has such an incredible simple storyline that it really seems that they simply pushed it entirely to the background and let the action instead tell the entire story on its own. Nothing wrong with it, since this definitely worked out for the movie but it of course is a very cheap way of film-making, that makes you get away with practically everything. And does this movie really reach a satisfying enough conclusion for the trilogy? In my opinion not really, since I don't really have the reason that lots have changed for Bourne. Somehow I don't think he picks up a normal quiet life after all he has been trough.

Matt Damon is perhaps the biggest winner after his three Bourne movies. Before these movies he sort of had a dull and very boyish, nerd like image. His career was already getting sort of slow, before he signed up for the first Bourne movie. He by now has officially been taking serious by lots of critics and movie goers all over the world and he has proved that he can actually handle action really well and is even a convincing action star. Joan Allen also luckily returns in this movie and so does Julia Stiles, though I have the feeling they should had dropped her two movies ago. David Strathairn, Scott Glenn and Albert Finney are some of the new welcome additions to the cast this time.

It's a real fancy and fast, slick looking action flick, that all in all forms a satisfying enough conclusion of the Bourne trilogy.

7/10

(Review originally written at 25 December 2007)

"The River Wild" isn't among the best or most exciting thriller/action movies ever made but it's a very well made one by acclaimed director Curtis Hanson and with a great cast.

A movie set entirely on a river, with as the central piece of the movie a family, complete with kids and a dog. How exciting does that sound? It sound like a 'based on true events' Hallmark type of movie. But don't be fooled. "The River Wild" is a movie that has plenty to offer, despite its very restrained concept and settings of the movie.

The movie is also more original than you perhaps would expect. The movie also does a fair job at keeping things sort of a mystery for a long time. I especially like how 'the bad guys' try to set up the family against each other to create disorder and different camps, of which they can profit from for their own benefit. It's perhaps not as good and prominently executed as it could had but nevertheless the movie gets points for the attempt, that also I must say mostly works out due to Kevin Bacon's fine role.

Watching this movie sort of makes you think what a shame it is that Bacon doesn't really play villainous roles anymore. He only played these sort of roles in the early '90's, though he had an obvious talent for it. Not that he plays crappy roles now but nevertheless it remains a shame he doesn't play more often the bad guy. He is perfectly good in his role in this movie. He knows to portray a likable character that you're also able to hate at times. A real achievement. But also credits have to go to Meryl Streep, who plays a fine strong female lead and other great actors such as David Strathairn, Joseph Mazzello and John C. Reilly.

Despite that it's not the most exciting movie in its genre it still is one that is always fast going and never boring to watch. The movie mostly features nature action, set on the river. So it's a pretty original movie in its genre but I don't know, movies set at mostly the same locations are just never among my favorite or most exciting ones to watch, such as for instance in my personal experience also was the case with movies such as "Speed" and "Phone Booth".

The movie is of course a great looking, thanks to its nature settings. Also the musical score by Jerry Goldsmith is really worth mentioning.

It's just a fine movie, that is perfectly put together and has a great cast but it's just not the finest exciting genre movie thinkable and it perhaps is also a bit too simplistic, also due to its restraints.

6/10

(Review originally written at 21 November 2006)

It's already a sort of forgotten subject, the McCarthy-hearings from the early '50's, though it perhaps is one of the blackest pages out of the modern American history in which Senator Joseph McCarthy was exploiting the fears of Americans regarding the communist threat, by (falsly) accusing hundreds of Americans of all social levels (without ever presenting proper evidence) of various Communist activities, on live TV. Nobody dared to oppose him until CBS television journalist Edward R. Murrow and his crew of journalist decided to stand up to him and stop his hearings/investigations by airing opposing documentaries and telling the real 'truth' to the public about McCarthy and the accusations he made.

The fact that this movies dares to touch such a controversial and not much talked about subject is already a reason why the movie is such a fascinating and relevant one to watch. It's a movie about people who dare to stand up to the government and use the powerful tool that media is to do so and deliver its message to the public, fully knowing what the consequences of it for them personally might be. It's inspiring and still applies to certain situations this present day.

Clooney definitely is not the most brilliant director but at least he is a daring one. He is not afraid to touch some (for Americans) controversial subjects. Not only as a director but also as an actor and producer. He and the movie were rewarded with six Oscar nominations for this.

The movie is shot atmospherically entirely in black & white and uses only real archive footage of McCarthy and the hearings, rather than make him a movie character. It suits the atmosphere and the time period the movie is set in. I don't know for some reason black & white movies always are more beautiful to look at and the images better help to tell the story. Thank goodness that there are also still film-makers around that realize this and have the guts to still shoot a movie entirely in black & white.

The movie handles some interesting matters, involving several characters. The movie easily could and perhaps also should had lasted 3 hours long, instead of merely 93 minutes. The subject screams for more and a deeper insightful treatment. Some of the elements and characters in the movie are rather raffled unfortunately.

The movie is very well cast and has some great actors. David Strathairn is absolutely brilliant in his role and it is without doubt the best role out of his career till date. Clooney also allowed himself to play a small and toned down role in the movie, which absolutely adorns him as a person. Some smaller roles also are there for actors such as Frank Langella, Robert Downey Jr. and Jeff Daniels.

In my opinion not a classic must-see but still an essential viewing, due to its subject.

8/10

Watch trailer