ThiefHott Too much of everything

Suman Roberson It's a movie as timely as it is provocative and amazingly, for much of its running time, it is weirdly funny.

Kimball Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Scarlet The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

JohnHowardReid At the beginning of April 1940, Frank S. Nugent resigned as chief film critic of The New York Times in order to pursue a career as a Hollywood screenwriter. (His last review, Rebecca, was published on 29 March.) His deputy, B.R. Crisler, took over for less than a month before Bosley Crowther, the paper's Hollywood correspondent, began his long reign in New York. This wrecked Abe Lincoln in Illinois's certainty of a place in the Times Ten Best. While agreeing that the film was "the best Lincoln picture the screen has ever had", Crowther felt it did not elevate screen biography to new heights, although it was certainly "fine and interesting". These comments fall a long way short of Nugent's endorsement which declared: "Although the Pulitzer committee may smile skeptically, we have no hesitation in calling the film the play's superior, in calling Raymond Massey's screen Lincoln better than his play's Lincoln, in finding it not only a more complete record of the man and his times, but a far more dramatic and a far more significant biography than the Pulitzer committee saw."Other critics across the nation were equally enthusiastic: With 221 votes, the film placed 6th in the annual Film Daily poll.COMMENT: One of the best films ever made, this movie features a brilliant performance from Raymond Massey in the title role. It's unbelievable that Massey missed out on Hollywood's most prestigious award. His Lincoln (repeated from the Broadway stage) is easily the most moving portrait of his entire screen career. It's true, as a few over-finicky critics have complained, his acting tends to be stagey and that the director occasionally seems to be forcing him to pose in carefully-wrought tableaux, but Massey brilliantly, forcefully overcomes all obstacles to make his Lincoln totally sincere, totally convincing (he may be too old for the early scenes, but no matter) and overwhelmingly sympathetic.If you're in a fault-finding mood and you want to pick at a mannered performance, go no further than Ruth Gordon. Odd, quixotic, stagey she certainly is, but she's always an interesting player — and I like her!More conventional but equally fascinating portrayals are etched by Gene Lockhart (an ever-reliable actor) and Roger Imhoff (a player who is not usually cast in such prominent roles — more's the pity). Also to be warmly commended are Aldrich Bowker, Mary Howard, Harlan Briggs and the unlisted actor (actually director Cromwell himself) who plays John Brown. All told, it's a grand cast, with many capable faces filling in the background.Abe Lincoln has been most lavishly produced. It's anything but a photographed stage play. Grover Jones opened out the action of the play so that it's truly a colorful movie, and then Sherwood came back and filled in the dialogue. A perfect combination of writing talent which has resulted in a screenplay that is both full of incident and excitement, yet has dialogue effectively fired with humor, drama, even poetry and romance.The make-up and costumes look incredibly realistic, while the sets and their appointments have a sparse, unHollywood lack of glamour and ornamentation which seems totally authentic. Not that the film looks bare — it is often crowded with people and is always appealingly and most attractively lit by James Wong Howe.Cromwell's direction is most assured. It also has been criticized for being too stagey and too static, but a recent viewing of the film makes nonsense of these claims. True, Cromwell does effectively employ stage compositions — even tableaux — at times. But not only are these moving and dramatic in themselves (who could forget the picture's final scenes, or indeed the final shot of all as the train pulls out, carrying Lincoln to Washington? This is real emotion), but they are skillfully contrasted with scenes of vigorous action in which both camera and players move with a speed that is only possible in the cinema.Roy Webb has provided a rousingly familiar, nonetheless stirring music score. Other technical credits are as proficient as unbounded Hollywood largess can make them.Abe Lincoln in Illinois is not the dry bones of history, but a living, moving portrait that is as vital and relevantly dramatic in 2015 as it was 75 years ago. Sherwood has not penned a museum piece, but a convincing, fascinating, well-rounded and, above all, deeply sympathetic picture that will live for all time. In fact, the more times I see the movie, the more I enjoy it. After viewing the superb Warner Brothers DVD, I regard it as one of the best movies Hollywood ever made. Certainly Raymond Massey rendered one of the all-time great performances of the cinema. Despite its great entertainment qualities and the plaudits of most critics, the film was not overly popular on first release. RKO's initial domestic loss was nearly $750,000 and it seemed the film would in no way duplicate the success of the play which opened on Broadway on 15 October 1938 for a highly profitable run of no less than 472 performances. Oddly enough, the picture proved more popular overseas, playing with great success in England and Australia. For example, it was aired at least 30 times on Oz television, making it one of the most frequently-seen RKO releases of the 1940's.

MartinHafer Abe Lincoln is one of the most misunderstood figures in American history--perhaps THE most misunderstood. So much of what we assume are facts are actually myths and misrepresentations--some of which were promoted by writers and some by films of the 30s and 40s. While ABE LINCOLN IN ILLINOIS is far from perfect, it is light-years ahead of the other contemporary works in giving a balanced account of Lincoln's life. While heroic in many ways, Lincoln is more of a man in this film and the facts are generally true--and that's a lot more than can be said of such sentimental hogwash as D.W. Griffith's 1930 fiasco ABRAHAM LINCOLN--which is basically one myth after another strung together!! I can say all this because I am well educated about the man and am an American history teacher--so my opinion should mean something.One of the common myths that has abounded was the Ann Rutledge romance. While it's uncertain exactly how much they were in love (was it just a passing romance or something deeper), it's obvious that they were NOT as they were portrayed in ABRAHAM LINCOLN with all of its syrupy sweetness. Read up on the controversy yourself--opinions vary and there's no concrete evidence to prove either extreme. Here in ABE LINCOLN IN ILLINOIS, they seem to take the position that the love between them was just beginning to blossom when she died and that that was about it.Another myth is that Lincoln was 100% against slavery and that he personally freed the slaves (that was actually done by Congress and the 13th amendment). The real life Lincoln, though opposed to slavery, was more concerned with unity and preserving the nation. Fortunately, ABE LINCOLN IN ILLINOIS gets this right--they show Lincoln as being torn by these two divergent interests. Most books and films portray him as "the Great Emancipator"--though Lincoln would have allowed slavery to keep the country from war and he did see class distinctions between the races.The other big myth is that Lincoln was sort of a "dumb hillbilly" and that he stumbled into greatness. While in this film he is a simple man, of sorts, he also is amazingly clever and has a great way with dealing with people. And, occasionally, he was a bit devious. While the film doesn't have a chance to show his political savvy and willingness to "forget" the Constitution during the war in order to keep the country together, he is relatively shrewd in this film.As for Mary Todd, in the film as in real life, she was a conniver and a very unstable woman. While her mental instability was only briefly shown in this film (as in reality--her mental condition greatly deteriorated after her husband was President as well as his death) but at least it was mentioned. Plus, her intense drive was a major focus of the film--as it was in Lincoln's own real life. She was a hard-driving and rather nasty woman if you read more about her (and rather mentally unstable in her later years).As a long-winded teacher, I could go on, but probably should wrap it up now. The film is reasonably accurate and tends to show Lincoln, warts and all--something films up until then neglected. Additionally, Raymond Massey's performance was superb and the film was both entertaining and inspiring. Interestingly enough, Massey was a Canadian and did a much better job than the Americans who have tackled this role.

bkoganbing Besides Raymond Massey, a whole flock of actors have been known for playing America's sixteenth president, Henry Fonda, Walter Huston, Sam Waterston, Hal Holbrook, Dennis Weaver, Gregory Peck, John Carradine. Character actor Frank McGlyn practically made a career of playing The Great Emancipator whenever Honest Abe was a character in a film. But the standard has been set by Raymond Massey who did Lincoln in Robert Sherwood's play for 472 performances on Broadway during the 1938-1939 season and he repeats the title role in Abe Lincoln in Illinois for this film version. I've no doubt that Sherwood used as source material for his play a lot of information based on Carl Sandburg's biography, Lincoln the Prarie Years. At that time Sandburg was considered the unofficial custodian of the Lincoln legend and mythology. Of course he based a lot of his work on the biography of Lincoln written by his law partner William Herndon played here by Alan Baxter. Herndon's well known antipathy for Mary Todd Lincoln as the shrewish wife of his good friend comes through her in Ruth Gordon's portrayal. It should be said that Mary Lincoln regarded Herndon as an opportunist drunk and he certainly did have a substance abuse problem.Gene Lockhart as Lincoln's rival Stephen A. Douglas is well done also, though Lockhart was a bit tall for the part. Had Douglas ever been elected president he would have been our shortest president, he was barely over five feet tall. The rivalry between these two was kind of like the Yankees and Red Sox with the Yankees always coming out on top until recent years. Lincoln is still our tallest president at 6'4" so the contrast on the speaking platform at the Lincoln-Douglas debates was really something to see.The only other actor to recreate his stage role besides Massey was Howard DaSilva who played Jack Armstrong. Not the All American hero, but the leader of the local gang of roughnecks who Lincoln beat in a wrestling match and who becomes his lifelong friend. All part of the Lincoln legend carefully preserved by Sandburg and Sherwood. It was one of DaSilva's earliest screen roles.Raymond Massey got an Academy Award nomination for Best Actor in 1940 and he was up against a strong field that included Henry Fonda for The Grapes of Wrath, Charles Chaplin for The Great Dictator, and Laurence Olivier in Rebecca. The winner however was a long-shot, James Stewart for The Philadelphia Story. There was a lot of sentiment that year that Stewart should have received the Oscar the year before for Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. So the good Academy voters made up for it this year. It goes that way with Oscar every so often. Abe Lincoln in Illinois still holds up very well although today's historical Lincoln specialists might have different interpretations placed on some of the events you see.

historyprofsoon I was very taken with this movie. I liked it because I believe that it captures not only some essential facts about President Lincoln, but about life as well. I am intrigued by the fact that destiny pulled Lincoln kicking and screaming into what he was created to do. He had no specific ambitions or plans. He never aspired to be president. The times that he lived in required it of him. The people who were his friends saw the calling in him that he could not see himself. If he had married Ann Rutledge he would not have become President. He would not have been in position to save the Union. It took the marriage to a women he did not love to push him into his destiny. Mary Todd's ambition was essential to his future. Her choice of Lincoln over Steven Douglas was providential. These facts tell me that personal happiness and fulfillment are not the most important considerations in choosing what to do with our lives. We must allow Providence to lead us into our destiny for the good of society as well as ourselves.