On Martin Luther King Day, I finally was able to go to a showing of Stephen Spielberg's "Lincoln" (2012) at our local theater. I had wanted to see it ever since it had been released, but somehow just was unable to find the time, especially around the holidays.
   It was worth the wait. I had read several reviews of the film, but none of them spoiled the magnificence and richness of the experience for me. It was beautifully filmed, using almost entirely Richmond and Petersburg locations, which added a lot of interest for me personally, as I live in the area. It was interesting to watch and realize that a particular scene was filmed at the Virginia Governor's Mansion or in the Capitol Building. For example, Thomas Sully's romanticized Victorian portrait of Pocahontas stood out in one scene, cluing me in to the room in the Capitol being used. Spielberg made great use of local people and buildings and took special care for the most part that the surroundings were accurate for Civil War period Washington.
   Although minor historical inaccuracies do exist throughout the film--Mary Todd Lincoln never sat in the House to see the vote taken on the 13th Amendment; Lincoln did not die in the position the film showed at all but was laid diagonally across the too short bed; Connecticut did not have a split vote on the Amendment; and the House would not have been as full as it looked in the movie, as those representatives of Congress from the Southern states were absent due to the war, etc.--I readily agree that probably few of these things were likely noticed by most people nor did they detract from my enjoyment of the film. It's not a documentary, but entertainment based on history.
   Daniel Day-Lewis, Sally Field, and Tommy Lee Jones were excellently cast in their roles and entirely believable in their portrayals. Powerful performances by each really fired the picture--I agree with one comment I saw that it was almost as if Day-Lewis were channeling Lincoln--and supporting actors like James Spader, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Hal Holbrook, and Gloria Reuben added much depth to the storytelling. Spielberg does a wonderful job of filming Tony Kushner's literate script, and they both made good use of historian Doris Kearns Goodwin's book, Team of Rivals, as source material. Each character was carefully and thoughtfully made human, shown with their flaws and emotions, their strengths and their weaknesses, their passions, and set against the terrible times of the Civil War. I was totally drawn into Lincoln's efforts at getting the amendment passed before the war's end, and his reasons for this were certainly made clear in the film. The production greatly added to my understanding of all the political maneuverings and manipulations, deals, and back room bargaining that went on to make things happen. I'm glad that I took the opportunity to see the film, it was totally worthwhile and satisfying to me as a movie goer and history buff. I would encourage anyone to make the effort to see this film for its outstanding performances and strong story about a very crucial episode in our nation's history.
  
  

DEATH OF KINGS by Bernard Cornwell, 2011.
The year is 899 AD, King Alfred the Great of Wessex is dying, and the kingdom is in turmoil. His lifelong desire to see a unified country is in danger of falling apart, unless his son and successor, Edward, can provide the leadership, cunning and know-how to pull the various tribes together and defeat their common enemies. But Edward, attacked from all sides by Saxon claimants to the throne, as well as Danish invaders, needs help with this daunting task. It falls to the novel's hero, Lord Uhtred, a Saxon raised by Vikings and who is liked and trusted by King Alfred, to participate in the power struggle upon Alfred's death. He had sworn oaths to Alfred but not to Edward to create a united "Anglcynn," so he must decide whether to assist Edward, or to follow his own path to reclaim his family's lands lost years earlier in Northumbria. It is a decision that will change Uhtred's life--and the history of England.
   Cornwell knows how to tell a story, keep it moving at a fast clip, and provide plenty of excitement and adventure. He creates well defined characters and situations, his descriptions are colorful, and his battle scenes are vivid. Uhtred, the main protagonist, he is a powerful warrior, with deeply conflicting loyalties and inner struggles that make him very human. Cornwell has created a multifaceted figure adept at the art of war and other manly exploits, yet who can also express a depth of feeling for several of the other characters, notably the spy Ludda, his sometime mistress Aethelflaed, and for his monarch, King Alfred. I found Uhtred a strong, likeable hero, decisive, determined, and loyal to his beliefs and vows.
   This novel is part of a series called "The Saxon Tales," but I have not read any of the previous books and found this fine to read on its own. I have to admit, though, that perhaps I would not have been so confused by characters' names or needed to continually use the place-name glossary if I had read the earlier stories. Nevertheless, I found this a rousing, stirring tale, complete with a strong and charismatic hero, and with plenty of history, adventure, brutality, and violence to keep me entertained throughout.