Lincoln

eroc

New member
Except slavery was not made an issue until Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, in September 1862, when Abraham Lincoln decided to free the slaves in the Confederate States in order to punish those states for continuing the war effort. The war had been in progress for almost two years by that time.

Most southerners did not even own slaves nor did they own plantations. Most of them were small farmers who worked their farms with their families. They were fighting for their rights. They were fighting to maintain their lifestyle and their independence
way without the United States Government dictating to them how they should behave.

Lincoln didn't want to end slavery, only stop it's expansion into new territories. The reasons for the Civil War were different economies, state’s rights to vote on laws, and the election of Abraham Lincoln as president.

The War Between the States began because the South demanded States' rights and were not getting them. The Congress at that time heavily favored the industrialized northern states to the point of demanding that the South sell is cotton and other raw materials only to the factories in the north, rather than to other countries. The Congress also taxed the finished materials that the northern industries produced heavily, making finished products that the South wanted, unaffordable.

The Civil War should not have occurred. If the Northern States and their representatives in Congress had only listened to the problems of the South, and stopped these practices that were almost like the taxation without representation of Great Britain, then the Southern states would not have seceded and the war would not have occurred.

I would never say that I supported my southern heritage during the Civil War, but there was more to it than ending the awful truth of slavery, which was dying out anyway.
 

Travis85

New member
Slavery was always the number one issue leading up to the civil war and through-out. The Dred Scott case had at that time lit a fire under abolitionist movements in the North. Southern congressmen (the South was the center of political power at that time) were concerned about abolitionists helping slaves escape to free territory, and also not returning escaped slaves when they were found. They attempted to expand slavery into free states and territories by getting the government to agree that it was unconstitutional for any state or territory to ban slavery.

They were especially upset with the Northwest territory which was created by Thomas Jefferson (now known as the midwest) because this entire territory banned slavery outright before it was even recognized as a territory. Abraham Lincoln won the election, because he was fighting against the expansion of slavery into the free states and terrorities, because Northerners felt that the Southern congressmen were violating their states rights by forcing slavery into their states and territories. Lincoln was not threatening the South's way of life or their states rights. He was simply trying to prevent them from violating the rights of the northern states, by preventing them from forcing the institution of slavery into the north.

Because many southerns hated Lincoln for his staunch anti-slavery speeches which are evident in his speeches and his debates with Douglas, they seceded (not even legally) and launched the first attack. I am not saying that the civil war was carried out well or that bad deeds were not committed against the South during the war, but I do not believe it was an issue of the North violating the Souths rights, since all the North was trying to do was prevent slavery in their territory where it was not wanted.

I'm not saying there weren't other reasons, but the main reason was always centered around slavery. The want by the South to expand slavery is what lead to Lincolns victory and the South had no real reason to secede from the Union, since Lincoln always stated he would not attempt to ban slavery in the south, just keep it illegal in the North, since he knew any overt movement to ban it in the south would lead to a civil war. This is the same reason John Adams and Thomas Jefferson were not able to ban it in the US constitution when they attempted to do so. Lincoln even stated after the Southern states seceded, that he would not go to war with them even though he disagreed with their secession. The South fired the first shot of the war when they attacked a Northern fort unprovoked.

Although Lincoln did not favor banning slavery outright in the south, he was still a life long abolitionist and this can be seen in speeches and letters from early in his career.
 
Last edited:

Travis85

New member
Sorry if anything I posted may have offended any of my Southern compatriots. It was not my intention to do so, I just had my own take on the cause of the civil war.
 

The Man

Well-known member
What did everybody think of Amistad? I've only seen bits and pieces, but Hopkins seemed terrific in it.
 

eroc

New member
Travis85 said:
Sorry if anything I posted may have offended any of my Southern compatriots. It was not my intention to do so, I just had my own take on the cause of the civil war.


Definitely no offense taken. I just had to say that the issues that led to the start of the Civil War ran deeper than only the freedom for for our enslaved fellow man.

I'm from the south, but I'm educated and in no way feel that the south was justified in continuing to enslave other human beings as their workforce. In the same breath I can also say that the north didn't do anything to ease the burden the south was facing or make it any easier to transition from slave labor to mechanized, paid labor. They made it impossible, really. The north put the south in a catch-22.

Today, Kudzu is the blight of the south, in 1861 it was Abe Lincoln and the north. We were all losers. Hopefully, lessons were learned.

The only people in the south, today, that support the causes of the Confederacy are Nascar lovin, under-educated, redneck, bigots. But they are everywhere aren't they?

Oh, and I'm a white southerner that supports Obama. (y)
 

The Man

Well-known member
Get thoses skates on, Stevie..!*

Jeff Wells has received one of his now famous third party bits of information and this time he brings news that we just might see Steven Spielberg?s Lincoln getting the greenlight in the next week or so.

The news comes as one of his readers reports from a Harvard University Institute of Politics forum at which playwright and Lincoln scripter Tony Kushner is speaking and said ?the decision will be made on Lincoln next week? and that if the green light is given the film will be ?out by Christmas.?



*Of course, any rumours that Booth merely shoots Abe in the foot by accident are totally unfounded...
 

HovitosKing

Well-known member
Travis85 said:
Slavery was always the number one issue leading up to the civil war and through-out.

Actually it was an attempted secession of Southern states. If you want to be, you know, accurate.
 

RedeemedChild

New member
As far as Liam Neeson being overexposed I must disagree. I don't think he is as overexposed as Orlando Bloom, Ian McShane, William Shatner, Samuel Jackson, J.Lo or Johnny Depp.

I personally feel that Liam is the perfect actor for Abraham Lincoln and I am looking forward to this movie. I hope the tone of this movie will be much like the Amazing Grace movie that was released not to long ago which dwelt with the subject of slavery as well. I think Steven Spielberg is a good movie producer and I look forward to seeing his spin on this subject.
 

deckard24

New member
For me the big question is will Ford be in it? Neeson is a given, considering there's no one else in Hollywood who can pull off that role and bring the necessary physical aspect to it. But I'm really curious to see if Ford might have a role! It would be pretty cool to see him in a film with Spielberg other then an Indy flick!
 

TheMutt92

New member
deckard24 said:
But I'm really curious to see if Ford might have a role! It would be pretty cool to see him in a film with Spielberg other then an Indy flick!

Agreed!

But what would he play? Grant? Any other parts confirmed for the film?
 

deckard24

New member
TheMutt92 said:
Agreed!

But what would he play? Grant? Any other parts confirmed for the film?
According to IMDB there are no other parts confirmed but Mary Todd Lincoln, and that's apparently being played by Sally Field! Yeah Grant could be interesting for Ford, but other then that I'm not sure? I do really hope he starts taking some interesting roles in some serious dramatic pieces! He's got so much more to offer then just the Firewall and Working Girl type roles! Case in point The Mosquito Coast and Witness.
 

WilliamBoyd8

Active member
I am wondering if the "Spielberg Lincoln Movie" is an urban legend.

How could Spielberg utilize his two favorite themes, Aliens and Nazis,
in a movie about Abraham Lincoln?

:)
 

The Man

Well-known member
Still No Green Light...

Jim Hill Media reported last week that Lincoln, which had been developed by DreamWorks and Paramount, might become a Disney project as part of Spielberg's new distribution deal with the studio.

But according to The Big Money, Lincoln is still at Paramount not Disney. "This past weekend, (Spielberg's) been waiting for executives at Paramount ? the studio he ditched last year ? to decide whether to make the film and hire him to direct it," the site reports. "DreamWorks intended to write another big check to retain the right to partner on and produce a separate batch of projects that it had to leave behind at Paramount. In that latter batch was Lincoln. But to stay in the game on Lincoln and the other projects, DreamWorks had to buy two completed films that it made during its time at Paramount (The Lovely Bones and A Thousand Words). And DreamWorks didn't have the money. So now Paramount is deciding whether it wants to make Lincoln."

The site claims Spielberg has shaved the budget on Lincoln down to $50 million, but that Paramount brass are still iffy because they feel the project is too much in the vein of Spielberg's commercially disappointing historical drama Amistad.
 

Hawkeye

New member
I gotta say, I am truly stoked to see this movie. I'm pretty much obsessed with anything and everything concerining the Civil War, so this is one of those films I'll be seeing on opening day. It'll be interesting to see what goes into the final film, especially with Spielberg directing. As for casting, Liam Neeson is practically a Lincoln doppleganger. And Sally Field is a ringer for Mary Todd, too. It's great to see that the Berg is keeping the cast historically accurate as far as looks. Not sure who Harrison Ford could play, but judging by the bookends in "Mystery of the Blues", he might pass off as "Unconditional Surrender".
 

TheMutt92

New member
How fitting this is to be announced on the anniversary of the Gettysburg Address. After much delay and recasting, the film is set to shoot in 2011 w/ Daniel Day-Lewis stepping in for Liam Neeson...

http://www.slashfilm.com/daniel-day-lewis-lincoln-steven-spielberg/

This is big stuff: DreamWorks has just sent out a press release announcing that Daniel Day-Lewis will star as Abraham Lincoln in Steven Spielberg‘s long-planned and oft-delayed Lincoln.

Filming is expected to begin in the fall of 2011 for release in the fourth quarter of 2012 through Disney’s Touchstone distribution label.

The casting of DDL is really inspired, and the fact that this is a Spielberg film gets me all the more excited. As dissapointed as I am that Liam Neeson had to bow out after nearly five years of preparation, something tells me that this project will be something special, as we all know DDL is very selective of his projects (Nine aside). Looks like after his varied abscenses over the past couple of years, Spielberg is back as a director in full force.
 
Last edited:

TheMutt92

New member
Shooting and location scouting in Virginia...

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2010/11/spielbergs_lincoln_film_to_tak.html

State officials have offered superstar film director Steven Spielberg tax credits to film his new movie on Abraham Lincoln in Virginia, several sources in Gov. Bob McDonnell's administration tell us.

Spielberg was scouting locations in Richmond last week when he stopped to have lunch with Rita McClenny, director of the Virginia Film Office, and Andy Edmunds, the office's location manager, at Millie's Diner.
 
Top