Review: Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter

Although the title is perfectly apt, I suppose a plot synopsis is traditional: Set in the 1800s and beginning in 1818 where a young Abraham Lincoln witnesses the evil Jack Barts (a well-cast Marton Csokas) break into the family home and drink the blood of Abraham’s mum. Yep, he’s a creature of the night. Years later, Abraham (now played by Benjamin Walker) attempts to kill Barts, before running into Henry Sturgess (Dominic Cooper), who advises him against such an action. Sturgess also reveals himself to be a vampire hunter, and agrees to train the young Abe to become his apprentice, Abe eventually wielding a silver-tipped axe (the only weapon/tool he seems competent in). Abe still wants Barts dead, but instead Sturgess insists on a specific order of vampires to kill, and like it or not, Barts’ time has not yet come. So by day Lincoln studies to be a lawyer, pays bills working in a general store owned by friendly Joshua (Jimmi Simpson), and by night he hunts down bloodsuckers. He also finds the time to romance Mary Todd (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), and eventually moves into politics, finally achieving the highest of offices, President of the United States. He even enacts the Emancipation Proclamation, though this time he’s freeing the slaves from being used for food/beverage by vampires. Anthony Mackie turns up as the adult version of a young black boy Abe saves from being whipped by nasty Barts. Rufus Sewell plays the chief vampire villain for most of the film, and leader of the ‘slave trade’. Alan Tudyk plays Stephen Douglas, a foppish potential suitor for Todd.

 

I knew I was most probably going to enjoy this 2012 film from director Timur Bekmambetov (the somewhat watchable Angelina Jolie action flick “Wanted”) and screenwriter/novelist Seth Grahame-Smith (based on his graphic novel) from the schlocky title alone. And indeed it is quite a bit of fun. But is it actually a good movie? Well, that’s a little hard to answer, and in fact, despite some schlocky elements, it actually takes itself a whole lot more seriously than I had expected. However, I think if pressed I’d still come out on the affirmative side here. Oh, and anyone who questions this film’s historical accuracy is a fucking idiot. Look at the title, you hosers. And if you still don’t get the gag, you’re gonna hate what this film does to the Battle of Gettysberg. Me, I thought it was hilarious, and if the real-life event was anything like this, I doubt you’d be getting any re-enactments of it.

 

It’s a well-directed and impressive-looking film and every bit as visually dynamic as you’d expect from the director. It has been very well-shot by cinematographer Caleb Deschanel (“The Right Stuff”, “The Natural”, “The Patriot”), especially the lighting (though apparently the 3D version fucks things up. I feel sorry for you poor suckers, I truly do). Anything that looks a bit foggy and moon-lit tends to be up my alley.

 

Co-stars Dominic Cooper and the absolutely luminous Mary Elizabeth Winstead are better than Liam Neeson lookalike Benjamin Walker in the title role, but durable villain Rufus Sewell ought to have been in more of the film, if you ask me. I’ve heard he doesn’t have an equivalent in the graphic novel, so perhaps the Sewell and Csokas roles would’ve been better combined and played by Sewell alone. Jimmi Simpson, meanwhile, seems to be channelling Brad Dourif as a shopkeeper turned Lincoln sidekick, and it’s the most likeable he’s ever been. It’s not much of a role, but foppish Alan Tudyk is perfectly cast as Stephen Douglas.

 

I was just so shocked at how seriously this was all playing out, and especially, surprised that it wasn’t a bad strategy. Instead of the “Bubba Ho-Tep” approach I was expecting, it was more “Blade”, a cheesy B-movie, but with much less emphasis on humour and schlock (at least at face value). Mind you, if vampires can’t kill vampires as suggested here, I guess Blade never got the memo. Then again, given what happens to slaves in this, maybe Blade had an extra incentive for hating blood-suckers! Actually, if anything, it’s more in the vein of a Hammer horror film, and that vibe, plus the film’s look are very indicative of Tim Burton (“Batman”, “Sleepy Hollow”, “Dark Shadows”- written by Mr. Grahame-Smith, no less), even if you didn’t notice his name listed as one of the producers.

 

I can understand why a lot of people would not want to watch this, but I can’t understand how anyone could watch this and not be mostly entertained by it. It’s not quite the film I was expecting, but it’s hardly a bad film, either. After liking “Jonah Hex”, perhaps my opinion no longer means a damn thing, but this was entertaining stuff. Those are some truly ugly vampires, by the way, if not nearly as spine-chilling as the vamps in “30 Days of Night” (another vampire film based on a graphic novel).

 

Rating: B-