Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter And Why Hollywood Should Stick To Biopics
What the hell happened to ‘based on a true story?’
Folks, whether you’ve noticed or not, there’s a new trend seeping through Hollywood. That trend is to take a historical figure and put them in an impossible scenario, which we know never happened, for the sake of entertainment.
The two most recent examples of this have been Anonymous – based on the Oxfordian theory of Shakespearean authorship- and The Raven – featuring Edgar Allan Poe as a Sherlock Holmes-esque detective. Now there’s Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Slayer.
Maybe the third time will be the proverbial charm?
So basically, Lincoln’s mother, (who actually died of milk sickness when he was nine) is killed by vampires, driving him to “kill them all” no Odd Future in order to avenge her.
These vampires are aided by slavemasters and even seem to take part in the Civil War. Actor Benjamin Walker, who beat Nicolas Cage for the role, stars as Lincoln in the film, which was principally filmed in the state of Louisiana.
Now while it can certainly be entertaining to re-imagine one of the nation’s most revered leaders as a badass, masterful killer of the undead, there’s one problem with such re-imaginings. This same problem presents itself in Anonymous as well as The Raven.
The very compelling and true stories of Shakespeare, Poe, and Lincoln have never really been told in the modern film era! There’s enough to be explored, enough secrets and story arcs to be uncovered and depicted – as true life is often more talented at twists and turns than screenwriters – to make incredible movie magic.
Both of the other films mentioned here had underwhelming releases. Will this historical fiction (fantasy?) film be any different? If not, will Hollywood get the message and leave films of this type alone – at least until the biopics are released?
Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Slayer will be released to theaters on June 22.
The true story of Mr. Shakespeare of Stratford is less than compelling for one simple fact. We know nothing about him. Everything is speculation. The fact that some works were published under the attribute of William Shakespeare does not identify the man behind the name. There is nothing in his handwriting ever discovered except for six almost illegible signatures. There are no letters, no correspondence, no manuscripts, no paper trail at all to identify the man behind the name, not a single word. Nobody claims to having ever met the man. When contemporaries refer to William Shakespeare, they are referring to the name on the title page and nothing else.
The few facts we know about Shakespeare from Stratford are stretched, pulled, and twisted to make it plausible that he was the author. There is nothing in his biography to connect him with the works. He seems merely to have been a man of the world, buying up property, laying in ample stocks of barley and malt, when others were starving, selling off his surpluses and pursuing debtors in court….
On the other hand, the evidence that de Vere is the true author is very strong and the premise of the film “Anonymous” makes good sense even though it is a fictional film, not a documentary.
Do your homework before being so critical. The trend isn’t derived directly from Hollywood. The movie is based off of a New York Times bestseller. It is clearly fiction in the horror genre and should be treated as such.
Yeah! This is the stuppidest (if that’s a word) thing I have ever heard of. I don’t like that they are portraying the former President in that negative lite. It’s an insult if I’ve ever seen one. Some things and people should be off limits and the Presidents is one of them. I won’t contribute to the maker of this movie pocket. Thanks for providing this site for comments on this.