@@bill2953 you clearly don't understand the scene or the film; these are the good guys. comparing them to pelosi and schumer is a compliment, not the insult you intend.
@@sirmoonslosthismind I was merely making the observation - sorry I didn't spell it out - that politics haven't changed, the contentious bickering still goes on as it has for 250 plus years. The film is nothing short of brilliant in Daniel Day Lewis' portrayal and the dynamics of the DC political sphere in the 1800's.
It is a great line and still relevant in modern politics. Though I still like his "I do not believe in equality in all things; only equality before the law" speech and then Congressman Yeaman's "I said aye, Mr. McPherson. AAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!"
Lincoln's "compass" retort was also pretty special. I love how one-to-two line segments in this movie annihilate so many stupid, idealistic opinions about politics. 'LINCOLN WAS A RACIST!" Uuuuh, homie, if he didn't say that racist shit, the border states would've joined the confederacy and your ass would be picking cotton. "I DON'T TRUST POLITICIANS!" Bitch, you elected this guy to scheme his way into getting what you voted him in for; if he's disloyal to you, fuck em, but otherwise, you WANT a backstabber on your side to get shit done... "WE NEED TO DEFUND THE POLICE HERE AND MAKE ALL HEALTHCARE FREE THERE NOW!!!" Bruhh, a compass will point you true north, but it doesn't tell you how to get there; "if you plunge ahead heedless of obstacles to achieve nothing more than to sink in a swamp...what good is knowing true north?" This is an essential movie about democracy and politics.
@@alexayers9463 I love that line ("...what's the point in knowing true north") because it is the rebuttal to Stephenson's rebuke of partisan politics. Making a nation, an entire sprawling concatenation of millions, do ANYTHING is complicated. Making it do something radical and unprecedented and permanent is nearly impossible, in any society, let alone a democratic one. Anyone can shout about what everyone SHOULD believe. The funny thing is, depending on what room he's in, Stephens (consummate politician that he is in this movie and was in history) advocates from both sides of this question. To the radical purists, he was a practical man, shoving them off their self-satisfied pedestals in the direction of compromise and progress. To Lincoln, he was the pillar of fire, upbraiding him for falling short of the one true faith. And then he went home, ate dinner, went to bed, got up, and did it all over again. Great movie, to bring that out so nimbly. Tony Kushner FTW.
"Nothing surprises you Asa. Therefore nothing about you is surprising." When you can insult someone without having to use petty names or profanity is impressive.
Yes, but more importantly show that yes bad things have happened in the past, but things can get better as well. In this current age people want to find the horrible things that have happened in history and wave it like an example saying, "Because "A" happened, things will never get better." We need to learn from our past and not only just the mistakes we have done no matter how horrible they were. But to also learn from the great things humanity has accomplished as well.
This movie had 95% completely fictional dialogue. This is a movie, do not confuse it with actual history. There are factual resources to learn American History that are far, far superior to Hollywood movies.
Common cause. Lincoln had proven himself to be more than the master of the situations he was thrust into. And, when Stevens WANTED Lincoln to push for abolition of slavery, he believed that Lincoln would hold to his word. At the very least, Stevens had nothing to lose by pushing forward to abolish slavery through Constitutional Amendment.
Stevens believed in abolition (and full rights, though that was not to be), if given a chance to accomplish one of his life long dreams he was not going to destroy it.
Stevens' cohorts were a bunch of hotheads. Stevens was too but maybe it was his age or his having dealt with Lincoln personally more than the others that made him trust Lincoln. My belief is that Lincoln was always an abolitionist at heart and I'm sure that Stevens picked up that vibe from him, or perhaps even Lincoln told him so.
@@XxowendanxX I agree. I think his personal dealings with old Abe showed him that the prez was a man of character, and also (despite being? 😂) a shrewd pol.
@@dmendez77 it's my belief that Abe was an abolitionist at heart, but not in practice. He lived in a time when men still revered the Constitution and still held to it even when they saw nothing in it that could be used to further their own interests or agenda. If Abe had his druthers about it, he would have abolished slavery at the first opportunity but he believed that the United States Constitution did not permit the federal government to abolish slavery in the states by fiat. That said, once he became president he did take every opportunity to curtail slavery when he found that he could do so without overstepping his boundaries as president. Even when he was not completely sure of his powers to do so, he would do so unless he was convinced that the Constitution forbids it. He decided that if he erred, it would be on the side of emancipation. Witness his Emancipation Proclamation, which historians are fond of pointing out emancipated no one in the strict, legal sense. And of course as the movie illustrates, he used the civil war as a way to hack the Constitution with nearly half the states absent in order to ram the 13th amendment through. Altering the Constitution itself was a way of abolishing slavery while still adhering to his constitutional scruples of limited federal power, which the movie also illustrates irritated the radical Republicans to no end.
Well, Daniel Day-Lewis is the star, so, by definition, he can't really "steal" scenes, per se. But yeah, he and Tommy Lee are both mesmerizing in this film.
Lastly More I don’t know if either steals the show in the scene they’re both in, but I liked the little grin Tommy gives DDL (Lincoln) at the end of they’re discussion. Just a brilliant scene for both of them.
"Nothing surprises you, Asa. Therefore nothing about you is surprising. Perhaps that is why your constituents did not re-elect you to the coming term." This is especially biting considering the Republicans won hard in the last election. Somehow Asa Litton managed to completely miss the Republican wave and lose when the rest of the party gained.
Clay Hawkins (the democrat who votes yes and dares the other dems to shoot him dead) is also fictional. I think he is meant to represent the good conscience of the Democratic Party in the film.
@@neilpemberton5523 Hawkins is meant to represent the congressmen who voted their conscience/kept promise in spite of being bullied and threatened by immovable democrats.
These men have been trying to end slavery for decades, and I love it how Stevens points out that now, when Lincoln has suddenly decided to reintroduce an Amendment for the very thing they want, they don't back him at first.
Notice how large windows used to be. In an era before electrical lighting, people had to take advantage of natural light to the extent possible. Also, long before air-conditioning, ceilings in rooms tended to be quite high to aid in cooling (as warmer air rises and cooler air sinks due to its higher density).
Both this scene and the Alexander Coffroth scene were filmed inside the Thomas Jefferson Room at the Virginia Capitol Building; it’s a room I’ve stepped inside many times.
Not to be "this guy," but...Stevens wasn't the speaker of the House. However he was Chairman of the Ways and Means committee, and enormously influential, especially among the Radicals.
The greatest leaders to be the quietest, because they see more than the screechers. The fact that the speaker spoke little showed he was looking at the merits of the then questionable decision for constitutional amendments
This role is Tommy Lee Jones shining achievement. I dont know if this was accurate, but this character. Holy Hell, definitely my top five characters in all showtime and movie history.
wrongway1100 from what I know of Thaddeus Stevens, this is an excellent portrayal of him. Biting wit, uncompromising beliefs, and one of the sharpest political minds in US history.
This is why I love Thaddeus Stevens. He was a cutthroat politician who didn’t even pretend to reach the other side when it came to the rights of slaves. He knew very well that cooperating with the other side would mean the rights of slaves would be in jeopardy. Being a ruthless partisan who didn’t pretend to be bipartisan helped pass the 13th Amendment. He didn’t believe in this “unity” bullshit because he knew the other side was a threat to the goal of a multiracial democracy. We need more politicians like Thaddeus Stevens today who recognize that “unity” and “bipartisanship” is utter bullshit and that you need to be totally partisan if you want to protect the rights of marginalized groups.
I actually disagree with this whole heartedly. I think partisanship should apply on a case by case basis. I've watched Mitch McConnell deadlock and break literally every procedural event that could even possibly be interpreted as a win for the Democratic party simply because they were in the majority at the time. The same man then turned around and used the fact that he gridlocked said government to try and win more political power by lying about his role in it when pressed or using whataboutisms. This is when he wasn't preventing routine court appointments and then turning around and stacking both the federal courts and the supreme court. The man is a ruthless partisan and would literally oppose the other side of the aisle on any issue just because it isn't his party. He even went so far as to say that the reason he voted to acquit in an impeachment had nothing to do with whether or not said impeachee was guilty or not but purely because they were both members of the same party. What kind of a world do we live in now where a politician in America can do so much harm, say the quiet part out loud, and still have a longstanding career in politics? Ruthless partisanship can be one of the worst things to happen at least in this country. You have to pick which battles are deserving of partisanship and the 13th amendment just happened to be one such battle. That being said it was a good thing Thaddeus was right because a central theme of this film is how trying to pass the 13th amendment at the time Lincoln wanted it passed could have damaged their ability to pass it later. Thaddeus himself also had to compromise his very moral principles for the greater common good by stating he did not believe in equality for all things just to get the amendment passed. Politics is about more than just outright partisanship especially when said partisanship gets you nowhere or will hurt the overall country.
Dammit, now I have to watch the whole thing again. The performances, script, and direction of this film are just astonishingly good. I believe it to be Speilberg's best work, which feels incredible to put into words.
The camera work and direction of this scene is incredible... We don't see Stephens at first...but everyone in the room is anchored around him...and then he says 2 words off camera and he completely halts conversation...He is the power in the room. We finally cut to behind the men we've been talking to and pan to finally reveal his old but powerful frame. We then follow him (never taking the frame off him) and have the door close on our chattering men. Absolute Masterclass.
What great writing, amazing speeches going back and forth. Today’s language is rather dull, mostly loud shouting instead of engaging minds and arguments.
TLJ steals every scene he is in, sucks the air out of every room, cowers every scholar with his knowledge, and I'm told by people in film who worked with him is bat shit crazy. Well that's an educated Texican for you. Reminds me of my Dad.
"When they look at you, at what it cost to live at the heart of this, they'll wonder at it. They'll wonder at you. They should. But they should also look at the wretched woman by your side, if they want to understand what this was truly like. For an ordinary person. For anyone other than you."
It's very sad that he died so early... He could have accomplished more in the time of reconstruction after Andrew Johnson. But unfortunately reconstruction was not popular anymore when Grant came into office. That explains most problems of later american society.
@@kayvan671 The face of Reconstruction that people saw was either bent on vengeance against the South, or bent on self-enrichment at their expense. Of course it was not popular.
In a movie filled with brilliant conversations, this particular one is one of my favorites....Seems so realistic, like how people would really talk...very believable and interesting.
Now its literally just about supporting rich people at the expense of everyone else. Dems do it too but at least there's guys like Bernie sanders and richard ojeda who break the mold
Still are. And the democrats still keep black people down, this time, so the democrat can stand on their shoulders and proclaim that they fight for these people. Even though it’s radical republican president that has done more for blacks in American than Obama didn’t in 8 years. If I were a democrat I’d be embarrassed everywhere I go.
The funny thing they never tell you in this film is that Alexander Stephens was a personal friend of Lincoln’s and that Lincoln trusted him to distribute his letter to the Southern politicians asking them to not secede. Also, Stephens opposed Davis on secession because the one thing that he agreed with William Lloyd Garrison and Lysander Spooner on was that secession would hasten the demise of slavery.
But the movie's called Lincoln. But I agree more of Stephens would have been nice. He was possibly the sanest politician in the Deep South, and with horrible irony ended up the Confederate Vice-President. All he could do in such a powerless role was criticise Davis.
You do know Alexander Stephens gave “the Cornerstone Speech” right? Yeah, he was an ardent Southern democrat, but he was still a rabid white supremacist. He was against secession but praise it as soon as he could.
@cgallegos2106 Yes, I have. The sane Southern politicians tried to stop secession, because everyone agreed the Constitution protected slavery, unless you were stupid enough to secede. Public and legal opinion in the North was overwhelmingly antisecession, and during a war Lincoln could find a legal basis to emancipate slaves who made it to Union lines. Stephens was not insane in supporting slavery, just short-sighted, deluded and callous in the way of the South of his time.
Watching this scene, and having watched the one where Lincoln and Steven talking privately to each other, I understand why Martin Scorsese said the Marvel franchise is not real cinema.
Thaddeus Stevens was a radical abolitionist in the Republican Party. He once said during the Civil War: "And if it's necessary to turn the South into a howling wilderness to free the slaves, so be it." And when he died it took a while to find a cemetery for him, because in his last will he explicitly forbade to be buried on a segregated cemetery. Rather all cemeteries were "whites only" and "others only" at that time. At the end but they found one.
Sounds like the Boston Bomber. As a resident of Boston who was unconvicted of any crime, he had a right to be buried in the public cemetery. But while the good people of Massachusetts demand that others have unsegregated cemeteries, they themselves will not do hard things that the law requires.
Well, to be fair, I'd guess that Trump has even less knowledge of whaling ships than Lincoln did. Not that he'd ever admit that. "Folks we've got to bring whaling back, you send the little boats out with the harpoons, we love the harpoons don't we, and frankly Sleepy Joe wants to take all the harpoons away, you want to lose your country folks, you start by taking the harpoons. They want that, we don't want that, we never wanted that, and we're doing very well with regard to whales, that I can tell you."
It is the biggest tragedy that slavery could not have ended without a war that killed over 600k people and the way it was fought continues bad feelings and more to this day. I wonder if the southern state leaders in 1776 would have accepted its end right then if they could see the deaths
No, the southern agricultural economic engine was built on slave labor. That is why they wouldn't have allowed slavery to end in 1776 and then in 1860 fought against its end. The North saw the Civil war as two things; first pulling back together the Union and then second the end of slavery. The South saw it as a separation of its states from an overbearing North and the saving of its economic engine (which its labor force was the slaves). That is why when the South started the process of ending the war they wanted to be allowed to keep their slaves so their economy wouldn't collapse. Also, the South saw a truce as an ending. The North did not and wanted a surrender and complete re-absorption of the southern states along with the end of Slavery. Reconstruction was to facilitate the whole process.
In 150 years someone will ask this question about politicians from 2020 in relation to climate change. The attitude 'it's a problem for someone else to solve' is the source of a lot of evils.
@@roryclague5876 Perhaps they will. Or perhaps they will laugh and joke about people in the olden times believing in climate change. We can only speculate.
Imagine the state of politics now, in which we can't see this happening on our era. Today, politics feels like fans during a game of football rather than people actually working for the good of all of us. There are things that are better in our era, for sure. Science being one of them just to name an example, but how come we have degradated from the glorious bits and pieces we see in this film, to what we have today? PS: I'm from Venezuela, but I think this has happened across all the globe, sadly.
Daniel Hardman and Alan Shore in the same movie! I wish Denny Crane was in there somewhere too along with Harvey Spectre and Mike Ross and Jessica Pearson could have been a wife of one of the black soldiers, while Shirley Schmidt could have been Lincoln's wife! Wow that would have been just great
I AM THE PRESIDENT OF THE AARON JAN ESTRADA STATES OF AMERICA CLOTHED IN AWESOME, IMMENSE POWER! YOU WILL PROCURE ME THOSE VOTES!" @@aaronjanestrada9484
I disagree. I'm an agnostic and I understand the point of his parables quite well. And yet, many Christians seem to have missed the point entirely. Hmmmmm.
The "problem" with DDL, is that his overwhelming brightness blinds us all to other sources of light. It must be terribly bitter-sweet to work with him.
Not seen here - a cut scene just before the sequence opens where Thaddeus Stevens and Litton argue about which of the three _Kung Fu Panda_ movies is the best one. "Sir, as one gentleman and scholar to another, I say to you with utmost candour that Bryan Cranston's vocal performance as Po's long-lost father made 3 the unadulterated cinematic triumph it assuredly was!"
This scene is why I'm not a fan of a lot of politicians and lawyers. Are you in favor of something being passed or not? Is it a good idea or not? Who cares WHO is getting it passed. Just get it passed.
Well in this case they are afraid it is being used as a bargaining chip, offer to take it off the table if the South returns to the fold. So it isn't entirely certain that their support will actually lead to passage.
It really helps when you 'providers' take the extra three seconds to name and date the damned movie. Some of us have lives and don't live in mom's basement.
@@danthemankhan really that’s wild I had to look it up there was a one invented in the late 1700s but the hydraulic one started being widely used in the late 1910s
@@humbertoflores2545 There was serious risk of him losing reelection. That's why he chose Democrat Andrew Johnson to be his new VP. To appeal to some Democrats. He mostly won because of what happened shortly before the election, loyalty of Union soldiers and people believing that it's their duty to re-elect wartime president, even though the war was extremely unpopular.
The Republican Party was mostly Whigs. Lincoln himself was a Whig longer then he was a Republican and he called Henry Clay, the KY slave holder, the “bough ideal of a statesman”. Some Republicans had been Democrats before. David Wilmot of PA was a Democrat turned Republican but he also had no problem with slavery.
The Whigs were not "very much pro slavery"; just like with Democrats, there were views all across the spectrum. Whigs tended to not be so focused on the issue exactly because it was divisive for their membership and thus not helpful when it came time to pull together and win an election. Though I suppose it is true that every Whig who got elected President was pro-slavery.
The elections immediately after the Civil War prohibited most ex-Confederates from voting, and especially from running for office. So most of the politicians were freed slaves. All the relevant legislatures passed the amendments. But Lincoln had the votes he needed. He needed majorities in 3/4ths (75%) of the state legislatures, and he already had 25/36ths, 70%. Ending slavery would have been far, far more difficult if the southern states had not seceded.
No, their states were governed by pro-Northern Republican governments for about ten years, and besides, once an amendment passes, the only way to throw it out is to repeal it, and the south knew they'd never get the northern states on board with that. They tended to focus more on circumventing the amendments granting citizenship and the right to vote to the freedmen. I wouldn't be surprised if somebody somewhere brought a lawsuit claiming that the southern governments that ratified the amendment weren't representative of their populations (only freed slaves and those who had supported the Union were permitted to vote) and thus their acts were illegitimate, but I doubt it got any traction. It was very much a "rub their secessionist noses in it" era.
In those days every state had their elections at different times but the Congressional term always ended at the same time. Some states had Congressmen in office for over a year after losing re-election.
They switched partially - but that switch really happened in the 1960s. With the civil rights act, that ironically more got more republicans support than democratic support. Republicans during this era were still a small goverment, pro-business, and anti-slavery party. The democratic party was a working class, labor and socially conservative party. They were extremely populist. Vestiges of that Republican party still exist - essentially northern republicans with who are quite popular in blue states, like Charlie Baker and Larry Hogan. In many ways the switch of the parties started back then, but the coalitions have shifted in stages and not all at once. It's almost but not entirely complete now. I think it's likely you'll see pro-growth elements of the Republican party now, who are generally liberal socially, cut ties and become a conservative wing of the democratic party. The process is already starting. FDR for example passed the New Deal, with support of conservative southern democrats - and it was opposed by the Lincoln Wing of the Republicans for being goverment overreach. The anti-goverment strain of Republican thought was alive and well during the civil war. One of the conflicts in the movie was how the Conservative Republicans wanted to end slavery while still maintaining seperation of powers, but the radicals were more willing to expand goverment power if it meant the end of slavery. But both wings were anti-slavery.
Do you hold this metaphor to also apply to the then-Republicans impeaching a President for violating a law they passed for the sole reason of getting him to violate it? Is this a modern Democrat strategy? What about the Compromise of 1876, where the then-Republicans traded protecting the civil rights of Southern blacks for winning the Presidency? Is this a modern Democrat strategy?
God I wish someone would write out this scene but in words I can understand! Lol but for real if someone could write out this scene in modern language and side notes explaining what they are saying actually means and all that would be so amazing and I would dance at their wedding!
"Trust? Oh. I'm sorry, I was under the misapprehension your chosen profession was politics."
A reenactment of Nadler, Schiff, Pelosi & Schumer anti-Trump squabbling.
Lol. Great. Just a great quote.
@@bill2953
you clearly don't understand the scene or the film; these are the good guys. comparing them to pelosi and schumer is a compliment, not the insult you intend.
@@sirmoonslosthismind I was merely making the observation - sorry I didn't spell it out - that politics haven't changed, the contentious bickering still goes on as it has for 250 plus years. The film is nothing short of brilliant in Daniel Day Lewis' portrayal and the dynamics of the DC political sphere in the 1800's.
Bill Do not even in the depths of stupidity equate Lincoln with that shiftless, racist, moron, and tool of a foreign despot.
"Trust? I'm sorry, I was under the misapprehension your chosen profession was politics."
Possibly the greatest line in this whole magnificent movie.
Odysseus Rex possibly. At least the most honest one and the one that best describes this movie as a whole!
It is a great line and still relevant in modern politics. Though I still like his "I do not believe in equality in all things; only equality before the law" speech and then Congressman Yeaman's "I said aye, Mr. McPherson. AAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!"
Lincoln's "compass" retort was also pretty special. I love how one-to-two line segments in this movie annihilate so many stupid, idealistic opinions about politics. 'LINCOLN WAS A RACIST!" Uuuuh, homie, if he didn't say that racist shit, the border states would've joined the confederacy and your ass would be picking cotton. "I DON'T TRUST POLITICIANS!" Bitch, you elected this guy to scheme his way into getting what you voted him in for; if he's disloyal to you, fuck em, but otherwise, you WANT a backstabber on your side to get shit done... "WE NEED TO DEFUND THE POLICE HERE AND MAKE ALL HEALTHCARE FREE THERE NOW!!!" Bruhh, a compass will point you true north, but it doesn't tell you how to get there; "if you plunge ahead heedless of obstacles to achieve nothing more than to sink in a swamp...what good is knowing true north?"
This is an essential movie about democracy and politics.
@@alexayers9463 I love that line ("...what's the point in knowing true north") because it is the rebuttal to Stephenson's rebuke of partisan politics. Making a nation, an entire sprawling concatenation of millions, do ANYTHING is complicated. Making it do something radical and unprecedented and permanent is nearly impossible, in any society, let alone a democratic one. Anyone can shout about what everyone SHOULD believe.
The funny thing is, depending on what room he's in, Stephens (consummate politician that he is in this movie and was in history) advocates from both sides of this question. To the radical purists, he was a practical man, shoving them off their self-satisfied pedestals in the direction of compromise and progress. To Lincoln, he was the pillar of fire, upbraiding him for falling short of the one true faith. And then he went home, ate dinner, went to bed, got up, and did it all over again. Great movie, to bring that out so nimbly. Tony Kushner FTW.
I dunno, I love it when Pendleton gets in a huff with Stevens and all he can do is shout, "HOOOOOOW DAAAAAARE YOOOOUUU!!!"
"Nothing surprises you Asa. Therefore nothing about you is surprising." When you can insult someone without having to use petty names or profanity is impressive.
Thats why Stevens is a complete and utter Chad.
In his next incarnation Thaddeus Stevens became Don Rickles.
Two scenes later he's telling us how he shits on the American people, then tells another man he's got slime for blood.
He could do both.
"Perhaps that is why your constituents did not re-elect you to the coming term."
@@dovbarleib3256 LOL!
"It's late, I'm old, I'm going home." I aspire to use this some day
Why wait?
I'm 52 and I use it now.
Particularly in the middle of the day.
Biden should apply that.
And step down, lol
The only reason why Tommy Lee Jones didn't steal this movie outright was because of Daniel Day Lewis.
@TMWSITY
As president Abraham Lincoln yes.
Tommy Lee Jones did steal this movie profoundly. I've heard movie reviewers describe it as a Thaddeus Stevens movie in disguise.
They were as well-matched as their real-life counterparts.
Tommy Lee Jones is so good, he once stole a scene from himself.
Jones stole the movie for sure. Lewis was good but Hal Holbrook's Lincoln is still the standard to which all other portrayals are judged by!
Damnit, did ANYONE in this movie NOT give their best performance? Total commitment to their roles. Just perfection....😲
I’m sure there was some fly on the wall that phoning it in, but thankfully, we’ll never know! This movie is a rarity in perfection!
I’m starting to think it’s a Spielberg thing. Actors getting in front of his camera and they want to bring it 100%.
Amen. They all should have received Oscars
@@abehambinoThat was the fly in Breaking Bad, she’s the best in the business.
It's one of the best movies ever made. I'd put it in at least the top 20. Just a magnificent movie.
We could use a dozen or a hundred more movies like this, telling the good and bad about American history.
Yes, but more importantly show that yes bad things have happened in the past, but things can get better as well. In this current age people want to find the horrible things that have happened in history and wave it like an example saying, "Because "A" happened, things will never get better." We need to learn from our past and not only just the mistakes we have done no matter how horrible they were. But to also learn from the great things humanity has accomplished as well.
Yeah, cus our fuckin' history teachers don't do it.
@@sempermilites87 Bravo!!
This is one of the best US history movies Hollywood ever produced.
_Spotlight_ is another.
Can anyone recommend to me another?
This movie had 95% completely fictional dialogue. This is a movie, do not confuse it with actual history. There are factual resources to learn American History that are far, far superior to Hollywood movies.
Ironic that despite being perhaps Lincoln's fiercest critic in the movie, Stevens puts faith in him when his fellow radicals don't.
Common cause. Lincoln had proven himself to be more than the master of the situations he was thrust into. And, when Stevens WANTED Lincoln to push for abolition of slavery, he believed that Lincoln would hold to his word.
At the very least, Stevens had nothing to lose by pushing forward to abolish slavery through Constitutional Amendment.
Stevens believed in abolition (and full rights, though that was not to be), if given a chance to accomplish one of his life long dreams he was not going to destroy it.
Stevens' cohorts were a bunch of hotheads. Stevens was too but maybe it was his age or his having dealt with Lincoln personally more than the others that made him trust Lincoln. My belief is that Lincoln was always an abolitionist at heart and I'm sure that Stevens picked up that vibe from him, or perhaps even Lincoln told him so.
@@XxowendanxX I agree. I think his personal dealings with old Abe showed him that the prez was a man of character, and also (despite being? 😂) a shrewd pol.
@@dmendez77 it's my belief that Abe was an abolitionist at heart, but not in practice. He lived in a time when men still revered the Constitution and still held to it even when they saw nothing in it that could be used to further their own interests or agenda. If Abe had his druthers about it, he would have abolished slavery at the first opportunity but he believed that the United States Constitution did not permit the federal government to abolish slavery in the states by fiat. That said, once he became president he did take every opportunity to curtail slavery when he found that he could do so without overstepping his boundaries as president. Even when he was not completely sure of his powers to do so, he would do so unless he was convinced that the Constitution forbids it. He decided that if he erred, it would be on the side of emancipation. Witness his Emancipation Proclamation, which historians are fond of pointing out emancipated no one in the strict, legal sense. And of course as the movie illustrates, he used the civil war as a way to hack the Constitution with nearly half the states absent in order to ram the 13th amendment through. Altering the Constitution itself was a way of abolishing slavery while still adhering to his constitutional scruples of limited federal power, which the movie also illustrates irritated the radical Republicans to no end.
It’s late, I’m old, I’m going home.
Boss: it’s only 11:30am, you’re 26 and your shift just started an hour ago.
Lol
I quote this religiously
Lol
LOL
Hahahaha
Daniel Day Lewis and Tommy Lee Jones steal every scene they're in
How about the scene they were both in? Who steals that scene?
Lastly More Tommy
Well, Daniel Day-Lewis is the star, so, by definition, he can't really "steal" scenes, per se. But yeah, he and Tommy Lee are both mesmerizing in this film.
They are both examples of that increasingly rare actor, the ones who can hold your attention when ever they are on the screen.
Lastly More I don’t know if either steals the show in the scene they’re both in, but I liked the little grin Tommy gives DDL (Lincoln) at the end of they’re discussion. Just a brilliant scene for both of them.
"Nothing surprises you, Asa. Therefore nothing about you is surprising. Perhaps that is why your constituents did not re-elect you to the coming term."
This is especially biting considering the Republicans won hard in the last election. Somehow Asa Litton managed to completely miss the Republican wave and lose when the rest of the party gained.
Asa Litton never existed. He seems to be loosely based on Henry Winter Davis
Yup.
Asa is a compilation character of congressmen who distrusted Lincoln but were adamantly against slavery too
Clay Hawkins (the democrat who votes yes and dares the other dems to shoot him dead) is also fictional. I think he is meant to represent the good conscience of the Democratic Party in the film.
@@neilpemberton5523 Hawkins is meant to represent the congressmen who voted their conscience/kept promise in spite of being bullied and threatened by immovable democrats.
These men have been trying to end slavery for decades, and I love it how Stevens points out that now, when Lincoln has suddenly decided to reintroduce an Amendment for the very thing they want, they don't back him at first.
Notice how large windows used to be. In an era before electrical lighting, people had to take advantage of natural light to the extent possible.
Also, long before air-conditioning, ceilings in rooms tended to be quite high to aid in cooling (as warmer air rises and cooler air sinks due to its higher density).
Great observation buddy-
@@guysalzmann9302 it shows good attention to detail on the part of the production designers.
Overall a wonderful film - another Spielberg masterpiece.
@@sean2015 Indeed! One of my favorite pics! Thx-
Both this scene and the Alexander Coffroth scene were filmed inside the Thomas Jefferson Room at the Virginia Capitol Building; it’s a room I’ve stepped inside many times.
I love how the literal Speaker of the House is the most quiet one in the room XD
Not to be "this guy," but...Stevens wasn't the speaker of the House. However he was Chairman of the Ways and Means committee, and enormously influential, especially among the Radicals.
@@pianoman9421 Oh I was talking about Colfax , who only gets one line in this scene
@@pianoman9421 lmao you’re not “that guy” just an idiot
The greatest leaders to be the quietest, because they see more than the screechers. The fact that the speaker spoke little showed he was looking at the merits of the then questionable decision for constitutional amendments
...I think Thaddeus Stevens just delivered what is called a "Sick Burn".
He was in the habit of doing that in real life, which I feel is the best part.
I believe now in 2020 it is called shade... :)
I believe that the insightful, targeted, devistatingly cutting remark you describe composes the vast majority of Thaddeus Stevens' entire vocabulary.
"Retain - even in opposition - your capacity for astonishment."
This role is Tommy Lee Jones shining achievement. I dont know if this was accurate, but this character. Holy Hell, definitely my top five characters in all showtime and movie history.
wrongway1100 from what I know of Thaddeus Stevens, this is an excellent portrayal of him. Biting wit, uncompromising beliefs, and one of the sharpest political minds in US history.
From what i have read, this is. pretty accurate account.
@@rlkinnard yes he researched his role deeply
This is why I love Thaddeus Stevens. He was a cutthroat politician who didn’t even pretend to reach the other side when it came to the rights of slaves. He knew very well that cooperating with the other side would mean the rights of slaves would be in jeopardy. Being a ruthless partisan who didn’t pretend to be bipartisan helped pass the 13th Amendment. He didn’t believe in this “unity” bullshit because he knew the other side was a threat to the goal of a multiracial democracy.
We need more politicians like Thaddeus Stevens today who recognize that “unity” and “bipartisanship” is utter bullshit and that you need to be totally partisan if you want to protect the rights of marginalized groups.
Thaddeus Stevens and William Lloyd Garrison are my favorite Americans.
That's goddamn right, brother!
Slavery is a bit different to most issues nowadays, though I see your point.
I actually disagree with this whole heartedly. I think partisanship should apply on a case by case basis. I've watched Mitch McConnell deadlock and break literally every procedural event that could even possibly be interpreted as a win for the Democratic party simply because they were in the majority at the time.
The same man then turned around and used the fact that he gridlocked said government to try and win more political power by lying about his role in it when pressed or using whataboutisms. This is when he wasn't preventing routine court appointments and then turning around and stacking both the federal courts and the supreme court. The man is a ruthless partisan and would literally oppose the other side of the aisle on any issue just because it isn't his party.
He even went so far as to say that the reason he voted to acquit in an impeachment had nothing to do with whether or not said impeachee was guilty or not but purely because they were both members of the same party. What kind of a world do we live in now where a politician in America can do so much harm, say the quiet part out loud, and still have a longstanding career in politics? Ruthless partisanship can be one of the worst things to happen at least in this country.
You have to pick which battles are deserving of partisanship and the 13th amendment just happened to be one such battle. That being said it was a good thing Thaddeus was right because a central theme of this film is how trying to pass the 13th amendment at the time Lincoln wanted it passed could have damaged their ability to pass it later.
Thaddeus himself also had to compromise his very moral principles for the greater common good by stating he did not believe in equality for all things just to get the amendment passed. Politics is about more than just outright partisanship especially when said partisanship gets you nowhere or will hurt the overall country.
Found the wild-eyed abolitionist scum.
Go marry your daughter to a freedman and leave us be.
Everyone is praising the actors which is well deserved but I believe the true stars are the screenwriters. Some of the best dialogue in a movie ever.
I love the conversations in this movie!
Dammit, now I have to watch the whole thing again.
The performances, script, and direction of this film are just astonishingly good. I believe it to be Speilberg's best work, which feels incredible to put into words.
Happy 10th anniversary, Lincoln!
My #1 favorite movie!
Released 11/16/2012!
The dialogue in this movie is simply perfect
The camera work and direction of this scene is incredible... We don't see Stephens at first...but everyone in the room is anchored around him...and then he says 2 words off camera and he completely halts conversation...He is the power in the room. We finally cut to behind the men we've been talking to and pan to finally reveal his old but powerful frame. We then follow him (never taking the frame off him) and have the door close on our chattering men. Absolute Masterclass.
DDL deserved his Oscar but TLJ was just as good. What a splendid ensemble cast!
What great writing, amazing speeches going back and forth. Today’s language is rather dull, mostly loud shouting instead of engaging minds and arguments.
Because no one today entertains critical thought. Lemmings.
I love tommy lee as Thaddus Stevens! I'm at the edge of my seat off his every word!
TLJ steals every scene he is in, sucks the air out of every room, cowers every scholar with his knowledge, and I'm told by people in film who worked with him is bat shit crazy. Well that's an educated Texican for you. Reminds me of my Dad.
I believe that 'Lincoln' is the finest work Spielberg has ever done ❤
"When they look at you, at what it cost to live at the heart of this, they'll wonder at it. They'll wonder at you. They should. But they should also look at the wretched woman by your side, if they want to understand what this was truly like. For an ordinary person. For anyone other than you."
I love this scene this how politics act beyond doors 🍺🍻🥂🥃🥃
"Lincoln and the Radicals." Cool band name.
Sounds like a 'ska band from Northern California. Hard pass.
@@theevilascotcompany9255 Understandable.
But Lincoln wasn’t a Radical Republican. He was a pragmatist.
‘Trust? Oh, I’m sorry, I was in the misapprehension you chosen profession was politics.’ 😂😂
Stevens never trusted Lincoln, but they had a respect for one another.
i am not sure about that.
Thaddeus Stevens speaches Majorly contributed to the 13 Amendment getting passed
It's very sad that he died so early...
He could have accomplished more in the time of reconstruction after Andrew Johnson.
But unfortunately reconstruction was not popular anymore when Grant came into office.
That explains most problems of later american society.
@@kayvan671 The face of Reconstruction that people saw was either bent on vengeance against the South, or bent on self-enrichment at their expense. Of course it was not popular.
In a movie filled with brilliant conversations, this particular one is one of my favorites....Seems so realistic, like how people would really talk...very believable and interesting.
Back in the day when the republicans were the radicals
Now its literally just about supporting rich people at the expense of everyone else. Dems do it too but at least there's guys like Bernie sanders and richard ojeda who break the mold
Creepy Closet if you think Bernie sanders isn’t one of those rich bastards then you are just stupid
Still are.
And the democrats still keep black people down, this time, so the democrat can stand on their shoulders and proclaim that they fight for these people.
Even though it’s radical republican president that has done more for blacks in American than Obama didn’t in 8 years.
If I were a democrat I’d be embarrassed everywhere I go.
In the face of SJW dogma, they are again, the radicals....offering radical ideas like individual responsibility, and freedom
1daddy57 freedom? Oh no that’s terrible... who wants freedom besides everyone?
Believe me when I say that I LOVE he had an answer for everything
The funny thing they never tell you in this film is that Alexander Stephens was a personal friend of Lincoln’s and that Lincoln trusted him to distribute his letter to the Southern politicians asking them to not secede. Also, Stephens opposed Davis on secession because the one thing that he agreed with William Lloyd Garrison and Lysander Spooner on was that secession would hasten the demise of slavery.
But the movie's called Lincoln. But I agree more of Stephens would have been nice. He was possibly the sanest politician in the Deep South, and with horrible irony ended up the Confederate Vice-President. All he could do in such a powerless role was criticise Davis.
This scene is about Thaddeus Stevens not Alexander Stephens.
@@neilpemberton5523”the sanest politician in the Deep South”, have you read the “Cornerstone” Speech?
You do know Alexander Stephens gave “the Cornerstone Speech” right?
Yeah, he was an ardent Southern democrat, but he was still a rabid white supremacist. He was against secession but praise it as soon as he could.
@cgallegos2106 Yes, I have. The sane Southern politicians tried to stop secession, because everyone agreed the Constitution protected slavery, unless you were stupid enough to secede. Public and legal opinion in the North was overwhelmingly antisecession, and during a war Lincoln could find a legal basis to emancipate slaves who made it to Union lines. Stephens was not insane in supporting slavery, just short-sighted, deluded and callous in the way of the South of his time.
“The mans never been near a whale ship in his life!”
Lol I remember hearing that line, and thinking to myself “yeah because that’s the point of what he was saying!” 😂
It's likely Lincoln read Melville so he'd have at least an academic idea about whalers and whaling ships even if he'd never actually seen one.
The way TLJ exited the room is the mic drop of the 1860's.
Watching this scene, and having watched the one where Lincoln and Steven talking privately to each other, I understand why Martin Scorsese said the Marvel franchise is not real cinema.
"Mans never been near a whale ship in his life"
Lol dude said that with so much malice
*whale ship
@@jmr1090 sorry i was high as shit
Thaddeus Stevens was a radical abolitionist in the Republican Party. He once said during the Civil War: "And if it's necessary to turn the South into a howling wilderness to free the slaves, so be it." And when he died it took a while to find a cemetery for him, because in his last will he explicitly forbade to be buried on a segregated cemetery. Rather all cemeteries were "whites only" and "others only" at that time. At the end but they found one.
Sounds like the Boston Bomber. As a resident of Boston who was unconvicted of any crime, he had a right to be buried in the public cemetery. But while the good people of Massachusetts demand that others have unsegregated cemeteries, they themselves will not do hard things that the law requires.
Sounds like he had a case of the Woke Mind Virus.
Every time I leave work. “ it’s late, I’m old. I’m going home.”
The old are young at heart. The young are old at heart.
Man, if only Republicans were like this today
"It's late, I itch from syphilis, and you didn't pay me a million dollars." - Trump
Well, to be fair, I'd guess that Trump has even less knowledge of whaling ships than Lincoln did. Not that he'd ever admit that.
"Folks we've got to bring whaling back, you send the little boats out with the harpoons, we love the harpoons don't we, and frankly Sleepy Joe wants to take all the harpoons away, you want to lose your country folks, you start by taking the harpoons. They want that, we don't want that, we never wanted that, and we're doing very well with regard to whales, that I can tell you."
It is the biggest tragedy that slavery could not have ended without a war that killed over 600k people and the way it was fought continues bad feelings and more to this day. I wonder if the southern state leaders in 1776 would have accepted its end right then if they could see the deaths
No, the southern agricultural economic engine was built on slave labor. That is why they wouldn't have allowed slavery to end in 1776 and then in 1860 fought against its end. The North saw the Civil war as two things; first pulling back together the Union and then second the end of slavery. The South saw it as a separation of its states from an overbearing North and the saving of its economic engine (which its labor force was the slaves). That is why when the South started the process of ending the war they wanted to be allowed to keep their slaves so their economy wouldn't collapse. Also, the South saw a truce as an ending. The North did not and wanted a surrender and complete re-absorption of the southern states along with the end of Slavery. Reconstruction was to facilitate the whole process.
In 150 years someone will ask this question about politicians from 2020 in relation to climate change. The attitude 'it's a problem for someone else to solve' is the source of a lot of evils.
@@roryclague5876 Perhaps they will. Or perhaps they will laugh and joke about people in the olden times believing in climate change. We can only speculate.
When republicans were americans....wake up the world is falling apart!!!!!!!!
Imagine the state of politics now, in which we can't see this happening on our era.
Today, politics feels like fans during a game of football rather than people actually working for the good of all of us.
There are things that are better in our era, for sure. Science being one of them just to name an example, but how come we have degradated from the glorious bits and pieces we see in this film, to what we have today?
PS: I'm from Venezuela, but I think this has happened across all the globe, sadly.
@jbl good perspective. Will dig more into it. Thank you!
Well these guys weren't "fighting for the good of all of us", they didn't care one bit about the good of the slave-owners.
Who knows what modern technology you can see in this vid.. btw a great movie I must say
"Retain even in opposition your capacity for astonishment."
Tommy Lee Jones in one of his finest hours
Amazing performances here, everywhere you looked
A bust of Robespierre is an interesting touch
Probably accurate too
Not surprising. They took the mantle of "radical" seriously.
Daniel Hardman and Alan Shore in the same movie! I wish Denny Crane was in there somewhere too along with Harvey Spectre and Mike Ross and Jessica Pearson could have been a wife of one of the black soldiers, while Shirley Schmidt could have been Lincoln's wife! Wow that would have been just great
This was back when Politicians had testicles...
Now look at where we are now...
They still have testicles, they are just in their mouth now.
@@reppinseattle7974 Problem is that those have cancer.
I AM THE PRESIDENT OF THE AARON JAN ESTRADA STATES OF AMERICA CLOTHED IN AWESOME, IMMENSE POWER! YOU WILL PROCURE ME THOSE VOTES!" @@aaronjanestrada9484
@@MegaToonzNetwork wut😂😂😂
@@aaronjanestrada9484 You said that in your 1995 inaugural address!
"Hasn't he surprised you? No. That's because you're boring haha what a burn!
When Jesus spoke in parables it was done to allow those who comprehend what he said while those who don’t believe will not understand
I disagree. I'm an agnostic and I understand the point of his parables quite well. And yet, many Christians seem to have missed the point entirely. Hmmmmm.
Tommy Lee Jones really brought Thaddeus Stevens to life
Yet "Argo" won for Best Picture. I dont mean to denigrate that movie. But this is so great!
Yes of the two "historical" films, the one that was a complete lie won.
The "problem" with DDL, is that his overwhelming brightness blinds us all to other sources of light. It must be terribly bitter-sweet to work with him.
Not seen here - a cut scene just before the sequence opens where Thaddeus Stevens and Litton argue about which of the three _Kung Fu Panda_ movies is the best one. "Sir, as one gentleman and scholar to another, I say to you with utmost candour that Bryan Cranston's vocal performance as Po's long-lost father made 3 the unadulterated cinematic triumph it assuredly was!"
Tommy Lee Jones fucking owns his scenes
What a roaster.
Tommy Lee Jones is a class act.
An absolute masterpiece aside from the pacing issue and historical inaccuracies.
Great Movie-
Daniel Hardmam, Raymond Reddington and The Director of the Cabal enter a bar......
This scene is why I'm not a fan of a lot of politicians and lawyers. Are you in favor of something being passed or not? Is it a good idea or not? Who cares WHO is getting it passed. Just get it passed.
Well in this case they are afraid it is being used as a bargaining chip, offer to take it off the table if the South returns to the fold. So it isn't entirely certain that their support will actually lead to passage.
Tommy lee Jones deserves an Oscar for this performance
I keep replaying the part where the guy say “whalers”. He’s so offended by Lincoln mentioning whale shipping lol.
I think that's a bust of Robespierre on his desk!
Could be Lafayette
I have read elsewhere that it is Robespierre. Stevens was likened to Robespierre by his detractors. Maybe the set designers were making a little joke.
It really helps when you 'providers' take the extra three seconds to name and date the damned movie. Some of us have lives and don't live in mom's basement.
2004, "Dude Where's My Car?".
You're welcome.
Your capacity for astonishment!
Anyone notice the modern door closer at the top of the door!!
Apparently they were invented only a dozen years after this movie was set. Who knew?
@@danthemankhan really that’s wild I had to look it up there was a one invented in the late 1700s but the hydraulic one started being widely used in the late 1910s
Thaddeus Stevens is a Chad.
Thaddeus “Thunderbolt” Stevens
What a cast !
Thaddeus could not sanction Asa's buffoonery.
Stevens Roast Asa 😂
I dub this scene, everyone hates Lincoln
Yeah sure.. and he won the second period by landslade against traitor useless Union General McClellan..
3 of them were defending him
@@humbertoflores2545 There was serious risk of him losing reelection. That's why he chose Democrat Andrew Johnson to be his new VP. To appeal to some Democrats. He mostly won because of what happened shortly before the election, loyalty of Union soldiers and people believing that it's their duty to re-elect wartime president, even though the war was extremely unpopular.
Tommy Lee Jones rose to the occasion in this movie
A bust of Robespierre on his desk? I have to say that choice baffles me but I'm working on it.
Could be Marquis de Lafayette. Would make more sense
@@joeszymaszek1146 Robespierre would certainly be more radical.
Stevens was likened to Robespierre by his detractors, so the bust may have been just an inside joke by the set designers.
I voted McClellan in '64.
I need a bumper sticker: "Don't Blame Me, I Voted Constitutional Union".
You know this fact is particularly interesting to note- Thaddeus Stevens was a Whig at one time, who were very much pro slavery.
prior to the creation of the republican party, there was no party specifically opposed to slavery. the parties were organized around other issues.
The Republican Party was mostly Whigs. Lincoln himself was a Whig longer then he was a Republican and he called Henry Clay, the KY slave holder, the “bough ideal of a statesman”. Some Republicans had been Democrats before. David Wilmot of PA was a Democrat turned Republican but he also had no problem with slavery.
He was also Know-nothing at one point.
The Whigs were not "very much pro slavery"; just like with Democrats, there were views all across the spectrum. Whigs tended to not be so focused on the issue exactly because it was divisive for their membership and thus not helpful when it came time to pull together and win an election.
Though I suppose it is true that every Whig who got elected President was pro-slavery.
Stevens was a king.
G
G
Gg
The disunited Republican Party... Somethings never change.
.....MIC DROP!
nobody:
senator wayde: wHaLeRs???
Don't give your soul to the pony = Don't trust the pony.
???
@@jt7638 it might already be too late some ponies aren't meant for the light.
Funny how Britain abolished slavery in 1834 and France in 1848 took America a little longer
Question from a Canadian: did the south try to throw out the 13th amendment when they rejoined the union?
The elections immediately after the Civil War prohibited most ex-Confederates from voting, and especially from running for office. So most of the politicians were freed slaves. All the relevant legislatures passed the amendments. But Lincoln had the votes he needed. He needed majorities in 3/4ths (75%) of the state legislatures, and he already had 25/36ths, 70%. Ending slavery would have been far, far more difficult if the southern states had not seceded.
No, their states were governed by pro-Northern Republican governments for about ten years, and besides, once an amendment passes, the only way to throw it out is to repeal it, and the south knew they'd never get the northern states on board with that.
They tended to focus more on circumventing the amendments granting citizenship and the right to vote to the freedmen.
I wouldn't be surprised if somebody somewhere brought a lawsuit claiming that the southern governments that ratified the amendment weren't representative of their populations (only freed slaves and those who had supported the Union were permitted to vote) and thus their acts were illegitimate, but I doubt it got any traction. It was very much a "rub their secessionist noses in it" era.
Nice
If Asa wasn't re-elected why is he in the House of Representatives at all?
@Benj Smith Productions He's a lame-duck politician essentially. Lost the election but his term isn't up yet
In those days every state had their elections at different times but the Congressional term always ended at the same time. Some states had Congressmen in office for over a year after losing re-election.
Nice.
Compare this with Republicans in the 21st Century and be sad for a moment.
Just a gentle reminder that the names for the parties were switched back then.
Republican = Modern Democrat
Democrat = Modern Republican
in important ways yes but certainly not in every way
Modern Democrat?
Dude no.
Republicans back then were totally progressives.
You just insulted them as Democrats.
They switched partially - but that switch really happened in the 1960s. With the civil rights act, that ironically more got more republicans support than democratic support.
Republicans during this era were still a small goverment, pro-business, and anti-slavery party. The democratic party was a working class, labor and socially conservative party. They were extremely populist. Vestiges of that Republican party still exist - essentially northern republicans with who are quite popular in blue states, like Charlie Baker and Larry Hogan.
In many ways the switch of the parties started back then, but the coalitions have shifted in stages and not all at once. It's almost but not entirely complete now. I think it's likely you'll see pro-growth elements of the Republican party now, who are generally liberal socially, cut ties and become a conservative wing of the democratic party. The process is already starting.
FDR for example passed the New Deal, with support of conservative southern democrats - and it was opposed by the Lincoln Wing of the Republicans for being goverment overreach. The anti-goverment strain of Republican thought was alive and well during the civil war. One of the conflicts in the movie was how the Conservative Republicans wanted to end slavery while still maintaining seperation of powers, but the radicals were more willing to expand goverment power if it meant the end of slavery. But both wings were anti-slavery.
Not quite that simple.
Do you hold this metaphor to also apply to the then-Republicans impeaching a President for violating a law they passed for the sole reason of getting him to violate it? Is this a modern Democrat strategy?
What about the Compromise of 1876, where the then-Republicans traded protecting the civil rights of Southern blacks for winning the Presidency? Is this a modern Democrat strategy?
Don't mix fact with cinematic license ...
Ok. Pay attention. Ill explain his witts.
God I wish someone would write out this scene but in words I can understand! Lol but for real if someone could write out this scene in modern language and side notes explaining what they are saying actually means and all that would be so amazing and I would dance at their wedding!
where is Lincoln? he is blowing his body guard.