A movie where U.S. President Abraham Lincoln (the so called five dallors joke I made in the thread title,) fights vampires?  Sounds too cool.  That's the plot for Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Hunter.  Comes out June 22.  Good timing as vampires are really popular now.  Like to know if anyone going to see it.

The sequel will probably have George Washington traveling to Honest Abe's time to fight alongside him against werewolves or zomibes in Texas.

Surely you jest ??

But I have a feeling - **NOT** !!!

I saw the previews for it.  It sounds a bit farfetched, but it might be fun anyway.  

Old Abe - had a bit of the night about him...

Well if Elizabeth Bennett and Mr D'arcy can vanquish the zombies in Pride & Prejudice & Zombies, I don't see why Abe Lincoln or any other historical figure should be off-limits.   

Excuse my seeming pomposity - but I reall **DFO** appreciate GOOD humour !

But these days we seem to be descending into LCD !

(Lowest Common Denomenator) !!

Originally Posted By Len Green (16 JUN 2012 1:46pm)

Excuse my seeming pomposity - but I reall **DFO** appreciate GOOD humour !

But these days we seem to be descending into LCD !

(Lowest Common Denomenator) !!

P.S.

  Don't get me wrong !

I'm not 'against' these films because they parody Lincoln, or the Bennets - they can do the same with Einstein or the Queen of England or Bibi Netanyahu for all I care (on 2nd thoughts the latter might be a good idea - we take politics TOO seriously here!).

It is the juxtaposition of these celebrity names with the crassness of vampires, zombies, and all the other imaginary creatures that seems rather silly & time-wasting to me !!! 

Personally I think pornography is far more harmful to young minds than a bit of zombie stupidity.  Inaccurate 'history' movies however do seem to convince a large portion of the population that they have seen 'the truth'.  But somehow, I don't think the population is taken in by vampires or zombies. 

Originally Posted By Caroline (16 JUN 2012 4:40pm)

Personally I think pornography is far more harmful to young minds than a bit of zombie stupidity.  Inaccurate 'history' movies however do seem to convince a large portion of the population that they have seen 'the truth'.  But somehow, I don't think the population is taken in by vampires or zombies. 

Maybe I missed something but I didn't read anything here about **HARMFUL** & certainly not about **PORNOGRAPHY**!

Just a sheer waste of limited entertainment time - like so much other complete trash of different sorts churned out these days !

So many enjoyable other worth whilenthings to do these days - why wast time on total rubbish ? 

As someone who loves films in general I don't see how you can say it's rubbish without even seeing it?

I love horror films, especially have a soft spot for b-movie horror films, especially older ones, IE - Fright Night (The original), Monster Squad, CHUD, Return of the living dead, Re-Animator, plus a ton more. Growing up in the 80's/early 90's I have many fond memories of staying up late and catching movies my parents probably "wouldn't" let me see or having friends over and them bringing some vhs tapes of movies they took from their parents and we watched them.

The label of "wasting time" can be put on about anything outside from science and pushing technology/medical boundries, what people do for hobbies is not wasting time imo, we can't just work work work all the time. I'm sure most of you are here becuase you enjoy Adventure gaming, and there are a TON of people out in the world that would say gaming is "wasting time."

A bit back to the topic but, I will wait for reviews on this one. It could be decent if they dont' try to be serious about it, go a bit tongue in cheek about the whole thing.

After watching the Hatfields & The McCoys series and seeing the success of it as a 19th century period piece, I had thought, 'Great, maybe we'll see some money put into some other great stories, such as the search for John Wilkes Booth or even Washington's crossing of the Delaware. Then I go to see Prometheus and there in the previews is what looks like a polished production having to do with Lincoln only to quickly find that it's Lincoln, Vampire Fighter.  Sorry, I can't help it, I find the whole concept pathetic. Lincoln was one of the great presidents and this the only subject they can come up with that will appeal to people? 

WHERE WOULD THE WORLD BE WITHOUT SUBJECTIVE DIFFERENCES OF OPINION ?

The same goes for **horror** but very much more so. There is so much real life horror & atrocities going on all around us, at home & even more so abroad that I don't find it attractive to watch more  - neither in films nor in computer games.

As far as pornography is concerned. Please don't clobber me, but a little bit of 'clean'

The *REAL* pornography is **VIOLENCE** including torture, brutality & rape.

Originally Posted By Caroline (16 JUN 2012 4:40pm)

Personally I think pornography is far more harmful to young minds than a bit of zombie stupidity.  Inaccurate 'history' movies however do seem to convince a large portion of the population that they have seen 'the truth'.  But somehow, I don't think the population is taken in by vampires or zombies. 

The issue with "historical" fiction goes a bit deeper than just movies. Some old historical fiction has become accepted truths for the population at large.

Example: A lot of what I learnt in elementary school about vikings was in fact based on a few national romantic works of fiction from the 19th century...

And people do tend to believe the first thing they hear about a subject, as long as it is portrayed as relatively believable (like for an example the movie Kingdom of Heaven, which was a nice movie, but it did a lot to spread misinformation about the crusades)

Some movies though, like the Abe Lincoln vampire hunter movie or "Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter" (they do seem to like pitting famous characters against vampires, don't they?) won't fool anyone. And movies like this does have some entertainment value, in a campy kind of way.

And trash has always been churned out at a far higher rate than quality. Just look at all the B-movies from the 40's & 50's, which often were so bad that they became entertaining. There was a whole industry built around these "trash" movies. At least these days they get enough of a budget as to allow them to use actors who at least know the basics of acting.

And many of the old B-movies were pretty good incubators for other actors. Jack Nicholson, a pretty good actor, started his career with B-movies, as did DiCaprio (Gilbert Grape was actually not his first movie, Critters 3 was)

Yes Fnord :-

I agree nearly all of the B-movies were terrible.

But I don't know who here lived in the era when I was young (and went to the cinema almost every week).

But in those far off days the program ALWAYS consisted of *TWO* films - the main attraction and the inferior B-film --- and generally some entertainment in between, often an organist playing popular songs to which the audience was invited to join in and sing along.

OH BOY - those were the days - and all for about a shilling !!!

Fnord :-

I haven't seen the movie "Kingdom of Heaven" but am willing to believe that its history is more than a tiny bit questionable.The Crusades is one of the (many) periods of history I knew little about  - Saladin, Richard the Lionheart, Knights Templar, Kingdom of Jerusalem, and nothing much more !

And then just a few days ago there was a 4-part (50 minutes) documentary on our TV History channel which i suppose was fairly authentic.

I had been taught in elementary school that the Muslims were pretty bloodthirsty.

What I did not know was how savage the Crusaders were - all in the name of Jesus Christ who I believe preached peace, gentility & 'Turn the other cheek.

According to this series, the Crusaders even resorted to cannibalism to scare their enemies half to death

WOW - this country is steeped in blood  - I think the soil must be saturated with it

What with the Persians, & Babylonians, and then the Greeks & the Romans, and then the Crusades &bthe Ottomans --- and finally NOW with the Israelis and their sworn enemies

And even though the B-movies were terrible, one can't deny that they at least had a certain charm. Hardly movies that I would recommend, but good for a laugh.

And war always bring out the worst in humanity, the crusades was no exception. The crusades actually came to be almost by accident. The first crusade happened because the Byzantine empire (at that point in pretty bad shape) had problems with Turks moving into their territory, and effectively blocking the rout to the holy land. They had no issues with the actual Muslim kingdoms themselves, in fact they considered themselves allies with Egypt, and were on good terms with most of the region, and the Muslims had nothing against christian pilgrims, they did not only bring lucrative trade, but also knowledge about the land in the west (Baghdad was at this point the worlds center of learning, and they actively encouraged people to come there, to share knowledge with each other, which helped everyone).

The emperor of the Byzantine empire (Alexius) asked the pope for help with the Turks, and at the same time he assured his neighbors to the east & south that it was an army under his command, and that it was safe. The pope sent out words to the major christian kingdoms, who in turn gathered armies of their own, but due to lack of communication, poor planing and probably several other reasons, the whole thing got out of hand, the crusaders started with clearing the road to the holy land, but sadly they did not stop there. And that was how the crusades came to be, totally pointless wars that just ended up in a lot of lost lives. 

 Both sides committed atrocities, but one of the most well known, and provocative was actually made by Richard the Lionheart (who is often portrayed as a good guy in movies & literature). He ended up killing his Muslim prisoners, probably to intentionally provoke the Muslims.

And there were also a lot of pointless minor crusades (they were not all limited to the holy land). Sweden sent out a "crusade" against the mostly christian western Finland (and came home with a lot of loot...), forcefully baptizing people, no matter what if they had already been baptized 

The time is quite interesting to read about, and the whole ordeal caused some major changes to the society of that time. But I think this has been off topic enough for now

Maybe "Off Topic" as you sy Fnord, but very interesting

This thread has taken a very interesting turn.  I'm contemplating buying a book about the Byzantine Empire: Lost to the West: The Forgotten Byzantine Empire That Rescued Western Civilization by Lars Brownworth.  I already have a book on this subject which I haven't read yet but the reviews seem to be extremely positive.

Btw, Richard the Lionheart was not a very nice man at all and atrocities in war are by no means restricted to 'the other side' or history. Indeed, everyday suburban violence is endemic and requires no theatre of war.  I think we must all accept that we possess the capacity for it but only our leaders have armies they can use to magnify their violent desires. 

As for the crusades, the Christian armies were often augmented with Muslim mercenaries which puts a different slant on the Holy War propaganda.

IMHO there was nothing whatsoever sanctified abouttthat "Holy War" on either or any side.

Originally Posted By Caroline (17 JUN 2012 8:14pm)

This thread has taken a very interesting turn.  I'm contemplating buying a book about the Byzantine Empire: Lost to the West: The Forgotten Byzantine Empire That Rescued Western Civilization by Lars Brownworth.  I already have a book on this subject which I haven't read yet but the reviews seem to be extremely positive.

 

Btw, Richard the Lionheart was not a very nice man at all and atrocities in war are by no means restricted to 'the other side' or history. Indeed, everyday suburban violence is endemic and requires no theatre of war.  I think we must all accept that we possess the capacity for it but only our leaders have armies they can use to magnify their violent desires. 

 

As for the crusades, the Christian armies were often augmented with Muslim mercenaries which puts a different slant on the Holy War propaganda.

Rosengård, Malmö (southern part of Sweden), last year. Yes, things really did get out of hand down there, suburban violence wrapped the entire region in a blanket of fear. While there are less reports of arson, the reports of shootouts and other violent crimes are still coming quite often (the last one was today). And suburban violence is very hard to actually do something about, because a lot of it comes from a lack of faith in the society that people live in. Push too hard, and the police will be seen as even more of a group of villains than they already are by the people who do this, don't do anything at all and it will just continue. 

Richard the Lionheart was apparently quite well liked by his men though, which probably explains why he is often portrayed in a very positive light in historical fiction. 

The Byzantine Empire was quite interesting. Few empires have undergone so much turmoil and still been able to survive for that long. One emperor could almost drive the empire to total social & economic colapse, only for the next one to rebuild the empire, and make it as strong as it used to, and then the next in line ruins everything again. And that was something that was repeated several times. 

And while looking for that image I ended up finding some rather disgusting sites. Neo-Nazis and self proclaimed Jihadists both seem to be fanning the flames. 

I read through John Julius Norwich's A Short History of Byzantium on the recommendation of a friend some years ago, and was stunned by it. It contained some of the wildest and most fascinating bits of history I had ever encountered, and yet I had never heard of most of it before, never learned any of it in school. I've been meaning to read his full three volume history of Byzantium for some time, but haven't gotten around to it. Too many other historical eras I'd like to cover as well, unfortunately.

I would also like to point out, for those of you who were disappointed that it was not a biographical type of film of Lincoln, they are actually making one of those as well, being directed by none other then Spielberg and starring the great Daniel Day Lewis as Abe (He's always great in movies).

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443272/

Originally Posted By Stiler (18 JUN 2012 6:38pm)

I would also like to point out, for those of you who were disappointed that it was not a biographical type of film of Lincoln, they are actually making one of those as well, being directed by none other then Spielberg and starring the great Daniel Day Lewis as Abe (He's always great in movies).

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443272/

Well I'll be darned... Thanks for the info.

On the topic of Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, from what I recall of the trailer that I saw this looks like another okay action movie - something on par with Priest, perhaps.

ha, another interesting JAV topic, one of the "global" wandering topics that includes some interesitng detours...

btw, ...

the Byzantine empire NEVER got "along" with the early Arabic competitor states, to hark back to this post...

........"The first crusade happened because the Byzantine empire (at that point in pretty bad shape) had problems with Turks moving into their territory, and effectively blocking the rout to the holy land. They had no issues with the actual Muslim kingdoms themselves, in fact they considered themselves allies with Egypt, and were on good terms with most of the region, and the Muslims had nothing against christian pilgrims, they did not only bring lucrative trade, but also knowledge about the land in the west (Baghdad was at this point the worlds center of learning, and they actively encouraged people to come there, to share knowledge with each other, which helped everyone).

The emperor of the Byzantine empire (Alexius) asked the pope for help with the Turks, and at the same time he assured his neighbors to the east & south that it was an army under his command, and that it was safe. The pope sent out words to the major christian kingdoms, who in turn gathered armies of their own, but due to lack of communication, poor planing and probably several other reasons, the whole thing got out of hand, the crusaders started with clearing the road to the holy land, but sadly they did not stop there. And that was how the crusades came to be, totally pointless wars that just ended up in a lot of lost lives. "

the Byzantine empire which was the successor state to the actual Roman Empire fought a long long and in the end sadly unsuccessful battle against the arab pirates who took over the entire Mediterranean area as rulers of corrupt slave states, they did not create anything themselves, they merely imposed outright slavery on the people they conquered, they would kill most of the men and enslave the women and make them into baby factories to create slave soldiers called Janissaries. Using these legions of trained killers, akin to Hells Angels Bikers of today, they went thru the civilized world of the region like a wildfire, murdering, burning and pillaging whatever was in their path, By default, they became the rulers of the region until today but they turned what was the most fertile and civlized area into a desert that it remains...the Romans had created a vast and successful irrigation system that made Egypt and the entire North African area the breadbasket of the ancient world and the Arabs turned it back iunto a desert. The Byzantines were the last hope and their long 800 year battle with the Arab pirates managed to save Western Civlization but without them it would have been lost. Sadly modern events are dominated by the remnants of these ancient wars and the legacy of the Arab conquest is the sad and violent world we have today. The Byzantines would turn over in their graves to hear that they got along well with their neighbors....the main battles were with the Persian Empire and then the rising Gang Leaders of the Arab Caliphates....again remember, they 'created" their supposely high culture by stealing wholesale and by emplying their slaves as artisans, and enslaved workers to bulid their despotic word in which a tiny minoirty kept everyone else in chains. Not at all the way the Byzantines themselves lived and hoped to live. They too struggled with corruption and had many civil wars sadly but they kept alive the light of civilization and were pillaged and invaded three times by the supposedly Christian Crusades that were supposed to liberabe the holy land. The main reason that there has been so much competition for the area of the Holy land is that Mohammad stole the ideas and fundamental principles of Christianity including the sites and the Holly areas for his own invented relgion very simliar to Mormonism, and they have used that cult of a relgion to dominate the areas they have conquered since.

Back to Lincoln, that is a bizarre idea for a game, who thinks up this stuff? what a world