Historical Fiction, Disrespect, and National Insults

Historical Fiction is a much respected genre in this world.  It has been around as long as people have told stories about events that have happened in the past.  Even Shakespeare wrote historical fiction in his retelling of the stories of Henry V and Julius Caesar.  Anytime you diverge even a little bit from the brute and basic facts of what happened in the past you engage to that degree in Historical Fiction.

I love the genre.  I have learned so much history simply by paying attention to what happens in movies.  However, there is a right way and a wrong way to do everything.  Rightly done, Historical Fiction informs the audience about a historical event or figure.  In a movie we can see legends from history come alive and we can know them as they may have been: real people who made hard decisions or did something extraordinary.  The best Historical Fiction helps us understand that our heroes have always had feet of clay; saints sometimes sin, founding fathers fought, conquerors struggled, mighty kings had weak spots.

But when Historical Fiction is done badly.  Sometimes lines are crossed, when events and persons from history are treated with disrespect.  At worst, the movie can become a colossal train wreck that even borders on national insult.

With that background, let me introduce you to a movie that will release in America on Friday (June 22): it is called (and I swear I'm not making this up) Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter.  Just so you believe me, here's the poster:

Now, I can't be alone when I say that the whole concept of this movie insults me.  As an American, I believe it is greatly disrespectful to any president to change fundamentally who he was simply to entertain.  Quite frankly, the real Lincoln who lived is enough of a hero for any movie: he exhibited great leadership, held a nation together, and overcame great odds throughout his life.  Do we really need to mar his memory by making him an action hero, and one that fights vampires at that?

Of course I've not seen the movie, just the preview trailer.  From that trailer I can deduce little except that all the filmmakers have to offer that separates this movie from the massive numbers of other vampire movies is the insult to Lincoln.  Honestly, how could anything the movie does change this fact?  How could anything the filmmakers do with their new version of Lincoln be anything but insult?  To those filmmakers I say this: you are crossing a line.  You've left Historical Fiction behind and are tramping without respect where angels fear to trod.


At this point I expect someone to object: "But you love Amadeus!  How is the portrayal of Mozart in that movie any less an insult?  What's the big deal?"  Allow me to explain the difference.  In Amadeus Mozart is portrayed as a brazen, somewhat abrasive, and immature man.  His character is surely over the top.  However, he is not portrayed in a way entirely inconsistent with what we know of him.  I know people like the Mozart of Amadeus, don't you?  To portray him this way makes a legend into a human.  Plus, it is clear the filmmakers had great respect for his talent and wonderfully depicted how brilliant he was.  The events of that movie most assuredly didn't happen, but they might have, and thus the rules of Historical Fiction are followed.

How different is Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter!  Lincoln here is portrayed entirely inconsistently from what we know and what is even possible!  To portray him this way makes a human into a legend, and not a good one at that!  The whole project makes me wonder how anyone could have respect for a man who, even if you disagreed with much of what he did, still deserves respect.  All we are thus left with is a mess of a movie concept.  No matter how technically good or entertaining the movie turns out, they have crossed a line.  Nor is it a small line: not only is a person from history affected, a whole nation is insulted.