For moviegoers who are still unfamiliar with author (now screenwriter) Seth Grahame-Smith, the idea of an undead-slaying Honest Abe might seem especially ridiculous – but that’s only because Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter beat Grahame-Smith’s other well known horror mashup novel, Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, to the big screen. While Pride and Prejudice and Zombies continues to languish in preproduction hell, director Timur Bekmambetov (Wanted) managed to bring Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter to fruition, barely two years after the source material book was first published (in March 2010).
However, despite an intriguing (and purposefully absurd) premise, moviegoers have a plethora of vampire films to choose from, these days. Do Grahame-Smith and Bekmambetov manage to deliver a film adaptation that successfully juggles the campy setup and over-the-top action with intriguing alt-history tie-ins and enjoyable character/Presidential drama?
Fortunately, the answer is yes, assuming that moviegoers can suspend enough disbelief and lock into Grahame-Smith’s eccentric retelling of Abraham Lincoln’s secret monster-slaying nightlife. Certainly, anyone expecting a straightforward and grounded take on the life of Honest Abe should pass on the film (and look to Steven Spielberg’s Lincoln starring Daniel Day-Lewis), as Vampire Hunter is full of one-note characters, sometimes laughable attempts at tying the supernatural plot to real life events, and several over-the-top set pieces. That said, the mashup film is exactly what viewers should have expected from a Bekmambetov film about an axe-wielding President who fights to free America from slavery and undead bloodsuckers, alike.
For anyone unfamiliar with the alternate historical account depicted in Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, the film (and source material novel) are centered around Abe’s secret diary, which includes the account of both his political – as well as supernatural – encounters, starting with the death of his mother at the hands of Jack Barts (Marton Csokas), a local businessman/vampire. After years of patiently waiting, Lincoln (Benjamin Walker) sets out to avenge his mother and encounters Henry Sturgess (Dominic Cooper) – who trains Abe in the art of vampire hunting and impressively choreographed axe wielding. Despite Henry’s instruction to avoid making friends or starting a family, Lincoln befriends a local shopkeep, Joshua Speed (Jimmi Simpson), courts Mary Todd (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), and reconnects with childhood friend/free African-American, William Johnson (Anthony Mackie). Though, when vampire chief Adam (Rufus Sewell) forms an alliance with confederate separatists, Lincoln’s loved ones (as well as the country itself) are threatened – forcing the 16th President to take action in and outside of the political arena.
Benjamin Walker as Honest (Vampire Hunter) Abe
As mentioned, the basic plot of Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter can be pretty convoluted – especially in its attempts to marry historical events and real-life personalities with supernatural elements. At times, history and fiction are stitched together in a way that makes both sides of the mashup more interesting, such as Lincoln’s time spent running a general store and a flatboat trip to New Orleans; unfortunately, other moments are too on-the-nose – relying on thin (and overly convenient) supernatural explanations for real events.
Similarly, characters are exceptionally one-dimensional – which is, by far, the biggest missed opportunity in the entire film (considering the story utilizes a number of historical figures within a supernatural conspiracy plot). While audiences may be surprised to find that one of history’s most iconic leaders (who, in this case, also happens to fight vampires at night) isn’t all that interesting, it’s hardly the fault of actor Benjamin Walker – who manages to keep what could have otherwise been a goofy portrayal of the 16th President (both old and young) grounded and believable during even the most outrageous monster slaying escapades. Both Mary Elizabeth Winstead’s Mary Todd and Anthony Mackie’s William Johnson are equally competent but underutilized – mostly reacting to increasingly crazy revelations without room to actually flesh out their characters as anything more than Lincoln’s loved ones. However, the biggest character misfire is the flat-out boring implementation of the primary vampires – the aforementioned Adam, and his lady Vadoma (Erin Wasson), who are nothing more than soulless faces in a convoluted attempt by Grahame-Smith to marry a vampire rebellion with anti-abolitionist confederates.
In spite of its shortcomings, the core premise rarely fails to entertain (even if there are a number of eye roll-worthy moments), since the vampire hunting elements successfully up-the-ante with each encounter. Early on, Lincoln forgoes his mentor’s preferred means of dispatching vampires, i.e. silver bullets – in favor of some slick axe work. While some audience members may find the axe versus vampire flesh sequences to be a little too flashy (and hard to follow), Bekmambetov utilizes some effective slow motion camerawork to showcase Lincoln’s stylish and acrobatic slaying techniques. In a genre that is overwrought with gun battles and throwing knives, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter thankfully presents a number of entertaining close quarters combat sequences that, despite our obvious real-world knowledge of Lincoln, make it easy to believe that the President could go toe-to-toe with similarly gifted monster slayers like Blade and Van Helsing.
Rufus Sewell, Benjamin Walker, and Erin Wasson in 'Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter'
Despite some high-octane action moments in the film’s trailer, Vampire Hunter is actually pretty intimate – as most of the epic moments are still pretty confined (narratively speaking). Few of the set pieces are given much time to build tension and many of the encounters offer little more than flashy hack and slash choreography. This isn’t to say that Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter can’t deliver on excitement – since a number of the vampire hand-to-Honest Axe combats benefit from Bekmambetov’s trademark fast and furious action beats.
Additionally, while many theaters will be pushing Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter in 3D, the film would be just as enjoyable without the premium upgrade. There are a few moments where the slow-motion axe combat looks especially slick (as vampire blood spews into the air) and several larger shots (such as a trip on the Mississippi river as well as Civil War battlefields) are definitely enhanced by the added dimension; but only those few moments are must see in 3D. As a result, the 3D up charge isn’t a waste, but it’s hardly required viewing.
Moviegoers expecting a gritty “Lincoln kills vampires” character drama will likely be disappointed by Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter; although, as a tongue-in-cheek action mashup, Grahame-Smith and Bekmambetov have, for the most part, delivered an entertaining (albeit campy) historical retelling. The film doesn’t quite deliver a fully-formed combination of history and supernatural horror (if that’s even possible), but for anyone who can accept the experience on its own terms, there are plenty of entertaining moments of vampire hunting to keep your appetite for blood a fun time at the theater sated.
If you’ve seen the movie and want to discuss details about the film without worrying about spoiling it for those who haven’t seen it, please head over to our Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter Spoilers Discussion.
For an in-depth discussion of the film by the Screen Rant team check out our Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter episode of the SR Underground podcast.
If you’re still on the fence about Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, check out the trailer below:
-
Loading ...-
Let us know what you thought of the film in the comment section below.
Follow me on Twitter @benkendrick for future reviews, as well as movie, TV, and gaming news.
Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter is Rated R for violence throughout and brief sexuality. Now playing in theaters.
Our Rating:
2.5 out of 5
‘Arrow’ Season 1 Finale Review 
J.J. Abrams Planned ‘Star Trek’ TV Show; Rights Issues Led to Jump to ‘Star Wars’? 
‘Assassin’s Creed’ Gets Memorial Day 2015 Release Date 
Ron Howard’s ‘The Dark Tower’ Adaptation Still Alive 
I still kinda want to go see it actually, despite the poor reviews it’s getting.
@Ben: Is this the type of movie that’s better off watching in theaters, or would a nice, big HD screen to the job as well? (Because I’m leaning towards waiting for the rental, but if I’ll get a nicer experience out of watching it on the silver screen, I’ll still try and make some room in the schedule…)
Edit: “…DO the job as well?”
I was worried about the first major review that was posted a few days ago. But, after I realized that the reviewer was a woman, all my fears were put to rest. No sane woman would ever actually admit liking this film.
Yep. I’m not sane. I’m a woman. And I liked this flick.
I have to say while I’m a fan of shows like The Walking Dead, I really hate horror flicks. I hate slasher flicks even more. But this was great. We couldn’t stop laughing. At one point I had tears in my eyes.
It was worth seeing in 3D, because seriously, cheesy decapitated heads flying in your face…how can you pass that up?
No one else in the (almost empty) theatre was laughing. Maybe they didn’t get it?
Anyway, I totally recommend it.
Some of the 3D effects are fun on the big screen (blood splattering) but, overall, most of the action is close-quarter combat – so I’m not sure it’s a must see in theaters.
Thanks man, I think I’ll be renting this one and go see Brave in theaters instead…
Pfft you should see it in theaters. This movie was awesome. Loved everything about it.
So Screenrant thinks that the movie is a “tongue-in-cheek, campy action mash-up” (to paraphrase them), but I just read IGN’s review that stated the film takes itself way too seriously with little to no light-heartedness to be found (to paraphrase them). While I understand these are two different reviewers, can a film really be seen as very campy to one person and way too serious to another? I suppose so, but I’m just a little surprised at the differing summarizations.
Um, different reviewers, different reviews, different interpretations. Same as usual.
Oh I know Kofi, I admitted as much in my original comment, I was just saying that it’s interesting how someone finds something super-serious and yet someone else finds is campy; the two are polar opposites and have obvious differences. Can someone perceive the Adam West Batman show as serious? I’ve never heard anyone who has.
I know my point is a little confusing .I’m just trying to say that, if one person thinks a movie is bad and another thinks its good, I understand that, but for one person to see camp where another one sees seriousness befuddles me a little.
You can trust Ben to get this right.
good point. I did not get any campiness from the film. It did seem like it was more of a serious movie that wants to make a point.
I am going to wait on this one to see what the general public is saying about the movie. Soo far this is probably the best review of the movie on the net with others calling the movie “dull”, “boring”, “a blockbuster bust”, the list goes on and on which is sad because I was hoping this movie would be good.
I do sort of want to see this, but honestly I’m not convinced it is worth the money. The Blu ray will be cheaper to buy than going to see it once at the cinema, and usually I can justify that price tag (Avengers,TDKR,Prometheus,Spidey) but not for this.
I’ll see it in a few months.
This movie is awesome! Don’t listen to what people are saying. I wasn’t expecting much when I went to see it.(I just see movies all the time to cure boredom) but it was amazing!!!!
loved the book. Still looking forward to seeing the movie. i was sort of surprised seeing a 2.5 after reading the review. The review itself almost seemed more postive than the score
It comes off that way to me as well (the review seems more in-line with a 3 star score instead of 2.5), but I’m sure there’s a reason for Ben’s rating…
The review seemed positive because Ben posed the question: “Do Grahame-Smith and Bekmambetov manage to deliver a film adaptation that successfully juggles the campy setup and over-the-top action with intriguing alt-history tie-ins and enjoyable character/Presidential drama?”
Then answered it with a “Yes.”
But later in the review, he did observe: “…characters are exceptionally one-dimensional – which is, by far, the biggest missed opportunity in the entire film (considering the story utilizes a number of historical figures within a supernatural conspiracy plot).”
Which seems to contradict his earlier point of “enjoyable characters,” but either way if that was the case, that’d be enough for me to knock down the movie’s rating a bit too.
I thought it was surprisingly good, hope it does well
I thought it was amazing! These people giving it bad reviews don’t know anything.
Well this is unfortunate. I wasn’t exactly expecting a 5 star review but was hoping it would do better than this. It’s also really taking a beating on RT.
It was amazing. Don’t listen to the reviews.
wow reading the reading I thought this was a 3-3.5, but then the rating was a 2
The movie was amazing. Nothing less from that. Maybe more. Reviewers suck.
At one point I thought this had the potential to be a nice little summer sleeper but the more I saw the more it seemed like this was going to fall in the rental category. And to be honest Smith’s screenplay for Dark Shadows didn’t help my hopes either.
Oh well, they can’t all be winners. I’ll save my money for a rainy day…
It was worth the money. It was amazing. Why does everyone listen to crappy critic reviews. Almost everytime they say something sucks I disagree. And when they say it was great it was horrible. This movie was the s***.
I think this movie will be popular among a certain demographic, mainly a younger audience. The vampires arent the problem. Its the way the story incorporates the civil war/slavery aspect. Lincoln wasnt in favor of ending slavery unless it meant he could win the war (look it up). Things like this are going limit the audience this movie gets. I know its fiction but using such an iconic real life persona like Lincoln is what makes the story fail IMHO.
Really? An alternate portrayal of a relatively little-known facet of Civil War history is going to “limit the audience”. In THIS movie? About Abe Lincoln as a vampire killer? REALLY?
Speaking of relatively little-known Civil War facts, at least they got the release date right. If it had come out on July 1st, the 150th anniversary of President Lincoln’s creation of what has become the Internal Revenue Service, a good argument might have been made for deleting “Hunter” from the title.
Well the movie is amazing. And you can’t blame the movie for using someone like Abraham Lincoln. It’s based on a book. If you want to complain about something stupid like that, then blame the author of the book.
It’s campy like Jonah Hex but done way better, if that makes any sense.
It does.
I had fun at this movie. It fits nicely between 3 and 3.5 for me. Loved the action i think timur makes slow motion look better than anyone else. I also thought benjamin walker was really impressive and charismatic, being the first movie ive ever seen of his. The whole cast acted extremely well there was just a lack of depth in the character. But i wasnt expected anything less than a high octane over the top action movie and its what i got. that being said there was a few moments of good emotion.
At current the TomatoMeter has the Critics/Audience reviews at %39 (Critics) and %75(Audience) with 112 reviews by critics and over 120,000 audience reviews. What does that mean?
If Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter is in a genre you like and you tend to lean more towards the average movie audience and less towards what critics think then you will most likely enjoy Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter; at least the odds are in you’re favor.
Based on the meter results I’d say it looks like another case of critics being out of sync with the paying audience and that’s OK. Its this difference that helps us known when the true gems hit the big screen. When the critics and the audience both score a film high then its almost a sure bet to be a hit. If the critics were more in line with the audience then it would be far more difficult to spot these rare gems.
Great review, Ben. Thorough and balanced.
No matter what your leanings the reader
gets what he needs to make a decision
on whether or not to go see this.
I was leaning away and feel justified.
Others leaning in could find enough
here to support going to see it.
I went to see this yesterday in 3D. I really enjoyed the book and also enjoyed Daywatch and Nightwatch, but, alas, this movie was just a bit sh*te, the effects at points were quite poor, and even though it was not overly long, i found it to be boring in parts and was quite ok when it ended. Dont get me wrong there are some good moments and some of the action is good but there are just not enough good moments, Rufus Sewell is great as was Benjamin Walker and Dominic Cooper. In hindsight I would probably not have wasted the £12 ticket price but instead used that money rent the blu-ray, or anything else
F the critics, the movie was pretty good.
It was amazing
I didn’t get all the hype about this movie. Thought it sounded stupid and looked stupid. OMG Abraham Lincoln killing vampires what a great story line! Not! Stupid as hell. Snakes on a plane 2 pretty much.
Dude, snakes on a plane!? That sounds basass. But this was even more badass.
That is a ridiculous comparison. Vampire Hunter is far, far better than “Snakes on a Plane”.
This has nothing to do with the review but anyone else notice the face behind Anthony in the train picture?
I thought it was awesome. People just have no taste these days.
Here is some other badass presidents Ol’ Hunter Abe has to be on the lookout for.
http://hollywoodleek.com/2012/06/top-10-supernatural-bad-ass-president-movies/
This feels more like one of these “guilty pleasure” movies more than anything, so I’ll wait for it to hit Netflix.
Steven Spielberg’s Lincoln on the other hand… can’t wait for that one.
Movie was amazing
I wouldn’t consider it just a “guilty pleasure” movie. It has an overall feel and sentiment that appreciates the gravity of this period in our history. And can we talk about the portrayal of African-Americans in this movie? Way better than most (and definitely better than Tyler Perry’s whatever Madea-of-the-month movie). And ugh – Spielberg, please he’s waaaay too sentimental, his movies give me a toothache!
I wouldn’t consider it just a “guilty pleasure” flick. It has an overall feel and sentiment that appreciates the gravity of this period in our history. And ugh – Spielberg, he’s waaaay too sentimental, his movies give me a toothache!
the movie was good. even after reading this review i understand everyones opinion, but i think it is like any movie, if you are interested in it you may be entertained, like any movie it may be the surprise you have been waiting for, it may be the worst thing you ever saw.
i couldn’t stand peter jacksons king kong and a lot of people love it.
so in my opinion, “every movie made is the worst movie made and every movie made is the best movie ever made.”
it’s summer time, if you have a couple hours go see the matinee.
At first, I didn’t know what to expect of this movie but since it’s Friday night and we didn’t have anywhere to go, my husband and I decided to go to the movies. To my surprise, it’s actually a great movie. We both certainly enjoyed it. Go watch it….
Let it be known now, Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter is a crazy ass, FUN movie. See it, have a good time. Not quite the book version,but fun. Not every movie needs to be Oscar contenders people. This is one of those fun movies like a Machete or Resident Evil or John Carter. Sure the “public” might hate on it. But see it for yourself and have a good time. We don’t have to be movie snobs on every damn movie during the Summer.
Well said
it’s a shame, the book was really good, too.
I liked it. I enjoyed the cast and the overall tone. Not everything has to be great to be good. This movie was a good watch.
Well I didn’t know what to expect when I was going to see the movie. But I loved it! It is my favorite movie this year along with the Avengers so far. I just thought everything about it was amazing. No complaints.
Just came from it. Not a bad film and I saw no reason for the 3D. I found it a bit obvious but also entertaining. 3/5 for me.
Oh, I didn’t know Howard Stark was in this. I might give it another .5 just for that.
The book was an amazing read, but I knew the movie would be a disappointment when the director was announced two years ago. He is a hack with the pedigree of Sir Michael Bay.
If their goal was to give us another ‘League Of Ordinary Excrement,’ then it was mission accomplished.
The movie’s title was both a selling point and an obstacle to overcome, it’s just too bad that Tim Burton didn’t have the faith to treat the book with more respect. This could’ve been ‘Interview With The Vampire’ meets ‘Sleepy Hallow’ instead of the overblown piece of ish that fans of the book wasted our time and money on.
Some of my friends have seen it and they say it was great, I’m gonna be checking this one out.