It's funny how over time the most hated of political leaders become deified by popular opinion, or at least have their evils or mistakes or blatant inconsistencies downplayed/overlooked.
This article summarizes much of what I already knew about the American "civil" war, but with a focus on the Man (behind the Myth).
http://arts.nationalpost.com/2012/10/30/abraham-lincoln-an-invented-hero/
Kind of like Teddy Roosevelt, one of those figures where the legend is much kinder than the man was (a rather terrifying imperialist.)
Then again so many historical figures are polarizing and will always be coloured by history and those who write it, i.e. the real Richard III versus Tudor propaganda (in popular media thanks to the likes of Shakespeare).
Louis CK's dry sense of humor + 70s style sitcom = SNL actually funny
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tbzfvef0aE0
I forgot to update this thread after seeing the excellent film (not saying it was "accurate*", just as a film it was pretty damn compelling).
And apparently the trailer is totally not gonna help you know what to expect. Cuz it's totally not chronological, not at all:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/02/19/movies/awardsseason/oscar-trailers.html
*and it should not have been ; it's a historical drama, not a documentary -- just like Argo (http://[url=http://www.cinemablend.com/new/why-argo-deserved-win-best-picture-35952.html), and just as satisfying of a film-making achievement.
You know what's truly sad? The story behind Argo is MORE INTERESTING than the film.
It just became a vehicle for an "actor" I truly despise.