"Can Gods and Generals really be as bad as I hear?"
Oh yeah, it's about as bad as it gets. I can't believe I gave up 3+ hours of my life to see it.
"Fifteen years on, this is still a very good war movie."
Agreed, Gettysburg has always made my top 10 list.
Report this comment
I think there may have been some breechloaders around at Gettysburg, Joe. But whether the movie had the right ones? I'm sure we will be Told....
Report this comment
This is really creepy. I did the exact same thing as you did, watched Gettysburg for the first time in years, the privious day.
Report this comment
Gods and Generals--would have to improve considerably to be rubbish.
Ted Turner--why not? I'm sure there are any number of folks who share your sentiment (myself, included).
Gettysburg--probably my favorite film on the American Civl War. Yes, big fan of the novel. Film as magnificent in its own way as the book.
Report this comment
I had the mixed fortune of being an extra -- along with 3,000 of my dearest friends -- in the movie. My reenactment unit was Confederate for three days, then (through the magic of movies) we exchanged sack coats and shot ourselves for the next two days.
We were there for the filming of Pickett's Charge -- part of which was filmed on the field itself -- and it was a grand experience. I had the honor of being the first Confederate casualty when I tripped in thick grass and went down like a tree trunk.
BTW, when Jane Fonda showed up for the last day of filming that week about 2/3rds of the units, heavy with Vietnam veterans, packed up and departed. My unit, the 23rd NY, had a vote. In solidarity, the non-vets agreed to support their fellow veteran reenactors. Which is why the numbers of bodies in the culmination of Pickett's Charge are greatly diminished.
Report this comment
Knowing very little about the American Civil Wars (it's one of the few conflicts that I really couldn't care less about) I didn't watch either film with any pre-conceptions or historical bias.
Whilst they are bloody long films I really, really enjoyed watching both of them. With bristling beards only surpassed in the Crimean War I'd happily watch both again - good choice Joe!
Still doesn't come close to knocking Battle of Britain off the top of my lost of great war films though...
Report this comment
Knowing very little about the American Civil Wars (it's one of the few conflicts that I really couldn't care less about) I didn't watch either film with any pre-conceptions or historical bias.
Whilst they are bloody long films I really, really enjoyed watching both of them. With bristling beards only surpassed in the Crimean War I'd happily watch both again - good choice Joe!
Still doesn't come close to knocking Battle of Britain off the top of my lost of great war films though...
Report this comment
While I think Gettysburg is an excellant film, richly deserving the praise on this blog, I was surprised at the comments regarding Gods and Generals. I always felt that although not quite as good as it's predecessor, it was still a very good film. Am I missing something?
Report this comment
Gods and Generals is not as good as Gettysburg, which is a shame, as it's a far more interesting period of the war. I think it suffers from what I call "bittiness" - it doesn't flow; and it barely mentions Jackson's Valley campaign. Still, the Fredericksburg scenes are quite good, and it does convey Jackson's excentric combination of fervent Christianity and belligerence. ( I think many of his lines are taken from recorded conversations and documents.)
When Gettysburg came out it was panned by the critics because of the beards. While the beards may look odd, they do represent the styles that were worn at the time. Anyone who can ignore the film's excellent exposition of the opposing views on secession, just to remark on beards, is so superficial as to be not worth considering, in my view.
Report this comment