Rating: 
Summary: Southern Comfort
Review: If some people would actually bother to watch and listen to this movie, the slaves are not "happy" being slaves. The black slave woman who stays behind to look after her owner's house says she cares about her owners, that they are good people. But she also says she wants to die free. The black man who goes to work for General Jackson is a free black, not a slave. He wanted to work for the Confederates. This type of scenario actually happened, no matter how distasteful it might be to some who have spent years trying to demonize Southerners and former slave owners as being like Nazis running death camps.I heard Jeff Shaara, the author of the book "Gods and Generals" ask, would small farmers in the South leave their families and homes to go off and fight a war just so some rich plantation owner down the road can keep his slaves? The Civil War had a complex beginning, like most wars. The truth shall set you free. As for the South fighting against the United States, I believe there was a group of rebels who earlier had declared their independence against their government. One of the leaders of this rebellion was named George Washington. Treason to one, independence to another. I love how this movie has so many knickers in a twist. Like General Robert E. Lee said, looking out at his beloved Virginia, its something Yankees will never understand.
Rating: 
Summary: Generals lead armies in rebellion against the USA!
Review: Ok: if you like Gone With the Wind, you will like this film: it is beautifully filmed, a long, drawn out movie with gorgeous costumes and gentlemanly generals. The slaves in this movie are happy to be so. God is referred to many times as being on the side of the slave owners. But unfortunately I came to this movie having read James MacPherson's Battle Cry of Freedom (not to mention the books of Gary Gallagher, Kenneth Stamp, Eric Foner and Ken Burns' Civil War series); Gods and Generals comes across like a greeting card in terms of depth, and where is the fairplay? The first part of the movie is stacked with vague statements about "southern states' rights" - states' rights to do WHAT? I kept wanting to hear. Well, to keep owning slaves (but it seems in Gods you're never supposed to ask that question). Soon we get to the battles though, and see Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson lead armies in rebellion against the United States. There are some distinctly unfair depictions in this series (Gods and Generals was, like Gettysburg the movie, made by Ted Turner, who plans to make a third entry as well). Here In Gods we see Union troops looting Fredericksburg, a southern town. This indeed happened so why not show it, right? But in Gettysburg, the previous film, no scene was filmed of Confederate troops rounding up free Pennsylvainia blacks and sending them south to be sold as slaves. The happy black slaves in Gods and Generals need only a slice of watermelon to make their depiction totally Jim Crow. I found this overpowering bias enough to make the film not matter much as history - though again I hasten to say it was beautifully filmed and is indeed a Hollywood epic like Gone With the Wind. Also in Gettysburg, the first of Turner's Civil War films, we got to see acts of Union courage and victory, which a modern, 21st century American needs to sit through all the slave owners' scenes. In Gods the Union victory at Antietam was left out. I recommend Ken Burns' series, The Civil War, also James McPherson's books (Battle Cry, also Hallowed Ground: A Stroll Through Gettysburg, Lincoln and the Second American Revolution), the civil war film Glory, and civil war books by Gary Gallagher (any), Alan Nolan (Lee Considered), Kenneth Stamp (The Peculiar Institution), and David Herbert Donald (Lincoln).
Rating: 
Summary: Gods & Generals...? How about "Sermons & Speeches!"
Review: This film is too preachy and boring to be of any interest to anyone (except perhaps the re-enactors who participated in it). English films are short on action, but they capture the time period with a feeling of authenticity that "Gods & Generals" sorely lacks. The dialoge in this film is so painfully stiff and unnatural that it becomes a burden to sit through it. I was also bothered by the depiction of slaves as happy, faithful servants who love their masters more than freedom...Not since "Gone With The Wind" have I seen something so awkwardly insensitive. I'm still waiting for a realistic, well acted, and well crafted Civil War epic.
Rating:
Summary: A solid film about a VERY complex period & issue
Review: I've seen "Gods & Generals" in both the theater and at home (DVD). Frankly, I commend Maxwell for taking such a SPRAWLING subject matter and making it, for the most part, understandable. I've read previous customer reviews of the film, and many of them take the film to task because (as one relates) it follows the "tired old party line" that slavery was the only (or, certainly, the most important) cause for the war. The implication is that the film took the "easy" way out. Frankly, I think those reviews took the easy way . . . Were those individuals asleep during the speech where Lee was nominated as commander of all Virginia forces? As well as during various comments throughout the movie where states rights and soverignty were the issue, NOT just slavery? Slavery WAS a major issue during the Civil War, and deservedly so. But slavery was also a political football during the war; one used to brilliant effect by one of the finest politicians this country has ever seen, Abraham Lincoln. A main reason for Lincoln's Emmancipation Proclamation was to take the moral high ground and make it more difficult for England to enter the war on the side of the Confederacy (which was becoming a real possibility, one which the North wanted DESPERATELY to avoid). Does THAT fact "cheapen" slavery as a cause for the war? Certainly not. But again, it wasn't the ONLY issue involved, and I think Maxwell addressed that in a very reasonable fashion. Should Maxwell have gone more in-depth as to the causes and events that led up to the war? Perhaps, but then it wouldn't have been the movie I think that he'd intended. THIS movie was an account of the war up through Chancellorsville, with Jackson as the main protagonist. It was an account of what happened to men in battle, and what specific battles occurred during that period. Now, did he (as an example) "forget" Antietam? Yes, but again - he's taken a sprawling piece of American history, and had to make SOME accomodations for the fact that he's still trying to serve it up in a 2+ hour movie. If I remember correctly, when it was released, some reviewers complained that it was too long. Well, which is it folks? Is it too long, or didn't he include enough? Being a history buff (with the Civil War a favorite period), I again commend the film for dealing with such a large canvas in such a fine manner. I've given it some thought, and I DO feel that this film, though complicated, is understandable to those who have little or no knowledge of the period. For those of us who DO - sure, we can pick it apart at our leisure, for having missed this, or that, or the other thing; OR we can be thankful that someone has made two films ("Gettysburg" and "Gods & Generals") about an IMMENSELY important period of United States' history which is often neglected. Again, a fine effort, one which will end up in my library, as it's predecessor has.
Rating:
Summary: Living History Lessons
Review: After reading some of the many negative reviews about this film, I almost fell into the trap of not ordering it..
However now that I have taken the plunge I am so very glad I purchased it and have watched it three times already. We bought the book of the film first which has the script at the back, and was hoping to see included the Battle of Antietam plus John Wilkes Boothes involvement but the DVD I received is only 219 mins long yet is long enough to hold total interest without having to take time out for bathroom and tea stops. I am not critical about clean uniforms and perfectly combed hair, even after sustained fighting, and nights sleeping with the dead. However, I was surprised to see how "Chamberlain" and his Segeant had aged and become plumper from Gettysburg into this prequel.. But I cannot and will not fault the fim...I am a Civil War buff of many years standing, and these films have served to turn the written word into how it was..
The script represents the era and I feel the critics must take this into account and forget the Schwarzenneger/Willis type of script translation.. I look forward to the final part of the trilogy and can only offer the highest praise to Mr Maxwell for his two films of the Civil War.. EXCELLENT
Rating: 
Summary: Gods and Generals - Historically authentic!
Review: When this particular movie was released in the theaters, I definitely wanted to see it, but who "really" wants to sit in a theater for four hours; hence the decision to wait until its much anticipated release on DVD. Given several months anticipation, I'm glad to say that I wasn't "thoroughly" disappointed, but slightly put aback by the "dry" nature of this film. Dramatically, this film just doesn't put forth a great effort. Historically, I'm sure this film is a real boon to Civil War buffs and I'm quite sure, every historian that relishes in this era probably rather enjoyed the authenticity of this film. I, myself, enjoyed the authenticity of this film, between over seven thousand re-enactors and the production crews efforts to put forth as accurate a film as possible, they accomplished that goal with flying colors. In the filmmakers efforts to keep the rating of the film down to a PG-13, they more or less sold out on the "authenticity" of the horrible type of combat that was engaged in during this era, which when comparing other films, most notably those starring Mel Gibson, somewhat lessens the experience. Performance wise, all of the actors and re-enactors performed quite admirably. Of special note is the exceptional performance by Stephen Lang as General Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson. Robert Duvall and Jeff Daniels both perform to their high standards in their respective roles in this film. Director Ronald F. Maxwell set out to recreate three of the civil war's most pivotal battles in Manassas, Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville. All three of which were, as I understand it, seamlessly recreated for the purpose of this film, bringing to it an authenticity that few other films have accomplished. High praise goes to Ronald Maxwell for his efforts here. Unfortunately, this film will most likely not go down in history as one of the best or the most successful, but it will most likely go down in history as one the most "required" films for students of this era. The soundtrack for the film is truly "dead on" for the events as they're being depicted; credit to those involved in this particular aspect of the film. The premise: Based on Jeffrey M. Shaara's bestseller, "Gods and Generals," this film takes on the role of depicting, in part, the story of select individuals during some of the events leading up to the beginning of the civil war and for a couple years thereafter. The film primarily focuses on southern generals, General Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson, General Robert E. Lee and northern Lieutenant Colonel Joshua Chamberlain. In a way, the director portrays an almost "clinical" look at these characters and the events. From General Jackson's devout religious beliefs to Lieutenant Colonel Chamberlain's initial doubts, the authenticity of the plot and the portrayal abound. I would definitely recommend this film, not as a dramatic success but as a historical success of a film, that given fours hours to watch, can be an enlightening experience, as I learned several things about these historic figures. {ssintrepid} Special Features: -Introduction by Ted Turner
- Feature-Length Audio Commentary by Writer/Director Ronald F. Maxwell and two of the Film's Historical Advisors, Col Keith Gibson and James I Robertson Jr.
- 3 Insightful Making of Documentaries:
Journey to the Past
The African-American Slave Experience in the Film's Era
The Life of Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson: A Close Up Look at This Complex Military Man
- The Authenticities of the Film
- 2 Music Videos: Bob Dylan's "Cross the Green Mountain" and Mary Fahl's "Going Home"
-Theatrical Trailer
Rating:
Summary: At Least an Hour too Long
Review: Film Editing is not a concept that jumps to mind when assessing the success of a movie. After all, who outside of the film industry, gets excited about the "Best Film Editing" Academy Award? Good editing escapes our attention while bad editing grabs it. The worst film editing I can recall was in "The Thin Red Line" but the editing of "Gods and Generals" may take its' place. Let's be frank here; This movie is at least an hour too long. The main reason for this is that it elaborates far too many scenes. A good film will spend only as much time as necessary to make the points it wants to make. Great films are noted, among other things, for their subtlety. I will mention two scenes by way of explanation. The first that comes to mind is one in which, on the eve of battle, Colonel Chamberlain (Jeff Daniels) quotes Julius Ceasar. We got the message early on but had to stay for the whole page and a half of the quote. The second scene that comes to mind was the long, drawn out illness and death of Stonewall Jackson. I spend a lot of time wondering whether this movie is about the early days of the Civil War or the last days of Stonewall Jackson. That question, as well, is the fault of failing to edit with a story focus in mind. Another complaint of the editing was the sense that I was seeing the same scenes over and over. I realize that a battle often has ebbs and flows but we were immersed in too much repetition. Finally, I was struck by the lack of a sense of direction as to where the story was going. I realize that this is about the Civil War but why did we have all the different related stories that we did? It seemed that we were going from scene to scene at random. For example, we have, in this movie, the best ever film about the battle of Fredricksburg. In that battle we DO get the subleties as well as a great overview. We had the one example of an officer making a sound suggestion of strategy only to be dismissed by General Burnside who had his mind made up. There were, of course, many such mistakes as that one made by Burnside but this scene is sufficient to make the point. There are the frequent scenes of the Rebels three deep at the wall on the hill. By passing the guns back for others to reload, we could see that the Rebels were able to fire at least twice as often as the Yankees. These and many other scenes were very impressive. Why is it, then, that we view the battles of First Bull Run and Chancellorsville only through the eyes of Jackson's troops? I can tell from other reviews that there is a large element of fans out there who appreciate this movie for going out of its' way to show the "real" Civil War. I can certainly see the many elements in this movie that brings out that reaction. My point is that it is possible to accomplish that AND have a slimmer, better edited movie. There are other complaints I have about the movie such as the mediocre acting. However, there is much to admire about it as well. I give it an "A" for effort. Now if we can just send it back to the cutting room...
Rating:
Summary: A GREAT VHS RELEASE!
Review: As an avid film collector, I usually buy both VHS and DVD copies of awesome films like "The Patriot" and "Gods and Generals." The film is superb! A dramatic look at the first two years of the war, and an exciting portrayal of one of history's greatest military figures: Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson! The acting and storytelling are top notch, and the battle scenes, especially the recreation of Frederickburg, are the most powerful ever filmed. This is epic storytelling on an epic scale!
The VHS version is beautifully rendered! The sound is crisp, making you feel like you're actually on the battlefield. The only quibble I have is that the subtitles are very small, unlike on the DVD. Other than this, the VHS version is a fine addition for those without DVD players, and for those who enjoy both VHS and DVD! Movie Grade: A+
VHS Grade: A+
Rating: 
Summary: Pales in Comparison
Review: The movie, as a whole, was a disappointment. This film does not deserve to hold a place next to great Civil War movies such as Glory and Gettysburg. Let's hope The Last Full Measure, the final installment in this trilogy which also features Gettysburg, is on par with the aforementioned Gettysburg. The movie, for the most part, felt like a high school play...and a bad one at that. Lofty and highly unbelievable dialogue combines with actors who seem to feel uncomfortable in their wool reenactment costumes, creating an overall awkward viewing experience. Furthermore, had the film editors used a more discerning eye, the movie may have been more enjoyable. One finishes feeling like an hour could have easily been cut from the product. Something must be said for the battle sequences however. Often impressive and sometimes extremely poignant, they help to redeem the film. Overall, however, one could find another way of spending four hours. For a more moving and watchable Civil War experience turn to Gone with the Wind, Glory, or Gettysburg. You're less likely to be disappointed.
Rating:
Summary: Overall good but could have ben better
Review: I liked this film, but I anticipated and expected much. The authenticity and much of the passion of the book is there, however I feel that there was something missing even though it is a long film. Maybe I expected too much because having seen Gettysburg (one of my favourite films) I went on to read the trilogy Gods and Generals, Killer Angels (on which Gettysburg is based) and The Last Full Measure. These books are some of the best I have read. Gods and Generals the book is epic in scope detailing many battles and themes and as such I believe that it should have been made into more than one film. The film doesn't quite convey the other stories; The John Brown episode, Hancock and Armistead's relationship and the history of the relationships of the other officers from both sides in the Mexico campaigns etc that tied the book together and showed how the war brewed up slowly and how divisive it was.
Steven Lang is truly excellent as Stonewall Jackson, he was excellent as Pickett in Gettysburg it will be a confusing day when I play the two back to back!
|
