Rating: 
Summary: The True Story of the Civil War South
Review: "Gods and Generals" is a wonderful Civil War movie, if for no other reason than it does not strive to demonize the South and its leaders. Robert Duvall is incomparable as usual as Lee, and Stonewall Jackson is portrayed as a man of great faith and virtue (which, by all accurate accounts, was true). If you are a person who believes that the South was a bunch of slave-beating rednecks, you will probably have one of two reactions to this film. If you are open-minded enough, you will probably be amazed at the tenderness and gentlemanly behavior of the Southern officers. Or, if you are determined to believe that which you were taught in school history class, you will reject this movie as convoluted Southern propaganda.Also wonderful (and surprising) is the amount of "God" which comes through in this film. From Generals Lee and Jackson's faith we see clear examples of how our country used to respect our Creator in its earlier days before pantywaist judges tried to throw all markings of him out of society. This film makes you wonder what would society have been like had the South won. My only problem with the film is not with the history, but with the artistic nature of the film. Much of it is shot in a very flat, uninteresting manner; the battle scenes pale beside some of the great modern war movies and series such as "Saving Private Ryan," "Band of Brothers," "Braveheart," or "We Were Soldiers." Still, this is the best Civil War movie I've ever seen, and I would say that everyone should watch it at least once, just to find out that the Southerners were not really the bad guys after all.
Rating: 
Summary: Horrible
Review: I a consider myself a big enthusiast of the civil war and I loved Gettyburg...but I found "GandG" to be maybe the worst war movie I have ever seen....not just for it`s preachy one-sided distorted view of history...but the film lacks all of the excitement of Gettysburg and the battles are so poorly shot and edited they are incomprehensible or utterly simplistic....lacking most of the battles key points...
Rating: 
Summary: A Great Civil War History Lesson
Review: This movie is not "Gone With the Wind" it is a history lesson. If you want a fictionalized version of what the war was like or have a cause that you want to see shouted you will not like this movie. If you have read a book (know something) about the people portrayed in this movie you will love it. The movie action scenes are as real as they could be. The words and actions of the main actors or as they were. Men and women referred to each other as husband and wife. Letters were started "Dear Wife" not "honey bunch". Again, if you do not want to see what it was like in 1862 and 63 then do not see it. - otherwise buy it - I have two of them.
Rating:
Summary: Great film, but a bit too much dialog
Review: This film mostly views the war from the southern viewpoint, highlighting how the war started out as state vs. federal authority, but later including slave emancipation. The primary character is Stonewall Jackson, with some attention given to Robert E. Lee and Joshua Chamberlain. The battle scenes are better produced than they were in Gettysburg, but the amount of dialog between the battles is a bit much, which slows the pace at times. Overall, it is a great film that delves deeply into the Southern viewpoint of the war.
Rating: 
Summary: What an effort
Review: What an effort, I refer both to the effort taken to make the movie, and the effort required to watch it! . Obviously creating this movie was a labor love. But the end product is too much for the average viewer. The attention to accurate historical detail makes the movie suffer as a whole. I think judicious editing to remove an hours worth of Chamberlin's rambling neo-classical soliloquies, parlor ballads, camp songs and Jackson's playing with paper dolls would have made the movie much easier to watch. Dialog in the movie seems to be taken from writings and letters of the time. Though this may be an accurate reflection of the way people thought at the time, using these writings as actual dialog comes off awkward and forced. I swear I saw one of the 20th Maine point his rifle at Chamberlin during one of his rambling muses about the glory of war. The dialog on both sides about slavery works better. It reflects the thoughts and ideas of the time about the subject, rather than the revisionist-history, self-righteous soapboxing that is usually seen in films of the last 20 years. Often, the movie's attention detail does not work. The movie attempts to show two sides of Jackson: the fierce warrior and the devout Christian. But he comes off more like a senile grandfather than the lunatic zealot his actions and recorded statements suggest. Likewise some battle scenes work, while others don't. The film's rendering of Fredricksburg and Chancellorsville capture the chaos and carnage with accuracy. But Bull Run seems staged and phony. (Can anyone believe that a rank of green solders standing at attention in the middle of the battle would not even flitch as a canon blast decimates a group of comrades standing twenty feet away?) If you want a great movie about the civil war, check out Ang Lee's 'Ride With the Devil.'
Rating:
Summary: Laughable and worrisome
Review: This is one of the worst films I have seen in quite a while. It's a rare event when I choose not to watch a film all the way through--attempting to give it every chance to succeed--but this one made the decision to walk away pretty easy. One of the biggest problems with "Gods and Generals" is that it's basically structured as a series of long-winded, overly earnest speeches. By the time I heard the actor playing Stonewall Jackson undertake his third or forth such effort, I was just exhausted. For all of the film's accuracy in battle depiction and costumes, God help these people if they actually spoke like that. Furthermore, the film presents an apologist point of view for the Confederacy--their cause is God's cause, the war has been thrust upon them. Never mind that their cause was treasonous, too. I recently visited the State capitol builing in Austin, TX where memorials still stand representing this point of view (e.g., the war as being "the war of northern aggression"), which was rather surprising. Particularly irritating is the depiction of slaves being so devoted to their owners that they volunteer, and even risk their lives, to help the Confederate cause. Even granting the remote possibility that a few slaves may have felt this way, is this really how we want to depict slavery? It seems to me that a consistent "slavery is bad" message has a lot to offer. Finally, I hope this review won't be construed as a condemnation of the South. Southern culture in the U.S. has much to offer--it's a shame some within it choose to invest all of their cultural identity in a portion of history that is best left behind them.
Rating:
Summary: Sentimental for the South
Review: Finally a Civil War movie that is fair and balanced, instead of "North - good, South - bad." I love the way it starts out. Robert E. Lee being summoned to Washington and asked to head the Union forces. Lee says he never thought he'd see the day when a president of the United States would raise an army to invade his own country. He politely declines stating that he will never fight against his home, Virginia. Then we see Lee accepting the leadership of the Confederate forces. The Civil War was seen by Confederates as the second war of independence. But mostly, this movie is about "Stonewall" Jackson and his dependence upon God - hence the name "Gods and Generals." His love of his beloved Southern homeland runs just as deep as Lee's. I can understand why Yankees, anti-Christians, and the PC re-write history crowd, would hate this movie. In fact, it was the reviews that said this movie was too "pro-South" that made me want to see it. I normally don't care for civil war movies, except "Gone With The Wind" (which is based on the stories Margaret Mitchell heard from her grandparents about the Civil War era - except for the fictitious central characters) and "Shenandoah," but I love "Gods and Generals." And I appreciate the fair and factual treatment of the South and the Civil War in this film. Watch for Ted Turner to make a cameo appearance alittle more than halfway through this movie during a performance by a fellow singing a song about the Bonnie Blue flag.
Rating:
Summary: Looonnnnnggggg
Review: First the good stuff: The settings, costumes and makeup are 1st class. Obviously a lot of attention was paid to getting the "environment" right. The accents and language are also spot on. If only the tempo and characters were as believable. Robert Duvall is great as Lee, a marked improvement over Sheen in "Gettysburg". Many of the actors coming back to reprise their characters lent a continuity that helped the viewer immeadiately feel at "home". Unfortuneately, the director allowed the glaring (and confusing) error of Stephan Lang switching from Gen Pickett (Gettysburg) to Gen Jackson. Lang is a fine actor and did his best to fill out his poorly written character. Jeff Daniels looked to be about 40 pounds overweight and 40 years older than the character he played in "Gettysburg". Another jolting and foolish bit of hubis that detracts from the video is the intoduction of Ted Turner (ego-man) in a frivilous cameo that contributes nothing and generally detracts from the video's flow.
The bad stuff: This video has all the dash and tempo of a dead cat. Even the battle scenes seem to drag. Many of the scenes drag on and on while the director rubs your nose in a particular point. Shoddy editing and heavy handed direction detract from an engaging and memorable story line. Suggestion: Don't buy it, rent it if you must see it.
Rating:
Summary: God-Awful, and Generally Boring!
Review: Never thought I'd be bored with a Shaara-inspired Civil War epic, but this DVD was a huge disappointment. Bad beards all around, a turgid storyline, and the film didn't hold a candle to the book. Some of the special features included with the DVD were okay, especially interesting to my non-Civil War literate spouse. I own "Gettysburg", and use it as a teaching tool, but there was nothing even remotely as inspiring in G & G. (Not even Ted Turner's vanity role!) Save your money, and buy the books!
Rating:
Summary: Extremely disappointing
Review: I liked the movie Gettysburg and was excited about seeing this one. Almost every bit of dialogue ended up being a speech. Acting was awful....but some of that can probably attributed to whoever wrote the script because it was a horrid script.
| 
