Rating: 
Summary: What exactly did I just plunk down 6 bucks for?
Review: The genius behind Gettysburg is that it takes 3 days and looks at the events that unfold through the eyes of three very different men. In this way you learn how the people really felt and you can see what they were thinking.
Gods and Generals is somewhat historically accurate. Most battles are resonable portrayed but the section where Lee is "affirmed" as the Southern Military leader is absurd. In relaity, Lee only was promoted to the head of the Army of Northern Virginia when Joe Johnston was injured.
Furthermore, all the brilliance of looking at the events through the eyes of one character is simply lost. What does the Civil War early days have to do with Jackson drinking lemonade?
I will never know.
Gods and Generals could have been a magnificent movie, but it spent maybe 40 mins portraying the war and about 1 hr and 40 mins looking at Jackson.
I give this 1 star. I hope The Last Full Measure, if they make it, is not made in this way.
Rating: 
Summary: To all of the loyal readers...
Review: "Gettysburg", stands out on my top ten movie list because I rank it number one, I believe not enough people in today's society are interested in the historical events which brought them into this world, and has given them what they have today. Although I'm still a high school attendant, I am very much interested in movies which potray historical events, although I was only a child when Gettysburg came out, I was not aware that movie critics then, or now would subject a historical movie to such harsh critisism. I've seen Gods and Generals twice in the movie theatre, and look forward to its release date on DVD, although Gods and Generals does not top Gettysburg, it is historicaly accurate and informing, which is probably why I didn't see many people in my age group there. Although the movie was more emotionally tied-into than Gettysburg was, it still had about a good hour of battle renactments. I rate it five stars because of it historical accuracy, and because the movie shows the different people involved in the war, and how the war really did turn brother against brother. Personally, I think they should make more movies that inform us of our past, and not of the immaturaty of society, such as (Malibu's Most Wanted, or The New Guy). I'm sure if you showed Gods and Generlas to an audience, I guarentee 9 out of 10 would feel for the generations that fought and died for freedom, and not judge the movie by how much action is in it. We all must remember that Gods and Generals was not produced to have the same effect as the Matrix did. I would like to thank Ronald Maxwell, Shelby Foote, and Ted Turner for investing time, and 90 million dollars into this movie to pay respect to those that have fallen and sacraficed for our present day society.
Rating:
Summary: Gods and Generals a Triumph
Review: This is a great movie. It to me would touch the hearts of all who see it. People may complain that it is only about "Stonewall" Jackson, but it is based on a book. I personally don't mind it being alot about Jackson, but if the movie is based on a book, you have to go by what is in the book. Besides this was only 3.5 hours in the theater compared to the total 6 hour DVD to be released in the future. That 6 hour DVD will probably have more on the other characters. Overall, this was a great movie, that I think everyone should see. It is one of my favorite movies of all time. Even if you are not into the Civil War, this movie will inspire some to learn more about it. Even though has a totally different feel compared to its sequal "Gettysburg", I still say that it is one of the best movies of all time. I can not wait for the final movie, "The Last Full Measure."
Rating: 
Summary: Oh my, did that ever suck!
Review: Aside from the special effects that looked like something out of a ten dollar video game, the fact the actors aged considerably (and had far much less enthusiasm) from the Gettysburg epic the movie just stank up the entire theater and the one next-door. Steven Lang was Pickett, and watching him as Jackson was a tough transition. Then there was the glossing over of the slavery issue. The movie seemed to imply "it wasn't bad, we were all friends, had the slaves on up to dinner and sat around and sang like birds". Casting the aristocracy of the South in a beneficent role in slavery does a disservice to us all. I never cared for Turner but this travesty is an all time new low even for "Mr. Colorization". As interested as I am in the Civil War if he's stupid enough to put this piece of ... out on video it'll be easy to pass by.
Rating:
Summary: The Stonewall Jackson Story ?
Review: Gods and Generals could have been the best civil war film ever made, however the slow script,dreary music(even during action scenes),bad acting and poor camera work fail to stir much emotion. For the sixty million Ted Turner put into this mess, and with GETTYSBURG's Ron Maxwell directing, I was hoping for something alot better. Yes, there are moments when it almost starts to grab you, but it never quite gets there. The only redeeming factor is Stephen Lang's wonderful performance as Jackson. This film would be great if they trimmed everything out except his part and retitled it "The Stonewall Jackson Story".
Rating:
Summary: Embarrassing
Review: This movie must be an embarrassment for everyone who had anything to do with it. My wife and I found it excruciatingly sappy and dull, the last adjectives one would imagine pertaining to the Civil War. We walked out before Gettysburg. What a massive waste of landscapes and re-enactors' time, not to mention investors' and movie-goers' money! The southern accents are corny; the dialogue so naive and jejune that it is painful to listen to; and the vignettes and tableaus are patched together with little other narrative logic than a timeline. This movie needs a screenwriter, an editor, a director, some acting talent, and a producer with the sense to say "no way." Some good footage of carnage might be saved for a better story on the Civil Way. Perhaps it is fitting to make a movie as disastrous as the war itself. One lesson the makers of this disaster might have learned from Homer is that a war by itself doesn't make a story, much less an epic. The story is inside the war, and it takes some talent if not genius to tease it out. Watching this movie is the equivalent of Dunbar's shooting skeet in Catch-22.
Rating: 
Summary: life and times of Stonewall Jackson
Review: I enjoyed Gods and Generals and can't wait for the full length version. I believe it would have been better and would have quelled some negative reviews had it been two movies. The one you see concentrates on Stonewall Jackson, which is fine in an of itself but because they had to make the movie four hours or less they had to cut. So Antietam and the Emancipation Proclamation are missed, along with the agony Lincoln had in trying to find any commander to compete with Lee. The movie shows well the organization of the Confederate Army and should have shown the overwhelming confusion within the North from McDowell toMclellan to Pope to McClellan to Burnside to Hooker to Meade. Unless you are schooled in this you have no clue the level of disorganization of the North and how close the south came to getting the North to stop. I can't say the South could have won for it was only Lincolns tenacity that kept things going and saved the nation. I hope the third movie highlights the efforts of the brave men of the North like Gods and Generals highligthed the brave men of the south. IT IS WELL WORTH IT.
Rating:
Summary: From a history major
Review: I began hearing rumors of making Gods and Generals a movie since the book was released in the late 1990's. So, obviously, since Gettysburg is my favorite movie of all time, I was really hyped to see this. The acting was great, especially with Stephen Lang jumping from Pickett in Gettysburg to a more serious General Jackson in Gods. I also enjoyed Jeff Daniels reprising his role as Joshua Chamberlain. Also, Robert Duvall far exeeded Martin Sheen in his portrayal of Robert E. Lee. Also, the story was very good, but I do have some criticisms. I felt that it focused too much on Jackson. If Ron Maxwell would have stuck closer to the book and included more on Lee and Hancock and others, the movie would have by far been better than Gettysburg. As a history major about to enter my second year in college, I was especially thrilled with the historical accuracy of the movie. Unlike with Gettysburg, I was unable to pick out any flaws.
Rating:
Summary: A great job!
Review: I take issue with many of the reviews that have panned GODS AND GENERALS. I have taught American history for over thirty years and have a deep interest in the civil war. The movie is
not perfect and there are ommisions. What we have is the start for providing a new generation of Americans an interest in our
past. The Civil War was a defining moment in American History. Too few Americans understand how that war shaped us as a nation. As Shelby Foote stated in Ken Burn's Civil War, The war made us an"is." GODS AND GENERALS shows that in 1861 many Americans were
unsure where their loyality belonged...to the state or to the nation. This is a conflict many do not understand today. The film also is the first film to bring to life in a partial and incomplete way on of the key figures of the Civil War - Thomas Jackson. The film is in no way a complete picture of Jackson. A lot is left out concerning his secretivness and
habits, but it is a start. It motivates interest. Certainly, there is room in the future for a more definitive biography of Jackson, but this film introduces him to a new generation of Americans. I feel many of the critics were overly harsh in some of their criticisms.One deplored that the film gave the impression that the South was victorious. During the time period of the film, it often was. One deplored the lack of "Blood and guts" in the film. To produce a film of this scale, the producers and director produced the best film they could given what would be astronomical costs to do blood and guts special effects.One critic lampooned the film because "all of the actors were talking through beards." Look at our penny and Abraham Lincoln! Beards were the style! I am looking forward to the film coming on DVD. I hope thet a film of LAST FULL MEASURE lies in the Near future.
Rating:
Summary: gods and generals
Review: TO BE TOTALLY OBJECTIVE ABOUT THIS MOVIE WS ASKING THE IMPOSSIBLE OF ME. I HAVE WAITED FOREVER FOR THIS MOVIE. I CAN'T WAIT TO SEE IT ON DVD. AT THE THEATRE I FELT RUSHED AND WILL CONCENTRATE BETTER ON THE SUBTLE PARTS ON THE DVD. I THOUGHT THE ACTING WAS GREAT. REALLY...
THE IMAGES THE ACTORS PORTRAYED, LIKE CHAMBERLAIN AND JACKSON WERE SO SOLID AS TO WARRANT A NOMINATION IN SOME OSCAR AWARD CATEGORY. TO SEE JACKSON PORTRAYED, WAS A FIRST IN ITSELF. WHERE HAS HE BEEN? I FELT I WAS WATCHING HIS BIOGRAPHY AT TIMES. HIS ECCENTRITY CAME THROUGH AS WELL AS HIS LOVE OF WAR.
AT LEAST HANCOCK GOT MORE AIRTIME, BUT COMPARED TO THE BOOK IT WAS FAR LESS. CHAMBERLAIN WAS HIS USUAL INTELLECTUAL SELF. THE ACTORS WERE PREACHY AND LONG-WINDED AT TIMES, BUT SO WERE THEIR PERSONAL WRITINGS. THEY SPOKE AND WROTE WITH GREAT DELIBERATENESS AND EMOTION.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME DIGITALIZED BATTLES COMBINED WITH REENACTORS. THE BIGGEST PROBLEM WHILE WAITING FOR THE NEXT MOVIE IS FIGURING OUT WHO WILL BE GRANT. MY VOTE IS FOR HARRISON FORD. MAYBE BRAD PITT CAN DROP IN AS CUSTER. WE NEED A SHORT, FEISTY, AND FIGHTING IRISHMAN AS SHERIDAN. HMMM.
SHERMAM WAS A FIGIDTY, NERVOUS, AND LONG WINDED TALKER ON ALL SUBJECTS T, BUT HE AND GRANT ARE THE BEST OF BUDDIES AND THAT IS A KEY INGREDIENT AS THEY PLAN THE SOUTH'S DESTRUCTION. I VOTE FOR HYPERACTIVE PERSONALITY AT MIDDLE AGE LIKE JAMES CAAN AS SHERMAN
LANG CAN STILL PLAY PICKETT...WHO WILL PLAY SHERIDAN???..WE NEED MEADE BACK AS WELL...
GODS AND GENERALS WILL DO BETTER ON DVD....ITS WAS THAT KIND OF MOVIE.
|
