Rating: 
Summary: "Gods and Generals"
Review: I liked this movie alot. If you like war movies see it. But its very lengthy, 4 and a 1/2 hours! It has an intermission! Overall the movie was fantastic! I would recomend the DVD it might be more convienient! The battles were cool and the acting was not bad either. I loved how they went in depth with the humanity aspect it really pulled the movie together. I own "Gettysburg" and DVD and I will own "Gods and Generals" on DVD!
Rating:
Summary: An Immediate Classic
Review: Ronald Maxwell has taken on one of the most difficult tasks in movie-making, the crafting of an historical period piece about which almost every viewer approaches with a prior attitude, and replacing time-worn icons with flesh-and-blood characters. "Gods and Generals" dispells the mythology of 140 years of rancorous historiography to take its place as the instant classic movie of the War Between the States.The scope is epic, with obvious effort at attention to detail and accuracy, with the recreation of the havoc and savagery of battles fought with weapons far deadlier than the tactics of the day. (A notable exception is the deletion of the carnage of Antietam.) Some may wince at the slaughter at Fredericksburg, but, in truth, if the images of Matthew Brady and others are to be believed, the movie is probably too gentle in its depiction of the gore of battle. More to the point is the metaphor that Irish against Irish in that battle portrays of the truth of the addage of "brother against brother" of the Civil War. The film's greatest strength lies in its portaits of the storied combatants. Here, the performances shine. Stephen Lang's virtuoso rendering of the complexity that was "Stonewall" is surrounded by an excellent Jeff Daniels's Joshua Chamberlain and Robert Duvall's marvelously muted Robert E. Lee. And Maxwell's faithfulness to Jeffrey Shaara's novel results in the abolition of icons with the inclusion of the intimacy of Anna Jackson and Fanny Chamberlain and the family love that both men cherished. It is interesting to note that Chamberlain, professor of religion and classic studies, has not yet reached the height of his reputation, which would come at Gettysburg, the film of which has already been made. And Jackson, whose religion is inseparable from his being, dies at Chancellorsville. But director Maxwell unapologetically renders the Christian character of Lee, Jackson and Chamberlain as a fact, in the context of the 1860's mindset. And his doing so is a fulfillment of his duty as an historical film-maker, just as our look at the wives and families of Jackson and Chamberlain are his expositing of truth, not a nod to political correctness. The Thomas J. Jackson who Stephen Lang brings to life was a slave-owning Presbyterian who saw God's hand at work in everything. Among those things were his starting a black Sunday school (to the amazement and displeasure of the townspeople of Lexington, VA) and paying Jim Lewis, another man's slave, to be his manservant. Impossible? In 2003, most surely, but certainly not in 1861. It is a combination of this kind of complexity and Maxwell's depiction of the great conflict with such circumspection, rare in our video-game-attention-span lifestyle, which gives credence to the joy of reading a letter at home and devotion to a palpable God among men who held hundreds of others' lives in their next decision. The PC police will cringe at "Gods and Generals." Those who come to this opus without that baggage will be swept along with the intensity of a mimi-ball and most likely come away with a greater appreciation for the character of those whose feiry conviction forged this nation on the anvils of Bull Run, Fredericksburg, Chancellorsville and Gettysburg.
Rating:
Summary: Gods & Generals
Review: I do feel very excited about Gods & Generals. It was exactly the movie I wanted to see. It's showing of the Civil War and the various thoughts and ideas that were around in era were tremendous. I thought that all the major views of the politics at the time were represented and shown in an organized,thoughtful way within the story. The scene between the Martha the slave & General Hancock in the hospital over a dead Union soldier were a very strong announciation of her fight for freedom while being loyal to the absent family. The scene between Jackson & his cook also showed a poignancy of the problem of being a slave who wants his freedom and would love to hear the words from his owner and the knowledge that if one keeps up in the same vein one is likely to get his owner mad and receive some retaliation. I loved the family scenes even though the wives weren't happy to let their men go to war. Just like now-a-days, hunh. I liked the through line of the young man staying in the South to fight for Jackson. Later on he got caught switching sides and paid for it with his life as Jackson had promised earlier on. According to my reading that happened alot on both sides. It's the small details that make a movie fun to watch. That was a big deal depicting man's responsibility for his actions. The battle scenes were great. I especially liked the Irish scenes; although I have one quibble with the scene that shows Jackson alone when General Bee said that his brigade was standing there like a stone wall. Jackson would have argued about that as he did in life and in the movie that it was his men that were the stone wall. Chamberlain & Buster must be real friends by now. They are able to convey so much in their scenes together. Also the slavery speech that Chamberlain lays on baby brother Tom. Mr Maxwell I salute you on the wonderful job you did on this movie. I have been supporting and recommending it to all I see and sending email to the cineplexes to bring it back. They don't seem to have local numbers.
Rating:
Summary: A great civil war classic!!
Review: God and generals is a very good and interesting movie which is part one of a trilogy based on the civil war. Stephan Lang did an excellent job as general Sonewall Jackson his performance gives me a better look as what the real Thomas Stonewall Jackson must have been as a leader of the confederate army. Robert Duvall made a great Robert E. Lee a better performance than Martin Sheen in Gettysburg. Jeff Daniels returns as Lt. Chamberlain a roll which stands out in Gettysburg and continues to shine in Gods and Generals. The battle scenes in this were a lot clearer and had more of a punch than the battles in the film Gettysburg. The battles that really stood out in this movie were Fredericksburg when the two Irish Birgades on opposing sides were shooting and killing each other. Between the music score and the way the battle was filmed it really has a powerful impact. The battle of Chancellorsville the films final battle really stood out when you see all these confederates coming out of the woods without making a sound made my heart race. I enjoyed Gettysburg and it makes a very good sequal to gods and generals but between the two Gods and Generals had the most impact on me. If you have an interest in the civil war these movies along with Glory opens your mind and gives you a strong image to what it was like actually being there. The things I wish they had in Gods and Generals is the battle of Antietam the bloodiest day in the civil war, and the rebel yell I've read that it was used by Stonewall Jackson just before he advanced his troops to attack. I look foward to seeing The Last Full Measure keeping Robert Duvall as Robert E. Lee and bringing Jeff Daniels, and Stephan Lang back. Overall an enjoyable historic experience.
Rating:
Summary: "Generals" is up there with the Civil War "Gods"!
Review: This is an amazing movie! I've seen this movie two times...Well, it follows three leading men in the Civil War and follows them into their personal and professional lifes...The critics do not see a good movie when they do. This movie shows what a great story line, characters, music, and cinematography can do the the modern world. I think everyone needs to see this historic movie because it shows what the U.S. was before all of this modern 2003 happened.
Rating: 
Summary: Not as bad as you might think
Review: Critics have just about killed expectations for this movie. They claim that it sympathizes too much with the South, suffers from too many cliches, in dire need of editing, and blah blah. If you are a Civil War buff, you'll enjoy the attention to detail of this film. If you're a military buff, you'll enjoy the attention to war tactics. If you're a fan of the bible, you'll love this movie. Yes, this movie is too long and it does have some war cliches, but overall, I wouldn't say this was a horrible film. Think of all the movies you'll enjoy if it weren't for the constant criticism offered by critics replaying themselves over in your head
Rating: 
Summary: Great movie, ignore the PC crowd!!!
Review: I can understand the PC crowd hating this movie. It gives human faces to those they have been demonizing since the war. It threatens the very foundations of PC history. Could the reviled southerners have really been fighting for liberty, rather than just to prolong slavery? Were the southern states justified in leaving the union? Was it legal? Was it greed that drove the north to war? Maybe these questions need more looking into. Regardless, this is a very good movie. It will no doubt exceed the attention span of some, and the lack of gratuitous sex will disappoint many, but I really liked it!
Rating:
Summary: Lang is superb
Review: This is not a perfect movie. I gave it 5 stars based on its perfection comparative to other recent movies. First, the negative aspects: The women's clothes are often very bad. I can spot [store] lace a mile away, and the dresses were often ill-fitting and/or inappropriate for the venue, which I found distracting. The same can be said for the civilian men's clothing. The CG scenes were likewise bad. The film-makers seemed to be laboring under the handicap of never having really studied the classes of people they tried to portray. One of my acquaintances remarked that the Virginia legislature looked like an aging motor-cycle gang. I agree. Like it or not, many of these men were but little removed from Brit nobility. Several acquaintances have remarked on the inappropriateness of Mrs. Pendleton's hair--this is nit-picky, but was, nevertheless, distracting. Many of the minor roles are badly cast--the scene depicting a gathering of Confederate generals was no better, if as good, as what one can see at any re-enactment. I thought Ted should have gotten more for his money. Most disappointing was the score. As flawed as Gettysburg was, the score was magnificent--I expected something comparable for G&G, and it just wasn't there.
On the positive side, Stephen Lang WAS Stonewall Jackson. There is really no dichotomy in Jackson's personality--he was an integral man. Lang was able to portray him as such. Truly the most masterful acting job I've ever witnessed. The dialog was appropriate for its time. That's how folks talked. Live with it. The constant affirmation of Faith was likewise authentic. It's easy to mock something that one has no conception of. The apparent dichotomy of slaves who loved their owners yet wanted to be free is unfathomable only to shallow minds, and is, in fact racist. People who would never bat an eye at the loyalty of the physician Keptah to Lucanus and Diodorus in "Dear and Glorious Physician" nevertheless fume when the same attributes are displayed by Confederate negroes--as if they were incapable of loyalty and patriotism surpassing personal interest. For shame. The love story between Stonewall and Anna is powerful, touching, and completely convincing. The film is not afraid to portray the conflict as "Lincoln's War", and deals fairly with the president in including his outrageous message to the Union troops after the slaughter at Fredericksburg. However, more kindness could have been shown to Burnside, who did not, in fact, behave in as arrogant a fashion as the film portrayed. Perhaps this was done to lessen the degree of guilt which ought to have been Lincoln's. Best of all, Martin Sheen did not appear in this movie. The wonderful Robert Duval misses General Lee, but manages to at least do him honor in his dignified and strong portrayal. This is a movie which I will purchase as soon as it is released on DVD. I hope that the director can correct his mistakes before he films "Last Full Measure", but I also hope he will not revert to the political correctness and historical revisionism displayed in "Gettysburg". He has taken a giant step toward making the perfect "Civil War" movie. A few tweaks here and there should do it.
Rating:
Summary: IN DEFENSE OF "GODS AND GENERALS!"
Review: I am sick and tired of reading and hearing all the negative reviews for "Gods and Generals." So I am here to clear things up once and for all time! Several points come to mind:
(1) This film was not made with the intent of documenting the entire first half of the Civil War (1861-1863). It was meant to dramatise several of the dramatic events that lead up to the battle of Gettysburg, the blodiest battle of the war.
(2) In the 1860's, people were not only quoting Shakespeare word-for-word, but they could come up with speeches off the top of their heads as well. And since Joshua Lawerence Chamberlain (Jeff Daniels) was a college professor, his profession demanded it!
(3) So the film portrayed Chamberlain, Robert E. Lee (Robert Duvall) and Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson (Stephen Lang) as religious men. No, it wasn't for dramatic effect. THEY BELIEVED IN GOD! AND SO DO I!
(4) So, the visual effects weren't perfect. THEY SERVED THEIR PURPOSE! They said "Fredericksburg," and "Huge Armies." And it was believable!
(5) So, it ended abrubtly. This is the first part of a trilogy. Wait for the end before you make any more complaints.
If you'd wait for July 4'ths six hour "Director's Cut" DVD, this will either 1) Clear up all the confusion, or 2) Just give you complainers something else to gripe about! Grade: A+
Rating:
Summary: The best movie I have seen
Review: If I had to see one movie all year, this would be the one I would want to see. It was historically accurate and portrayed "Stonewall" Jackson as a very Christian man, which he was. There was no profanity in the movie which was representative of the times in the 1860's. It was unbiased and only revealed both sides of the conflict from the North and South's perspective. Although it had a 12-minute intermission, I wanted the movie to keep flowing without any interruptions. I was never bored and the battle scenes were amazing. Stephen Lang deserves to win some kind of award for his portrayal of "Stonewall" Jackson. He was fantastic. Terrific movie! I can't wait for the DVD to come out. I heard it is going to be 6 hours long after they add the Battle of Antietam.
| 
