Rating: 
Summary: BACK TO THE HISTORICAL EPIC!
Review: The Romantic Comedy is dying. Science Fiction is no longer potent (Just look at "Star Wars Episode 2: Attack of the Clones.). Police and Gangster Dramas are heading for television. Now, with the success of films like "Gladiator," "The Patriot," and "Pearl Harbor," Hollywood is going back to the historical epic. Based on the theatrical trailer, this promises to be the granddaddy of them all. Trailer Grade: A+
Rating: 
Summary: Trailer looks great
Review: I was a big fan of Maxwell's Gettysburg and I'm excited by the glimpses of the trailer for the new film Gods and Generals too. It looks great. I'm a little disappointed that Tom Berenger is not reprising his role as Gen. Longstreet, but I do like that Robert Duvall has replaced Martin Sheen. I think Duvall will do a much better job.
Rating:
Summary: TRAILERS!!!
Review: I have been waiting for almost a year to see footage from this film, based on the bestselling novel by Jeff Shaara, a prequel to his father Michael's Pulitzer Prize-winner "The Killer Angels" (the basis for Ron Maxwell's first Civil War Epic, "Gettysburg"). Please, let us see a trailer. I know it's gonna be great, but I wannna see some scenes. Please!!!
Rating:
Summary: Prequel to "Gettysburg" is better !
Review: The movie "Gods and Generals" is much better then the book. The movie is based on the novel "Gods and Generals" as well as on James Robertson's "Stonewall Jackson". In the movie, the director attempts to remove most of the innacuracies of the novel, while still keeping the storyline and flow intact. The special effects totally outdo it's predecessor, and the fact that the budget was over twice as much didn't hurt. The more stringent process of choosing reenactor extras was attempted, but falls short. There won't be any santa clause soldiers like in the opening of Gettysburg, but the Tubby Bearded Guys and Ravioli are still there. ... The only reason that I don't give this film 5 stars is because of the TBGS, modern haircuts, and real rebels. Not necessarily the fault of the film crew or director, but the faults of the reenactors themselves who don't care about history or doing it right. If you enjoyed the movie "Gettysburg", the novel "Gods and Generals", or anything Civil War at all, you will want to see this film. The battle scenes alone are spectacular, with the early-war uniforms present at manassas, and the frosted dead bodies at Fredericksburg. Nice details in there. Go see it!
Rating:
Summary: THIS IS AWESOME!
Review: THIS MOVIE IS FOR ANYONE WHO SAW GETTYSBURG. THIS IS THE LONG AWAITED PREQUEL. THE BATTLES IN THIS WILL BE MIND BAFFLING TO
ANYONE WHO LIKES SPECIAL EFFECTS. I SAY AGAIN ,THIS WILL BE AWESOME. FOR MORE MOVIE INFO, READ THE BOOK GODS AND GENERSLS
Rating:
Summary: Great Movie!!!
Review: Great movie with a perspective not common in the Liberal dominated mainstream media or academia. For the lefty in CA, "red neck" is a racist term you biggot!!!
Rating:
Summary: liberals go away
Review: Ok first off I saw this movie and thoroughly enjoyed. However, I cannot stand reading reviews by people who do nothing but complain. Some slaves returned to their "masters" after the civil war to continue to work for them! Slavery as an institution is bad and though not excusable there were slave owners who treated their slaves with respect while you had your bad lot as well. Please don't believe I'm advocating or you are an idiot. South went to war with the north cause they were being driven into nothing financially by the feds. This war was about economics, freedom, fairness, and self rule....the south rebelled and that does not make them traitors....that was not law at the time only after the war was secession made illegal. If you honestly believe Lincoln gave two nuggets about the black and poor down trodden slaves you are a fool....this war had nothing to do with slavery...but all the complaints by idiots is nothing more than garbage and should be ignored. Its just like the left to lie, they distort everything to gain advantage....Then you have reality and they are just so appalled and begin their propaganda machine.
Rating: 
Summary: I keep wanting to like this movie, but....
Review: Glory was a great civil war film, it had characters with character, it had a story with a story, it had a believable premise. But, this movie I don't know what this movie was all about. The acting was like a cross between stage acting and politicians trying to act emotional about their causes on a debate stage. And to have it centered in the 19th Century south in this format is like having the cast of the Andy Griffith Show deliver their lines with Shakespearean drama, it just doesn't work. I really don't think General Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson would be proud to be remember for his endless droning philosophy on lemonade. This movie has been playing endlessly on cable for the last few months, and I admit I keep getting drawn into watching it, and if you turn the sound down it's not so bad as a silent movie, but the dialog is, well it's what it is. I could care less about the message personally. The facts about the motivation of the Confederacy are so muddled due to southern pride and political correctness I really don't expect a movie to portray them accurately. Glory did at least make an effort not to sugar coat the reality of the time to a degree. You can't be politically correct about a time that just plain wasn't politically correct, and unfortunately in the times we live in this means that our history is being rewritten all around to either exaggerate the "bad" guys or glorify the "good" guys in whatever perspective the author seems to think those "guys" are. The simple fact is that 19th century America was a terribly racially divided place and it went much further than skin color and the South. I guess I keep watching it trying to figure out how someone could bankroll so much effort in costuming and location shoots and battle scenes and all and wonder if they actually watched it before they released it. Does the director of this movie actually have conversations like this? I think the real problem with this movie is that it tries to hard to be politically correct, and that the Author, the Director, the Producer, the Editor, or someone feels that you can't portray the glorious careers of men who don't fit into the political correctness mold of the modern day. This is a serious disservice to historical fact.
Rating:
Summary: So much preaching you can skip church for a year!
Review: Save your $ and just watch the excellent "Gettysburg" again. This one is simply terrible, almost painful to watch. If this was an accurate portrayal of Gen. Jackson, then I'm amazed that his troops waited until after Chancellorsville to shoot him. Returning actors are ten years older than in "Gettysburg" while playing in action that happened months+ before. The only positive was Robert Duvall as an excellent Gen. Lee.
Rating:
Summary: A film of epic proportions on the first years of the Civil
Review: War. It is a prequel to "Gettysburg" made 11 years ago yet the first of a planned trilogy.
The war is pursued thru its protagonist, General Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson. By the way, he disliked that nickname. He was a very devout man & believed in predestiny, therefore was utterly fearless. As he fought it, this movie is definitely rebel friendly. Jackson was portrayed as a highly moral man with integrity. Questions such as slavery are neatly glossed over. The first three battles are nicely outlined without getting bogged down in boring (to some) details.
Training & recruiting of civilians without a clue is covered. This use of nonprofessional soldiers & the advance of weapons technology since the last major conflict, the Napoleonic wars, 35 years before, make this one of the first modern wars in history.
The south had the best generals such as Jackson, Beaureguard & Lee, played superbly by Robert Duval. It was as I imagined him.
As good as the southern general were the northern generals were insubordinate, (to Lincoln) cowardly & incompetant. They delayed after Bull Run allowing the Confederates who were out-gunned & out-manned to build impregnable defenses. Stupidly, the union generals threw waves of young men into frontal assualts repeatedly. I imagine that is where the term "cannon fodder" was coined. The carnage yielded nothing & the Yankees retreated. This failure ensured a long, bloody conflict.
The "Making of...", commentaries & two fine songs by Dylan & Mary Fahl were nice additions to the DVD version.
| 
