The "Gods and Generals" Breakdown: Part 1: 1861 / Reel History
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 ก.ย. 2024
- 20th Anniversary Special: Join History Professor Jared Frederick for part one of three in a lively analysis of the 2003 Civil War epic "Gods and Generals." Loved by some and reviled by many, the movie is plagued by narrative imbalance and oratorical excess. Part I examines the year 1861, with particular emphasis on the Battle of First Bull Run. Also view our interview with "Gods and Generals" author Jeff Shaara and hear his take on the film: • "Gods and Generals" Au...
Support us on Patreon: www.patreon.com/reelhistory
Find Educator Resources on our website: www.reelhistoryfilms.com
Explore our online shirt store: my-store-c21f5c.creator-spring.com
If you wish to donate to our channel, our PayPal is reelhistory1944@gmail.com
Reel History delves into historical films to separate fact from fiction. These engaging episodes explore, contextualize, and clarify stories related to the most famous historical movies. In contrast to the more prevalent "reaction" videos, these installments seek not only to entertain but to educate and inform. For host Jared Frederick and producer Andrew Collins, these episodes are a labor of love and a means of expressing passion for the past as well as cinema. Courteous viewer feedback is always welcome. The views expressed are our own and do not necessarily represent our employers or organizations with which we are involved.
*Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational, or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use. NO COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT INTENDED. All rights belong to their respective owners. All original commentary and materials produced by this channel are the intellectual property of Reel History, LLC. To reach the Reel History team, email reelhistory1944@gmail.com.
I like how professor Frederick always introduces his videos with how he knows that people will disagree with him and not share his opinions.
And yet his channels is one of the very, VERY few ones i ever seen on YT whose videos have so little "dislikes", lot of them even no "dislikes" at all! 🙂
Seriously, you're doing such a wonderful job, sir and I'm absolutely happy whenever I see a new video coming out here.
Best of luck with all your endeavors and looking forward to lot of interesting videos still to come.
Greetings from Switzerland
Thank you for your kind comments!
That may be the case because YT doesn't show dislikes anymore :D But I totally agree on the quality part.
@@ReelHistory Could you look at Cromwell and look at it and decide if it propaganda or not
“We Are Fighting for Independence, Not Slavery”. - Jefferson Davis President of the Confederacy to Edward Kirk 1864
“I worked night and day for 12 years to prevent the war, but I could not. The north was mad, blind,would not let us govern ourselves, and so the war came.” - Confederate President Jefferson Davis 1861
“Is it worth while to continue this union of states, where the north demands to be our masters and we are required to be their tributaries.” - Thomas Cooper of South Carolina 1860
“In this enlightened age, there are few I believe, but what will acknowledge, that slavery as an institution, is a moral & political evil in any Country.” - Robert E Lee 1856
“While we see the Course of the final abolition of human slavery is onward, & we give it the aid of our prayers & all justifiable means in our power we must leave the progress as well as the result in his hands who Sees the end” - Robert E Lee 1856
“I am rejoiced that slavery is abolished. I believe it will be greatly for the interests of the South. So fully am I satisfied of this, as regards Virginia especially, that I would cheerfully have lost all I have lost by the war, and have suffered all I have suffered, to have this object attained.” - Robert E Lee 1865
“All I think that can now be done, is to aid our noble & generous women in their efforts to protect the graves & mark the last resting places of those who have fallen, & wait for better times.” - Robert E. Lee
“I have always been in favor of Emancipation.” - Robert E Lee
"I consider it a privilege to die for my country." - Paul Jones Semmes
On the third day of the battle, Confederate General Lewis Armistead led his brigade during Pickett's Charge, fixing his hat on the point of sword and reputedly urging his men to “remember what you are fighting for - your homes, your friends, your sweethearts!”
In an 1863 letter to his home state congressman, Elihu Washburne, Grant summed up his pre-war attitude: “I never was an Abolitionist,” he said, “not even what could be called anti-slavery.”
“Slavery exists. It is black in the South, and white in the North.” - Union Vice President Johnson.
“We're not fighting for the perpetuation of slavery, but for the principles of states rights and free trade, and in defense of our homes which we were ruthlessly invaded.” -VMI Jewish Cadet Moses Jacob Ezekiel 1864
“Abolish the Loyal League and the Ku Klux Klan;
let us stand together. We may differ in color, but not in sentiment. Many things have been said about me which are wrong, and which white and black persons here, who stood by me through the war, can contradict.” - Nathan Bedford Forrest
“African Americans should have the right to vote.” - Confederate Colonel John Salmon Ford
The confederate soldier “Fought because he was provoked, intimidated, and ultimately invaded”
-James Webb Born Fighting a History of the Scoth-Irish in America
“I was fighting for my home, and he had no business being there”
-Virginia confederate Soldier Frank Potts
“Let me tell you what is coming. After the sacrifice of countless millions of treasure and hundreds of thousands of lives, you may win Southern independence if God be not against you, but I doubt it. I tell you that, while I believe with you in the doctrine of states rights, the North is determined to preserve this Union. They are not a fiery, impulsive people as you are, for they live in colder climates. But when they begin to move in a given direction, they move with the steady momentum and perseverance of a mighty avalanche; and what I fear is, they will overwhelm the South.” - Texas Revolutionary/President/Governor Sam Houston
List of causes of the Civil War-
Harpers Ferry
On the night of October 16, 1859, Brown and a band of followers seized the federal arsenal at Harper’s Ferry, Virginia (now West Virginia), in what is believed to have been an attempt to arm a slave insurrection. (Brown denied this at his trial, but evidence indicated otherwise.) They were dislodged by a force of U.S. Marines led by Army lieutenant colonel Robert E. Lee.
Brown was swiftly tried for treason against Virginia and hanged. Southern reaction initially was that his acts were those of a mad fanatic, of little consequence. But when Northern abolitionists made a martyr of him, Southerners came to believe this was proof the North intended to wage a war of extermination against white Southerners. Brown’s raid thus became a step on the road to war between the sections.
States' Rights
The idea of states' rights was not new to the Civil War. Since the Constitution was first written there had been arguments about how much power the states should have versus how much power the federal government should have. The southern states felt that the federal government was taking away their rights and powers.
Political power
That was not enough to calm the fears of delegates to an 1860 secession convention in South Carolina. To the surprise of other Southern states-and even to many South Carolinians-the convention voted to dissolve the state’s contract with the United States and strike off on its own.
South Carolina had threatened this before in the 1830s during the presidency of Andrew Jackson, over a tariff that benefited Northern manufacturers but increased the cost of goods in the South. Jackson had vowed to send an army to force the state to stay in the Union, and Congress authorized him to raise such an army (all Southern senators walked out in protest before the vote was taken), but a compromise prevented the confrontation from occurring.
Perhaps learning from that experience the danger of going it alone, in 1860 and early 1861 South Carolina sent emissaries to other slave holding states urging their legislatures to follow its lead, nullify their contract with the United States and form a new Southern Confederacy. Six more states heeded the siren call: Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas. Others voted down secession-temporarily. When President Lincoln called for Volunteers to invade the south, six southern states voted to join the Confederacy.
The issue of slavery
The burning issue that led to the disruption of the union was the debate over the future of slavery. Secession brought about a war in which the Northern and Western states and territories fought to preserve the Union, and the South fought to establish Southern independence as a new confederation of states under its own constitution.
Most of the states of the North, meanwhile, one by one had gradually abolished slavery. A steady flow of immigrants, especially from Ireland and Germany during the potato famine of the 1840s and 1850s, insured the North a ready pool of laborers, many of whom could be hired at low wages, diminishing the need to cling to the institution of slavery. Child labor was also a growing trend in the North.
The agrarian South utilized slaves to tend its large plantations and perform other duties. On the eve of the Civil War, some 4 million Africans and their descendants toiled as slave laborers in the South. Slavery was part of the Southern economy although only a relatively small portion of the population actually owned slaves.
The book by Doris Kearns Goodwin is filled w/LIES! She is clearly a worshipper of the LIN--CLOWN cult! Lincoln developed TOTAL WAR which is war against soldiers AND CIVILIANS! Every war since in the world has used the satanic policy; the world having yet ro recover. We CITIZENS remain 'slaves to the CENTRAL GOVT as begun by linCLOWN!!
Any sultry/balmy VTH and Atun-Shei fans here with me?
Jared and the Atun-Shei host actually worked at Gettysburg National Military Park at the same time for a summer.
that's awesome do a collab video
Absolutely. I love the overlap between these channels!
atun-shei has gotta be one of my favourite people on the planet
@@breakfaust, believe it or not, he and Jared worked at Gettysburg National Military Park the same summer once!
I tried rewatching the Director’s Cut about a month ago I got to the lemonade scene and I thought to myself why am I doing this I hate this movie.
Pass the buttah biscuits!
Yeah the moss neck chapter is a bit too much
I’ve been waiting on this. When this came out on DVD, my brother and I were in separate classes at Ole Miss on the Civil War: mine was the age of the Civil War: 1820-1865, and his was the more desirable Civil War combat class. We were excited to see Gods & Generals make a quick trip to the $5 bin at Walmart. We bought it in our zeal over our classes, and it fast became our most reliable sleep aid.
I laughed out loud. 10/10
I love Gettysburg but haven't bothered to watch Gods and Generals. But the book was ok.
The film has its moments. Just glad we don't own it on the double VHS set.
I had the pleasure of being in Dr James Robertsons Civil War History class at Virginia Tech in 1988. Outstanding course. Never missed a class even though it was at 8:00
@@robertferguson533, he was quite the encyclopedia on Civil War Virginia!
Jared, you missed pointing this out but the blue uniform Jackson wears early on in the film is actually a Virginia State Army uniform and not a US Army uniform. Jackson graduated from West Point in 1846, served in the Mexican War, resigned from the army in 1851, and then became a professor at the Virginia Military Institute. Virginia used the same blue uniform as the US Regular Army, except that it had Virginia state buttons. Note that in Jackson's very first scene, he is wearing the round belt buckle of Virginia, as opposed to the rectangular one of the US Army.
Can't cover it all!
@@ReelHistory Not with that attitude you can't
@@scotfarquharson6836hah
@@ReelHistory That's why your not accurate enough to do these films and stories.
@@suzvalentino1901, this comment makes no sense.
The directors cut of the movie cut some the scenes of Jackson praying among other things and it flows better for what it’s worth. What perplexes me most about this movie is there’s no Valley campaign, it’s not even referenced. And that’s where Jackson really earned his fame.
One nit to pick that hasn’t been mentioned is that Lee did not have a beard nor gray hair in 1861. His hair was still dark and he had a mustache.
My advice to anyone is skip the movie and read the book. In this case the book really is better.
Good calls. The Valley Campaign could have been a movie itself.
Correct on Lee's facial hair. It was undoubtedly shown white for continuity and immediate identification.
I absolutely love these two films. Stephen Lang gives a masterclass performance
He really nailed Stonewall Jackson. Brilliant performance.
Gods and Generals was a mess imo. Should have sticked to the book.
@@johndfw8680 never read the book.
I just love the the film.
Stephen Lang’s performance is nothing short of a masterpiece.
I also prefer Robert Duvall as General Lee
it’s also rare to see a genuine representation of the south beyond the modern BS and lies that’s spread.
I never fall asleep during movies. Until I tried to watch this movie.
@@TheRealMediaMan Ironic given gods & generals is a modern piece of BS full of lies
Jackson's hand, circa 29 minutes in. What you say about Jackson tending to hold his hand up is documented, but in this case you can see that it is wrapped in a cloth which has blood on it. He was wounded in the hand, and was holding it up to slow the flow, and loss, of blood from the wound. Later, we see him with that arm in a sling.
you are correct, i guess Jared could have worded it better (he was recovering from a bad cold) but he does say him holding his hand up is an "homage" to his quirks. regardless, thanks for your input and for watching!
Still taught as basic first aid today….. Elevate the wound
I wish the movie had been more faithful to the novel which was more balanced. Also, we need more CW films about the Western front which was more significant than the fighting in the East.
A movie about Sherman would be a good one. An adaptation of "The Widow of the South" would likewise be interesting.
Army of the Cumberland movie, please. Just one.
I would be all-in on a movie about Shiloh. Been several times and it's one of the most well-preserved battlefields around because it's in the middle of nowhere
But you have The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly about fighting in the West! Hehe
I would love to see a Civil War film that depicts the trans-mississippi theater.
Gettysburg is still one of my all-time favorite films. So, I was pretty stoked when I heard about this movie.
Then...I watched it.
😳😖🥴😵💫😵
The pacing is abysmal, the acting is really bad, and as my mom put it, "it doesn't have the magic." I'm not ragging on the actors, themselves. Robert Duvall, Jeff Daniels and some of the other actors are really good at what they do. It's just subpar writing and direction compared to Gettysburg. I love Duvall, but I didn't like him as Lee. It was too distracting to see too many different actors in the roles from Gettysburg; EVEN MORE SO to see the same actors from Gettysburg in different roles, namely Stephen Lang and William Campbell! It's a shame they didn't bring back Tom Berenger. He probably didn't like Longstreet being relegated to a glorified cameo in this film compared to being one of the primary roles in Gettysburg, but Bruce Boxleitner was not great here. Terrible casting choices for all the new roles, and very underwhelming dialog and performances from those reprising their roles from Gettysburg.
"We have named the cannons Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John."
(Ugh! Make it stop!🤦)
Also, it reeked of über-romanticizing and fluff compared to Gettysburg. Yes, Gettysburg had Its fair share of those things too, but Gods and Generals cranked it to 11, and it was downright hard to sit through at times.
I've only watched it once, and that was all I could stomach.
They actually named the cannons that though
Life's rough, youngster. Can't have your way all the time.
It's a shame that "The Last Full measure" was never made. The book was pretty good.
Agreed. We always thought Robin Williams would have played a good Grant.
@@ReelHistory Are you serious?
@@sonnyliston4741, absolutely. Look at him in "Good Will Hunting" where his acting talents are at peak--all with a beard no less!
@@ReelHistory I have trouble seeing Robin Williams as a military figure
@@sonnyliston4741, fair enough! Who do you think would play a good Grant?
I love the timing of this video. I am half way through reading the book and I have seen the movie before. Thank you for covering it.
Wonderful!
I remember going to see this when I was 14 with a friend of mine and their dad who was a huge CW buff, a whole wall of books and memorabilia. He and this film really got me into studying history in general. Having an intermission in a film was so alien to me at the time as well.
Rebel Yell. I was surprised reading that book. I had always assumed Jackson was a typical man of a slave state. But to learn he repeatedly risked arrest by teaching slaves to read was a revelation to me.
The other fact from that book that surprised me was that Jackson purchased two slaves because they begged him to do so to prevent their being sold to the deep south. If I recall, one of them was a skilled craftsman.
Jared said it’s important to identify the lessons he was teaching the enslaved people. It makes his arrest even more alluring considering that he professed a pro slavery Christianity.
Also, Jackson did not free his two enslaved people. The type of slavery to evolve out of Virginia was still founded on supremacist views which dehumanized enslaved people.
So very often, these facts have been used to admonish Jackson from his connection to slavery. I hope the book examined these facts with a lens that respects the history of chattel slavery in the United States.
Jackson is a bit mysterious on the slavery issue as he does not fit within the cookie cutter template of traditional slavers as we read of them.
I don't believe Jackson ever taught slaves to read. Was this something actually related in the book referenced? (Not that it would make a lot of difference. At the end of the day Jackson was a slave owner, and showed at no point any desire to change that status, nor to end the practice elsewhere.)
@herecomesaregular8418 if I recall correctly from the book, Jackson was not just teaching church lessons, he was teaching other peoples' slaves to read so they could read the Bible for themselves. This was illegal to do in VA at that time.
@@herecomesaregular8418 I think it was his wife who said so post war.
I personally absolutely loved both this and Gettysburg. The amount of content/storylines personally never bothered me. I am 33 and I remember seeing Gods & Generals in theaters.
critics complimented its performances and historically accurate details such as costumes, they criticized its length, pacing, and screenplay.
And valorization of the slaver traitor cause, and whitewashing of the horrors of slavery
@@robertelder164 70% of the south didn’t have slavery, many confederates were anti slavery, no confederate was convicted of treason, and the union had 1 million slaves in 1864.
Looks like your ignorance is the problem
@@SouthernGentleman The Slaver traitors themselves said why they rebelled. It is slavery.
Treason consists of warring against the United States, they were traitors.
Kluxxer deflections change nothing.
@@SouthernGentlemanuh nice propaganda attempt
For all of the legitimate shortcomings of the film, the one thing I can say is that the soundtrack is phenomenal.
It has some of the best acting and line delivery. And some of the most awful and cringy lol. But over all the movie pulls my heart strings something fierce.
It's a visual masterpiece! Everything is both beautiful and minutely historically illuminating. But the script...too bad.
I loved the movie Gettysburg but this movie perpetuates the ‘Lost Cause’ myth.
What does that mean?
The easiest way to understand that society is to actively imagine the level of asshole you would HAVE to be to literally own another human. Secession is treason we can not go on like this in the end we all NEED each other you can't just separate from people you don't like and still be a Patriot.
Looking at people and events of the distant past through modern eyes, are we? Bad idea, that.
@@Rick-jf6sg Slavery is as much a part of human existence as war itself and therefore very current and the two go hand in hand. This very same thing makes it a distraction, today. The real issue is the level of aggression that came after slavery was abolished, called Jim Crow and was in place even when there weren't laws expressly demanding it.
You can fulminate against secession if you like, as long as you are intellectually consistent and condemn the "treason" of the 13 Colonies for seceding from the British Empire.
Imagine being angry at history.
@@JDoe-gf5oz Imagine ignoring history. You know, the river we all ride on.
It’s a shame that The last full measure will not be coming to screen anytime soon. I’ve read a lot of the Shaara books, from the Mexican war to ww2. Great reads.
Frozen Hours is a great one about the Korean War
@@matthewmccormack7791 I’ve not read that one.
@@helpimmabug7430 its pretty good about the Battle of the Chosin
Another thing that's actually quite interesting and historically accurate is when Lee arrived at the Blair house, you can see the U.S. Capitol dome being constructed in the background, which is actually realistic because the Capitol was being transformed, adding the dome and two wings of the building around Spring 1861.
I'm glad some of the actors came back from the film Gettysburg. I became interested in both Civil War films when I was in the 12th grade. 🥰❤️
Indeed, Hollywood can be powerful that way!
Their obvious advanced ageing stood out in a (ghastly) prequel.
I know this is an older video but I just came across it. I remember when they filmed this. I was a student at VMI at the time. They did get one thing right. Those are actual VMI cadets in those scenes. Funny to see my friends in the movie. And yes Stonewall although extremely well respected by the corps was considered a lackluster professor. Rumor has it amongst the corps to this day he memorized his notes and only taught that. When I was a senior there we restored his cannons called “The gospels” because stonewall named them Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John. Rah Virginia Mil!
Thanks for sharing!
Your breakdown is much better than Atun-Shei's. I feel like, along with so many people today espousing woke ideology, he tries to be irreverent as possible towards the memory of the southern soldier. Basically calls it a confederate apologist and propaganda movie. I can see why some might think that in some respects. I feel like it goes a little heavy on the southern perspective, but he completely dismisses why your average confederate soldier felt the need to fight. The answer was never as simple as "muh slavery."
I watched Atun-Shei's piece stuff as well. He definitely had an agenda. But he's still just a kid with lots of growing up to do.
Minor mistake, but Lee did not have a beard until the winter of 1861-62. He should have been clean shaven in the opening scene. Also, Robert Duvall was about 15 years too old to be Lee.
Indeed. Done for continuity no doubt.
If you look at an 1859 photo of Lee, he was dark-haired with a mustache. The last time he was ever clean-shaven was when he was a young man through his graduation from West Point.
@@1101millie97, indeed!
Yes, but being too old didn’t keep him from Duvall a much better performance than Martin Sheen did in the same role in Gettysburg
@@shawnmiller4781 True, I was about to say Sheen was about 2 feet too short, 50 pounds too heavy, and incorrectly/outrageously accented to play Lee!
Stephen Lang was very good as Stonewall Jackson in this movie, but I liked his portrayal as General Pickett in Gettysburg much better.... of course that was also a much better movie than the preachy and overlong Gods and Generals.
I wish they'd cut up the scene were Pickett and Jackson are in together in a way that Lang played both parts. A little easter egg for the fans.
@@jakebeach7056 that would have been very cool....and Lang aged a lot better than many of the actors from Gettysburg that were in Gods and Generals, so it wouldn't have been too difficult with fancy make-up.
THANK YOU, FOR YOUR SERVICE! | Just to be a sport, I had to watch this badly-written, dreadful Lost Cause propaganda full of NOBLE slavers who gotta do what a man's gotta do to defend slavery. As a military veteran (11Bravo) I found this movie morally offensive, because "the victims of war" are the Confederates; the self-conscious language (“I nevah thought that I would live to see. . . .”) redolent of pompous religious justification, obviously is meant for the twentieth-century viewer.
So what?
@@Rick-jf6sg --- THE THEFT OF LIFE TIME BY BAD ENTERTAINMENT IS NOT ENTERTAINING . . . this hokey movie is white supremacist propaganda, like the propaganda of Socialist Realism, about a place thankfully gone with the wind.
@@Rick-jf6sg --- WHAT IS THE PURPOSE IN TELLING THESES RACIST LIES? . . . the contemporary MAGA-Nazis and Judas Trump have clearly and definitively shown the ideologic connections that prove this movie to be white-supremacist propaganda. The intellectual dishonesty of "Gods and Generals" (2003) makes a documentary of "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly" (1966). Is it not time for the right wing to "give it a rest" that you are "victims of history" rather than so-so soldiers and vanquished villains?
Wrong. Lee did not receive ownership of his father in law’s slaves, they were to be loaned to Lee to work off Custis’s debt at Arlington. They were to stay there for 5 years total or they could leave earlier if the debt was paid. Some ran away which was illegal be law. Doesn’t make discipling them right, but it was also custom to shoot deserters from the army back then and Lee was a military officer. Custis’s slaves were freed December 29, 1862. Lee said this in response to having to run his father in law’s house.
“The N. Y. Tribune has attacked me for my treatment of your grandfather's slaves, but I shall not reply. He has left me an unpleasant legacy.” - Robert E Lee
“While we see the Course of the final abolition of human slavery is onward, & we give it the aid of our prayers & all justifiable means in our power we must leave the progress as well as the result in his hands who Sees the end” - Robert E Lee 1856
“I am rejoiced that slavery is abolished. I believe it will be greatly for the interests of the South. So fully am I satisfied of this, as regards Virginia especially, that I would cheerfully have lost all I have lost by the war, and have suffered all I have suffered, to have this object attained.” - Robert E Lee 1865
You obviously intentionally left these important parts out.
Plus many countries and places like Belgium, Cuba, Puerto Rico, Ottoman Empire still had slavery and slavery died over time. Plus the Confederacy’s Allies was Britain.
Southern Gentleman- I notice he didn’t respond to the facts! Keep it up.
The reason Jackson had his arm raised during the scene at Manassas should have been obvious. Apparently you missed the fact his hand was bandaged because he took a musket ball to his hand that grazed it.
That's why Jared said "it's an homage to him holding his arm up"
In real life the reason he sometimes kept an arm raised is because he was crazy.
Apply pressure and elevate the wound is still taught as basic first aid today
It was illegal to teach slaves to read and write. You could receive severe punishment for doing so. Jackson didn’t care. Because of his religious beliefs, Jackson thought it important enough to teach his slaves to read the Bible. Now, if his slaves were nothing more than chattel, why would Jackson care anything about them, if he did not believe that they had a human soul that could go to heaven? Your thesis makes no sense to me.
There’s one scene where it shows a military supply train on what is supposed to be the Manassas Gap Railroad, but the engine and cars are clearly lettered “W&A RR”, which is for the Western & Atlantic Railroad, located in Georgia.
The engine seen is B&O engine No. 25, named “William Mason”, which is an 1856 built locomotive that is today preserved at the B&O Railroad Museum.
It’s my understanding that it was merely unused/recycled footage from Walt Disney’s 1956 film “The Great Locomotive Chase”, in which the Mason played the roles of the locomotives “General” and “Catoosa”, and was lettered for the W&A Railroad.
The Virginia & Truckee Railroad’s No. 22 “Inyo” played the parts of the W&A locomotives “Texas” and “New York”, as well as the Rome Railroad engine “William R. Smith”. While the B&O’s replica locomotive “LaFayette” played the part of the W&A locomotive “Yonah”, then leased to Major Mark Cooper’s Iron Works Railroad in Etowah, Georgia.
Good technical detail here.
Although the cook Jim may have been a slave, there were several thousand armed black soldiers in the state militias of the southern armies. There were both free black men, and slaves who were promised their freedom at the end of the war. This fact is not mentioned here. Also not known to many people is that there were black slaveholders who supported the Confederacy.
Oh god. I haven’t even started this yet and I already know this is gonna be good.
Despite this movie being absolutely terrible there’s definitely some good stuff in it. To me, Stephen Lang IS Stonewall Jackson. His performance is fantastic, I imagine him whenever I read about Jackson. If the movie was more focused and maybe just a bio pic on Jackson it might have worked better.
The Fredericksburg sequence is also a real stand out. While the Irish vs Irish scene isn’t exactly the most accurate (Cobbs “Irish” Legion, lmao what?) it’s a perfect example of the whole brother vs brother aspect of the war.
Besides that, yeah, my complaints are everyone else’s complaints. It’s overly long, boring, and hot take, might be biased.
We only wish Lang had had a stronger script to work with.
I've had arguments with people generally well informed on the Civil War, who swear the Confederates had several "Irish regiments". They did not. So far as I can tell they had 1 that could be even slightly considered as such and it fought in the Western theatre.
Yeah. Yeah, that's real good, law dog, 'cause law just don't go around here!
@@aldosigmann419, now there is a movie with a good script!
@@aldosigmann419 So weird to see Lang playing a cowardly bully in that since he now has such a reputation for playing badasses. Suppose that is why he gets paid the big bucks.
I used to go to a doctor in Fredericksburg, and it's always a trip to think of the Union crossing the Rappahannock within eye shot of rush hour traffic on the bridge (Fredericksburg can have sleepy traffic). Now 305 Lewis St. where poor Mrs. Beale lived will be vivid with me if I go down there again. Pretty crazy to stand in a neighborhood intersection where dozens of Union troops fell to capture 160 years prior.
This would have been fine as a mini or limited series if it also stuck close to the book as Gettysburg did. As a feature it pales to the book which is far better and the medium can’t possibly begin to do it justice.
Agreed.
The best part of this movie was at the beginning when they showed all the State Flags. That got me choked up a little. It was straight downhill after that
It is a very good opening.
I believe that "Gods & Generals" was originally shot to be a mini series for television and at the last minute Ted Turner released it as a theatrical movie to recoup the cost of the production. This gives me the best explanation on the length of the film.
That actually was "Gettysburg" that clocked in at over 4 hours and was supposed to be a miniseries on TBS/TNT. That movie was a literal retelling of the book "The Killer Angels" from cover to cover. Much better than this mess was.
@@AndreaMcMaster I think gettysburg was really better; G&G is too ... "disjointed" ! For a foreign person, Gettysburg explains the different opinions much better
I think with regard to Jackson quoting scripture it all depends on the audience. I’m orthodox Presbyterian and greatly appreciate use of scripture and, having read “Christ in the camp” I think it’s perfectly consistent with the historic Jackson.
Slavery was abolished in the British Empire already and died in the rest of the Americas during the following decades. It was on the way out, as the movie suggests. The fact that the bulk of the international sympathy went to the Union further supports this position.
That's not to say that the Confederates didn't secede to try to protect slavery. They did.
Slavery was growing in the United States by 1860. That's why southern states rebelled at Lincoln's election; he wanted to stop the growth. Check out the books of Eric Foner for more on this.
@@ReelHistory will do, thanks.
@@ReelHistory I’m not sure that I’m willing to trust the word of a cosmopolitan red diaper baby and openly avowed far left radical.
Nonetheless, this a direct quote from his lecture: “The percentage of people working in agriculture in the South in 1860 is the same as in 1800, about 82%. In the North it has gone down to less than 50%... Now, this does not necessarily make war inevitable. Countries have different regions, they have agricultural regions, they have industrial regions. They don’t have to go to war with each other, they can compliment each other. But nonetheless it does introduce many tensions.”
th-cam.com/video/xW7jvSD3xEg/w-d-xo.html
It doesn't seem to me that a disagreement which was dealt with peacefully by the British Empire a few decades before and all the other American powers a few decades later needed to be resolved through the bloodiest war in U.S. history. Especially when the end result of all the white Americans slaughtering each other was just Jim Crow segregation for another 100 years.
@@seandilallo8718, in short, there is nothing in the antebellum era to suggest that southerners were willing to compromise further on the issue of slavery. The North yielded to them on most major policy points in this regard up to the Civil War.
@@ReelHistory The Compromise of 1850 is a good example of productive negotiation between Northerners and Southerners on this issue, just after a patriotic war that expanded their country rather than destroying it.
Gettysburg covers 3 days in 4 hours. Gods And Generals has the same amount of time to cover two years.
That's a key point that many G&G bashers conveniently ignore.
Jackson was shot through the hand in this scene. Even though I agree with the understanding of Jackson’s “blood balancing” eccentricities but it doesn’t seem out of place here considering someone of Jackson’s education would know that his hand above his heart would slow the bleeding.
It’s basic first aid
I will never forgive them for not including the California scene for Hancock. Not only would that scene had set up Armistead's story in Gettysburg, but it also would've provided an excellent illustration of the choices that many of the officers in the army made.
This film is an epic and thus the million of story lines, it's much like the ancient epics and sagas, a story of many about the major event that took place.
its not good enough to warrant the runtime
Wish we could get a better version of Gods and Generals. Maxwell really dropped the ball.
You would need a better book to start with.
The directors cut of this movie is a big improvement over the theatrical version everyone has seen. It has an entire new battle and fills in a lot of the holes in the story.
It was neat to see Antietam.
Does it still whitewash the horrors of slavery?
@@robertelder164 Watch it and find out, buttercup
@@BishopWalters12 It was a rhetorical uestion, still kluxxer lost cause agitprop
@@robertelder164 Poor buttercup
Indeed, every minute counted in these movies.
Gettysburg, covers approx 4 days of events.
Gods and generals, covers approx 2 1/2 years.
Does anybody else think it would have made more sense for the film version of Gods and Generals to begin with a text or narrated prologue explaining the events leading up to the war instead of abruptly opening with Lee turning down command of the Union Army?
We suppose it was assumed the audience would know--another mistake.
Chamberlain has been a long time hero of mine...an amazing story and career
Indeed!
I named my kid after him...hoping it would cause him to aspire to greatness. It worked. @26, he's ascending to the top of his industry, capturing an invitation to the Vice-President's home for her Christmas party. (regardless of your personal opinion of her - it's the office, first and foremost. )
@williamhollin1445 that's really awesome! Congrats! That is definitely an achievement. Like you said, Regardless of opinion of her, it is an accomplishment!
Material culture was the main thing the movie got right, especially the extended cut, from my limited knowledge they got a lot more right in that regard than in Gettysburg. The soundtrack was ok, Glory, Gettysburg, and The Horse Soldiers will continue to be my favorite civil war movies but I do admit to watching Gods and Generals occasionally
The movie is not a complete loss. It just frequently got ahead of itself.
Robert Duvall is an actual decedent of Robert E. Lee
I watch anything with Robert Duvall so there's that. (Especially since he is related to Lee) And Jeff Daniels' Chamberlain is a favorite. But as an entertaining movie it fell short and that's too bad.
Lots of wasted talent.
This is one of those movies that needs to remade. If they go with the background, then it should be centered on Bull Run. If they follow Jackson, then it should be centered on Chancellorsville.
The director's cut is longer than the war itself.
😆😄
🤣🤣🤣🤣. That’s 💯 accurate. I actually decided to buy the directors cut myself. Long yes, but loved those extra scenes.
@@CG87343 I mean if you're going to watch the movie, you gotta sit through the whole thing.
@@dannyhernandez1212: Pretty much. May as well get the full version if you’re going to do it at all.
@@CG87343 yup. Have you watched the directors cut of Gettysburg?
This and Gettysburg were my favorite movies when I was like 8 years old
Very few films have disappointed me as thoroughly as this film. It was as terrible as Gettysburg was brilliant.
You say Lee was a slave owner from a slave owning family.
He and his mother were destitute, and lived with relatives. His father was a man in deep debt and left the family when Lee was very young.
It has been said he had slaves and rented them out. But this is difficult to believe. A career officer, almost never at home. Commandant of West Point, etc. It has not been proven.
Lee did not own the slaves at Arlington. They were part of the estate of his father in law, and as executor of his estate, he was directed to free them in 5 years.
Lincoln promoted Lee to Colonel and then offered him the command of what would be the Army of the Potomac. Curious that an alleged slave owner would be offered the command of an army to "free the slaves".
The Norris slave incident was printed up in Northern papers with obvious purpose. There were apparently no corroborating witnesses.
It is easy to believe that a personal servant or a domestic slave would hold gratitude, for the alternative would be a field slave which was hell.
Only crickets from the monitor on site here. Truth prevails.!
Lee was not offered command of the army of the Potomac. He was offered a field command to command the portion of the union army which would defend Washington DC
@@greglathrop8191 which at the time was the Army which became the Army of the Potomac
What other army was there in Spring 61?
And your point is ….?
this is my fav civil war movie.. i dont get why it gets so much hate.
Imagine a modern pro-Nazi movie.
To each their own!
It is whitewashed confederate agitprop. People are pretty clear how, and why
Because of leftist propaganda of the media and the Democrats
Because it's little more than a propaganda flick.
Watched this movie in theaters at 12 and despite its issues I still have a soft spot for it. It's not a great movie and it cut out so much despite its bloated run time but there's just something about seeing civil War battles that especially nowadays you will just never see. Every now and again I will listen to the hail Caesar speech with the cannons and musical crescendo as the assault on the wall begins at Fredricksburg or the Battle of the Irish Brigades and be reminded that I'm glad that this movie was made at least for certain scenes. I also like some of the common soldiers scenes that show a breakdown in discipline and that they are not just hordes of men running around and shooting each other for the spectacle.
I would have loved to have seen the part three that covers the the end of the war for the army of Northern Virginia, maybe not the full four hours with intermission but I know that it'll never be made.
For now on war shall be our Judge!
Hair Casear!! We who are about to die salute you!!
Fredericksburg scenes are the best in the film. More to come on that in episode two!
Your take on G&G pretty much mirrors my own.
The whole feeling of this film is off- it’s over dramatic with it’s acting and whimsical music. It doesn’t earn its drama.. it’s takes it for granted. When compared to gettysburg, there is no comparison
Quite right. The script is full of delusions of grandeur.
Very insightful, and a far better experience than having to sit through the actual movie.
We do our best to keep things entertaining!
There will never be general's without the soldiers starting from the lowest rank
"A union that must be stitched together by bayonets holds no charm for me." -- Robert E. Lee
Lee was correct in my opinion. The South fought the war for a bad reason (slavery) and a good cause (limited federal constitutional government) and when the South lost, so did limited government, murdered at the hands of Lincoln. Chancellorsville is my favorite part of this movie.
You used "murdered" and "Lincoln" in the same sentence and still made him sound like a bad guy. Interesting.
@@ReelHistory Thanks for the reply. I consider Lincoln the man who murdered 800K Americans and destroyed the Constitution, leaving us with this shell of a bogus government that is no longer limited nor legitimate. Just my opinion. Ever read Jeffery Hummel's history of the war, EMANCIPATING SLAVES, ENSLAVING FREE MEN?
Lincoln is patently despotic. When you analyze him from the proverbial 30k foot view; it’s ugly.
Very well said! Am so tired of the reverence or worship of Lincoln, and the Lincoln memorial itself is an affront to democracy- he looks like an emperor on a throne.
@@historyandhorseplaying7374 agreed
Stephen Lang was great as Stonewall Jackson. Robert Duval was good as Robert E. Lee. The rest of the movie was bad.
I know that Gods and Generals has its problems but I absolutely love this film! One of my all time favourites!
My thoughts exactly. Unfortunately, many people took it way too seriously and thus unlimbered their artillery.
I have read that Book. I have also read all the offers reports of the men that were there and that's over 22 books. The war was not over black slaves there was more to it than you think. The North tryed to tax the south for each slave. But there's so much more
Ugh.
If only someone had thought to suggest to Ron Maxwell that he should stop after Gettysburg.
A major problem is that the Shaaras were not involved in the script, unlike Gettysburg.
Bruce Boxleitner should have been playing Phillip Sheridan😁
Sorry bit of a joke there, Boxleitner's most iconic role was as John Sheridan on the Sci-Fi series Babylon 5
Hmmm . . . don't know about that. Phil Sheridan was a little fella, while Boxleitner stands 6-2.
I consider Gods and Generals the pinnacle of civil war films.
Stephen Lang gives a master class performance and the details in writing are flawless.
Aside from Glory this film is my favorite
Chamberlin was not a soldier at the time in the movie. He hadn’t joined the army yet. On the other hand, Jackson was already a soldier. There is no “imbalance” in the facts, as you say.
So this was a book adaptation gone wrong? How often does that happen? Interesting break down, as always. Nice bit of trivia on IMDb - Martin Sheen was in the Washington, D.C. area in early September 2001, filming scenes for The West Wing (1999). He was prepared to take a Tuesday morning flight from Dulles to LAX if Warner Brothers agreed to pay him $1 million to reprise his role of Robert E. Lee from Gettysburg (1993). Because Warner Brothers passed, Sheen was not on Flight 77 the morning of September 11, 2001.
I was interested by your reference to the use of railways for efficient transportation of troops and supplies - I just happened to spend my spare time in recent days researching the Deutsche Reichsbahn - said to be the largest enterprise in the capitalist world between 1926 and 1932 following the unification of all the railway companies in the individual German states after WW1. My starting point of interest was a vague reference in Rob Kershaw's book, It Never Snows In September (1990) - the German side of Operation Market Garden in September 1944, who briefly mentions "railway guards" as one of the rear echelon units incorporated into the defence of the Nijmegen bridges, and Dutch researcher Hans Den Brok's series on the 'Market Flights' of the USAAF Troop Carrier units, which include photographs of USAAF glider pilots guarding prisoners of war in the Groesbeek POW cage. Many of those POWs were actually Reichsbahn personnel - apparently because they were issued small arms (rifles, pistols and machine-pistols) and wore a 'Wehrmacht' arm band to identify them as combatants under the rules of war. Similarly, the glider pilots were not intended to be combat troops, being regarded as too valuable for their flying skills and held back in rear areas until they could be evacuated to rejoin their squadrons, but they were used for odd jobs like guarding prisoners.
One of the interesting incidents from the 82nd Airborne's area of operations around Nijmegen was a train that steamed out of the city and ran straight through the middle of the Divisional HQ area on the Groesbeek heights and on into Germany towards Kranenburg and Kleve, completely unmolested. London had requested the Dutch resistance organise a national rail strike of Dutch workers in Holland for 17 September to coincide with the airborne operation, so the train probably caught troopers by surprise. General Gavin was furious with the incident and ordered the track to be mined and a bazooka team on permanent watch to stop any more coming through. Another train did attempt to run the gauntlet and the locomotive was stopped by the bazooka. Germans scrambled off the train and ran off into the woods, and it took all night for the troopers to round them up and secure them in the POW cage. My research indicates that Nijmegen hosted the Lehr-Abteilung des Chefs des Transportwesens (transportation training battalion) for the army and Reichsbahn personnel manning the network of Bahnhofs-Kommandanturen (railway station commands) and they were probably trying to evacuate the Reichsbahn personnel that were not trained as frontline combat troops.
Losing Sheen on 9/11 would have been a tragedy among many tragedies. Glad WB didn't pay!
Seth McFarlen was supposed to be on one of the flights as well, but his assistant gave him the wrong gate time.
@@Rick-Rarick - it's never Steven Seagal, Chuck Norris, or the entire cast of SEAL Team on any of these flights - have you noticed that?
@@Rick-Rarick, wow!
@@davemac1197 Seagal has not worked out so well as a “Lawman” lol
Not shown, but highlighted aas the after effects of battle (the 29:18 part of your video) was the hand to hand combat prior to that video snippet. I was there and had been in previous movies. Filming was going slowly so I took it upon myself to speak the scene's director and the cameramen. They were so safety conscious to an extent that scenes were dragging. I told them that we as reenactors know what to do and to let us do what we do best. He then gave us 10-15 minutes to script our own scenes and we did it flawlessly without incident. Instead of 8-10 different cuts, we only had to perform maybe 3or 4 times. My idea, and it worked. :-)
Great story!
Too much of a Stonewall love fest. When he died at the end I thought he was going to rise on the third day.
I think they played it up too much in many ways- the speculative personal stuff etc.
But it is cliche for a reason. The Valley Campaign came for the Confederacy in what was up until that point its darkest hour- what seemed likely to be a successful attack of the Capitol. His unlikely victories in the Valley precipitated the failure of the Peninsula Campaign and rightfully elevated him as a hero for the southerners.
Make no mistake either, the Valley Campaign was probably the most brilliant series of tactical maneuvers in that war against significant odds and shows marks of true genius. Despite being outnumbered he often found himself with a numerical advantage at the point of contact with his enemy thanks to his maneuvering. Not only that but in the big picture it achieved a significant strategic distraction at a critical juncture for the south. For good reason it stands as probably the most notable and studied "campaigns" to emerge from that war.
As we all know he was also an eccentric. Extremely pious, unique personality etc. And he died early. That eccentricity when coupled with military genius and a premauture death often makes for intrigue and legend building.
Was never a fan of stonewall Jackson. This movie just put him up on a pedestal.
@@AlexLopez-rx8lw Not a fan? Why so? (Just curious).
Great video. While Gods and Generals clearly has a lot of issues in terms of its sense of balance and its portrayal of slavery, I’ve always thought it wasn’t the absolute worst film made. I think it’s too easy to give the film a bad reputation in reviews (it’s pretty easy to shit all over), so I appreciate you taking the time to give it an objective review. Looking to the next parts of the series.
Thanks for your perspective! The film certainly has some good moments.
It's not just the balance and portrayal of slavery. It strays so far off of the source material that it's not even the same. It was a nightmare for me to be on the set due to the inept handling of the extras (making Gettysburg we were told to just do our thing and if we had suggestions they usually listened to us to make it better). Passion of the Stonewall was an advertisement for Bud Roberts' book that had just come out, and he just happened to be the TA on the movie.
@@kellycochran6487, that's a really interesting contrast you mention.
@@kellycochran6487 Agreed, the movie is much more "The Stonewall Jackson Story" than "Gods and Generals." Multiple chapters devoted to guys like Hancock who are barely a footnote in the movie.
The film "Cromwell" had many Bibilical lines. Jackson was the Confederate Cromwell. Thus the relious ines are historical and appropriate.
No doubt, although repetitive for the sake of cinema.
A good review. Personally I enjoyed the movie, and I’ve watched the directors cut. Yes, it was extremely long, but I enjoyed some of the extra scenes, like the ones with Booth in them and the extended scenes at the Maine camp.
Overall, it’s a good movie. Flawed for sure, but still good.
Thanks for your input!
IF you are a neo confederate who loves being lied to
Well, Professor, it really surprises me that you did not know that General Jackson was inflicted with a shrapnel wound to his left hand at the battle of First Manassas. Yes! Jackson had some strange eccentric behaviors, and, yes! He would raise his arm and hold it in an upright position because he thought it increased blood flow. But, this is not what he was doing at the battle of Manassas! He got shot in the hand and refused medical treatment during the battle. If you watch the very next scene in “Gods and Generals,” where he is paying homage to the dead on the battlefield, you will notice that he has his arm in a sling. I assure you, that wearing that sling was not one of his eccentric behaviors.
I think the issue with this, as opposed to Gettysburg is that you can show the humanity and valor of men in a given action without addressing the underlying cause. In this movie the underlying cause is front and center it's the motivation for the actions of all the characters.
I've been waiting for this one
So have we!
Removing the statues and monuments to this time in our history is one of the greatest cultural crimes we could have committed against ourselves. They were meant to heal the division and honor the dead.
It all depends on perspective. They are memorials of heroism to some and scars of oppression to others. It's what makes history interesting.
@@ReelHistory There are many moments in history when statues and monuments are destroyed. Everyone is considered a shame. Earthquakes and fires happen, but the worst ones are the ones people do to themselves. The riots of Alexandria that destroyed the great library, the riots that destroyed the forum of Constantine. All self inflicted wounds that destroyed their own cultural legacies. Now America gets to join that list of aging, self destructive empires. We deny our greatness while reveling in our own downfall and call it atonement.
Food for thought!
www.smithsonianmag.com/history/a-toppled-statue-of-george-iii-epitomizes-the-ongoing-debate-over-americas-monuments-180979463/
@@ReelHistory toppling the statue of a contemporary ruler isn’t the same thing. Current events are still unfolding, the persons impact and legacy is still to be determined. His statue has not achieved the status of cultural significance nor has it become woven into the fabric of the nation’s identity. It’s not simply the act of defacing the monument, it’s what the act represents and what the monument represents.
Legacies are constantly rewritten and redefined as a reflection of contemporary events. Whether a good or bad thing, it is just the way it is.
Rebel Yell is a very good book. It does a good job showing the complexity of Jackson.
Have you read any of Gwynne's other books? He's a fine writer but he has the habit of doing too much opinionating rather than just sticking to the facts. But that hardly makes him unique among today's literati.
@@Rick-jf6sg I haven't read his other work. I will look into it.
The people of Virginia, in their ratification of the Constitution of the United States of America, adopted by them in Convention, on the 25th day of June, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eight-eight, having declared that the powers granted them under the said Constitution were derived from the people of the United States, and might be resumed whensoever the same should be perverted to their injury and oppression, and the Federal Government having perverted said powers, not only to the injury of the people of Virginia, but to the oppression of the southern slave states
- Virginia Articles of secession
Virginia voted to stay in the union but switched sides because Lincoln sent a fleet to Charleston which caused Fort Sumter. Virginia’s article of secession is in direct response to that.
Written in black and white.
This is the first video from this channel that I won't bother watching -- not because of Jared, but because that movie was possibly the most miserable excuse for cinema I've ever endured. It's hard to believe that such a travesty came from the director of the magnificent "Gettysburg."
That was pretty much our conclusion
Yes, Gods (R.E.Lee) and Generals (mostly Glorious Rebels) fighting for happy servants (slaves) and powerful music and Sechesh triumph over Federal Forces… …
It is just a long movie pushing the Lost Cause to the 9th Degree. Gettysburg was much more even approach.
@@DrTarrandProfessorFether So what?
Id rather get dysentery at Chickamauga than have to watch this terrible movie im liking this video because i feel sorry for Jared poor SOB
It's ok, this was our choice. Anything to help out Mr. Shaara
@@ReelHistory Jeff Shaara and his paratrooper dad rule it just stinks that those great books got turned into such bland lost cause dog water. Thanks for the great videos anyway.
@@jerrysmooth24, it has been awhile since I watched the film and I have enjoyed clarifying/explaining it.
-Jared
Stonewall Jackson also had a kerning disability as a young man. He would stay up at bight and study over and over again until he got it. I thin that can be attributed to his rigid teaching style.
I've read a great deal on Lee , I've have never heard of your statement before about Lee and the story on the escaped slaves.
From the Robert E. Lee Memorial itself:
www.nps.gov/arho/learn/historyculture/an-unpleasant-legacy.htm
Yes he was a bad man and his legacy should be removed from public view.
@chiefslingineef3641 no we need to remember, not make them into idols.
@@chiefslinginbeef3641 Nonsense. He was a typical man of his time and place, not ours. We have no business judging him.
.
Best review of this film I ever read said it was a movie featuring lots of Southerners spending lots of time doing lots of talking.
For as much I love Gettysburg, I dislike this movie just as much. There are so many things I dislike about this movie. Gettysburg was great because you got 50/50 plot time for both Union and Confederate characters. Not the case in Gods & Generals, where it felt like much closer to 75/25 (on top of that you had stuff like slaves that loved being slaves which I have a very hard time believing). Then there was the casting which failed by not being able to reprise some of the actors for characters (Martin Sheen for Lee, Tom Berenger for Longstreet) and then while I appreciate that they were able to keep some continuity between actors (Jeff Daniels and C Thomas Howell for the Chamberlain brothers, Kevin Conway for Kilrain, Patrick Gorman for Hood) they were all shells of their Gettysburg selves: Daniels got fat, and Patrick Gorman was damn near a hundred playing a guy in John Bell Hood who was in his 20's.
Then in the first half of this movie there is an endless litany of speeches and it comes off almost like a bad stage play. The dialogue in so much of it feels forced whereas in Gettysburg in came off much more naturally (and on top of that it felt like they tried to cram in all the famous Civil War quotes inorganically where they probably didn't belong). Furthermore, the music in Gods & Generals feels wrong. Gettysburg's score felt much more homey and rustic while this one's felt like it was trying too hard to win awards.
Then purely cinematically there were a number of duplicate shots at both First Bull Run and Fredricksburg. On top of that there was a ton of very bad early 2000's CGI used in some of those battle scenes. To add on to that by 2003 the use of PG13 violence in war movies just wasn't going to cut it. Gettysburg gets a pass because it was made in 1993 and was originally made for TV. But by the time Gods & Generals came out in 2003 we had seen graphic and realistic war violence in Braveheart, Saving Private Ryan, Gladiator, Black Hawk Down, We Were Soldiers, and The Last Samurai so bloodless and goreless violence just wasn't going to pass muster.
Good and very true input!
@@ReelHistory I will say the one thing it does better than Gettysburg is the sound of battle. Everything I've ever read describes the boom of cannons and the crackle of musketry, which I think Gods and Generals nailed
@@lawrencedockery9032, agreed!
So, I wasn’t crazy about this film, but I thought the opening song with the different flags waving was pretty neat.
I remember going to the theater to see it with my dad lol I think it was longer than the Lord of the rings movie!
If I remember correctly one problem that both sides faced during the First Battle of Bull Run was that both sides basically wore the same uniform so identification was a issue.
In some cases, yes.
Plenty of smoke.
People arrived late.
I love this movie, especially the Battle of Fredericksburg scene. My Great Great Granddaddy was at the battle of Fredericksburg. Pvt Benjamin Durham Co.I 38th NC Inf. He was one of those men behind the wall cutting down the yankee invader. I wish I could have been there to give em hell too. DEO VINDICE.
The movie makes a general reference they are invaders, with JLC’s quoting of Caesar’s army on the march!
My ancestors were around somewhere, in the 9th Virginia Cavalry. Are you an SCV member sir? Deo Vindice.
@@historyandhorseplaying7374 Sam Davis 596 Biloxi Mississippi.
@@garyyork-zt8om Elihu Hutton 569 WV
@@historyandhorseplaying7374 👍
I think the Directors Cut is a better movie and I don't get triggered by everything like so many in Gen-Z because I try watching war movies or period pieces in general without my 2023 mindset of what is right and wrong.
Good for you! That's so rare these days.
The film shows Jackson being shot in the hand. That’s why he had his hand raised.
indeed, that's why we said it is an "homage" to him doing that
Love the way the professor dissects the movies! Very very informative.❤❤❤❤❤❤ YOUR CHANNEL IS GREAT!😊 THANK YOU!!!
Thank you!
it's fine to tear apart a movie because this or that isn't right, but it's still a good movie and I have to disagree with you about slavery dying because it was dying
Lee did the right thing. I would have told Lincoln to take his offer and.............. Lee was correct about what Lincoln did forming an army to invade his own country. General Jackson was one if not the greatest general in the Civil War. He was a very religious man, but many of them were back then North and South. Had he not died in Chancellorsville and made it to Gettysburg the war might have ended differently. God bless the South.
@Reel History: What did you think of the movie The Conspirator? Love to hear your thoughts if possible, maybe in a review. 😊
thank you for this. your explainations are awesome.
You're very welcome!
Love this movie
Your profile picture would suggest why!
@@ReelHistory yep he's a really complex, interesting character from history 😄
@@stevehalling816, cheers! Thanks for visiting.
I detest this movie. It was such a terrible disappointment because I think the Civil War period is under-represented in film and I loved Gettysburg so much. It was eye -candy, but otherwise intellectually and historically dishonest. Ouch. Just awful.