|
|
|
|
|
|
Gods & Generals 
Actors : Jeff Daniels, Stephen Lang, Mark Aldrich, Robert Duvall, George Allen (III)
Director : Ronald F. Maxwell
Studio : Warner Home Video
by Warner Home Video
Release Date : 2003-07-15
Publisher : Warner Home Video
Availability : Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Number of Items : 1
EAN : 0085392341320
UPC : 085392341320
Avg. Customer Rating: (based on 600 reviews)
List Price : $14.98
Our Price : $4.48
|
|
| |
|
Americancivilwar.com |
|
The more you know about the Civil War, the more you'll appreciate Gods and Generals and the painstaking attention to detail that Gettysburg writer-director Ronald F. Maxwell has invested in this academically respectable 220-minute historical pageant. In adapting Jeffrey Shaara's 1996 novel (encompassing events of 1861-63, specifically the Virginian battles of Bull Run, Fredericksburg, and Chancellorsville), Maxwell sacrifices depth for scope while focusing on the devoutly religious "Stonewall" Jackson (Stephen Lang), whose Confederate campaigns endear him to Gen. Robert E. Lee (Robert Duvall, giving the film's most subtle performance). Battles are impeccably recreated using 7,500 Civil War re-enactors and sanitized PG-13 violence, their authenticity compromised by tasteful discretion and endless scenes of grandiloquent dialogue. Still, as the first part of a trilogy that ends with The Last Full Measure, this is a superbly crafted, instantly essential film for Civil War study. For all its misguided priorities, Gods and Generals is a noble effort, honoring faith and patriotism with the kind of reverence that has all but vanished from American film - but provides abundant proof that historical accuracy is no guarantee of great storytelling. --Jeff Shannon |
| |
|
Description |
|
A sweeping epic charting the early years of the Civil War and how campaigns unfolded from Manassas to the Battle of Fredericksburg, this prequel to the film Gettysburg explores the motivations of the combatants and examines the lives of those who waited at home. |
| |
|
| |
|
Like a history lesson. But not as informative... |
by dane youssef
Many sequels suffer from repeating and rehashing the majority of the material from the original. Some suffer from not being enough like the original. Some are lucky and...
Sometimes movies are bad because they are simply moving at a slow pace with little to no interest or substance. Sometimes sequels just have too much to live up to.
This is an example of just about every bad quality I've mentioned. It doesn't outright stink and suck, nor does it leave you cross-eyed with perplexion or indifference, either. But it doesn't really inspire any particular feelings for you at all, really. Positive or negative.
"Gods and Generals" is a movie that might be perfect for recovering war veterans in trauma wards. A movie that moves on a quiet, comatose pace. "Gods and Generals," a prequel to the famed and magnificent "Gettysburg" has little or no energy. Everyone just appears to be back to set things up for "Gettysburg."
This whole movie is a 2 1/2 hour set-up for a punch line we've already seen---with nothing happening or really going on here.
Oh, I'm not saying it's horribly made. It's put together with skill---the whole look and sound of the civil war. It might be the kind of movie that would be shown in a history class.
It's complete with big-name actors like Jeff Daniels and Robert Duvall in full civil war garb and giving famous and poetic quotes as if they're striking a pose. They appear to be posing throughout the entire movie. It's a civil war re-enactment.
But they're just goofin' like any other group of men doing a civil war re-enactment.
There is one real battle sequence where everybody lines up and charges to die and to kill. The body count begins to pile up---like ANY war movie worth it's salt should.... but it doesn't capture the true stink and ugliness of war in a "Saving Private Ryan" or "Braveheart" sort of way, or even the original "Gettysburg."
Perhaps because all those were R-rated movies and this movie doesn't want to lose it's PG-13 movie, it's more about poetic stories and makes the civil war a backdrop for all this.
At least in my opinion, the actual problem with the fact this movie runs at the pace of a comatose snail. Still waters run deep? Not here.
The movie moves so slowly at times that these people seem to have started the civil war simply out of sheer boredom and so they could say thing that would become historic. This is part I to a III-part series ("Gettysburg" was part II). I look foreword to the next in the series.
"Gods and Generals" all felt like set-up where "Gettysburg" delivered the actual punch-line. I hope the final in the series (these are all adapted from books) doesn't just tie up loose ends.
Let's all hope, shall we?
On the film scale--every scale--"GODS AND GENERALS" rates as two stars out of four, 3.5 out of 10, a dozing viewer in his seat (that's the rating system from the Chicago Examiner"). Eh...
SPECIAL NOTE HERE: Matt Letscher, a really good actor ("Gettysburg," TV's "Good Morning, Miami" and "The Mask of Zorro") at least is given more to do than his nameless and bit character in the original movie--but it's still just not a good movie, I'm afraid.
danessf@yahoo.com
http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=58175682
http://movies.yahoo.com/mvc/durvl?iid=7-3771615&.crumb=tGxhXi4L%2Fi8&s=mt_a |
| |
|
Tedious! |
"Gods and Generals" is as bad a movie as its counterpart "Gettysburg" is great. While the movie may try to convey the opposing mindsets of the northern abolitionists, and the souther slave-holders, the dialog through which they present their opinions is hard to watch without feeling insulted.
The only saving grace in the movie (as far as I care to recall) is Robert Duvall's adept and nuanced portrayal of General Robert E. Lee. |
| |
|
An often misunderstood classic of epic proportions |
A splendid adaptation of the Shaara novel of the same name, many reviewers seem to feel that this is (or should be) a history of the first part of the American Civil War. However, that is just not the case, nor the intent of this film. What the film IS about are the career and personal natures of a very few seminal characters, and in particular, General 'Stonewall' Jackson. As such, lengthy treatment of the 'causes' of the Civil War, who was right and who was wrong are not particularly appropriate, nor is such discussed. Instead, we are treated to the 'causes' that brought Jackson HIMSELF to the war, as well as Robert E. Lee, and Chamberlain too. That is the point; to bring the focus not to huge overarching national and regional issues, but to the reasons and causes why INDIVIDUALS fight, and will go to a great war of unknown length and violence inconceivable, even though they know they themselves are unlikely to survive. Yet these causes are considered by the INDIVIDUALS concerned to be SO important, SO fundamental to their own perception of what is, and is not tolerable that the time comes where they have to make a very personal and terrible choice, and live (or die) by the outcome of that choice.
Anyone who has ever gone to war will recognise that mental wrestling match that all who take that unalterable step must engage in. What makes the scenario of the American Civil War so poignant is that virtually everyone involved understands and KNOWS that he will not just be going off to fight some vaguely perceived and relatively undefined 'enemy,' but that they will be fighting and killing their OWN friends, neighbors, and even family members in defense of that which is perceived to be absolute. The choice therefore, is even more terrible, as are the consequences.
This is why there are some long soliloquys in the film, as both the author, and film maker work to get the audience to UNDERSTAND and appreciate the depth and breadth of the sacrifice contemplated, and acted upon. Further, it should be remembered that the people of that time actually spoke and thought in the manner presented (not just an 'author's conceit'), as is recorded in the many journal entries and letters from the time (these were NOT 21st century men and women, but a product of their times, and thought and spoke accordingly).
In sum, if you are simply looking for a Civil War 'action movie' with lots of explosions and little plot, then you might not like this (though there are indeed plenty of explosions, and the most splendidly filmed battle sequences ever done). You might not like it if you are looking solely for a history of the Civil War either (PBS did an excellent documentary on the Civil War, if it's strict history you are looking for, that's your source!). But if you are looking for a film of breadth and scope on a personal level, comparable to the incomparable film 'Glory,' then you will agree that 'Gods and Generals' is an excellent choice. |
| |
|
soft edged |
Laudable effort with good detail; nothing wrong with the focus on one side. What I miss is more dimension to the principals. Jackson, as one example, is a pale reflection of the historical man (at least as presented by Shelby Foote, my measure).
This period of American history cannot be rendered politically correct. If the drama is to be compelling, we need a full spectrum presentation. Nuanced does not mean eviscerated.
What if a film about, say Martin Luther or Henry VIII, tried to adjust them to contemporary standards? I don't see it working. Some disagree; I can only suggest reflecting on how a historian--like Foote--would respond to Gods & Generals.
Screen presentation of the Civil War is not easy. Possibly it may best be served by the Ken Burns approach. |
| |
|
better Picture & Sound Quality than the standard DVD... |
but, not by much, so, if you already own the standard DVD, pass on this format & buy something else for your collection...there are no NEW bonus materials, or Director's cut...and "Stonewall" still gets shot by his own men, :rolleyes: ;-)
Dolby Digital Plus is better, slightly, than DD 5.1
another plus is the whole feature film fits on 1 (one) side; no flipping req'd to finish watching the movie |
| |
|
|
|
