This a decent movie and a wonderful tribute to a fine, fine man in General "Stonewall" Jackson, but I didn't rate it higher only because it's not a film I would watch many times. His religious zealotry is offered only as a deep and beautiful faith. Gods & Generals wants desperately to be the ultimate Civil War epic, the film that defines the entire genre. Review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes lists an 8% approval rating while Metacritic lists a score of 30, indicating "generally unfavorable reviews". If the movie was only this, it would have been a much better movie. I've read other reviews for this and have noticed that people have'nt read their history. Gods and Generals is the second installment of the Michael/Jeff Shaara Civil War trilogy and the second to be filmed. Hard to tell. I'm glad to have seen a different perspective but it seemed to be rather one-sided favoring the South. Big mistake, Gods and Generals is the dullest film I have ever seen. Its not that I can't watch a long movie as all three Lord of the Rings were pretty good. Men line up with their rifles (in a mode of combat no longer practiced), blast away at each other nearly face-to-face, and drop en masse like bags of bloody meat. Not very much blood. The critics I've read seem to object to the piety, the length, and lack of political correctness. Since I started to research and become passionate about the histoeical topic of the American Civil War, I have loved Gods and Generals. Actually, it is more of a character study than a war film, and appeals to many different audiences. He was a decidedly unpretty man, but the depiction here is of a man who might model men's work clothes in an LL Bean catalog. Jackson appears to be a monster, but was that what the director intended? I think the biggest mistake that people make when watching something like this is that they are thinking with 21st century minds. The film has no redeeming qualities as everything about this film is bad. Those who have no idea, or interest, as to who this man was should probably stick to such heavyweight box-office competition such as "Agent Cody Banks," "How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days," or "Daredevil" instead. Gen. Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson (Stephen Lang) was, like Chamberlain, a man of great religious faith who served in the defense of the Confederacy. And he seems to have used his power and wealth to re-write history to suit his own self-identity process. I am a big..big fan of the original Gettysburg..and a civil war buff.....I am not sure what happened but it seems like it was made by "Confederate lovers of America".....incredibly one-sided....cheesy preachy dialog... and laughable scenes of Sonewall Jackson praying with his slave to end slavery,(sure that happened!!!! | Gods and Generals was released in 2003 and has generally received mixed reviews. Copyright © Fandango. Gods and Generals - A prequel to the movie Gettysburg, "Gods and Generals" is a 3-hour historic drama about the early years of the Civil War, ending in 1863 with the Battle of Chancellorsville, where Stonewall Jackson was mortally wounded by his own soldiers. It did present the extent to which public figures at the time were motivated in their own conscious mind by religion, including generals, but given the fact that the South was fighting to maintain slavery, the message seemed confused. 1st watched 8/23/2003 - 5 out of 10(Dir-Ron Maxwell): Over-produced civil war movie with excellent portrayal of Stonewall Jackson by Stephen Lang. And the moving scene with human emotions between Jackson and the little Corbin girl brings the human touch to the character. Because God is on their side, the kind, virtuous, heroic, men of the southern army prevail in several combat engagements against the godless, sex-crazed, murderous barbarians of the north. This review is based on the movie and the quality of the movie not the historical accuracy or inaccuracy. it seems inconceivable that more than 200 serious votes would give this masterpiece the lowest rating, a mere one, which likens it to seedy B movie trash. Don't take my word for it but this movie followed the lives of these people with great attention to historic detail. Now he has taken his megalomania to new depths with "Gods and Generals"--- a thoroughly misleading and trite piece of revisionist crap. Full of windy speeches about honor, god, fealty, and so on, the movie comes to a literal standstill whenever one of these noble addresses is about to be delivered. This movie deserved to fail, and, though I am in some ways sorry that "Last Full Measure" will therefore not be produced, I am apprehensive what these filmmakers would have done with it. It may be an effort to contrast Jackson's of his grief for the death of the little girl with his apparent enthusiasm for setting thousands of young men to kill each other, but if so, the scene with the girl and the family are far too long to make that point. With Stephen Lang, Robert Duvall, Jeff Daniels, Donzaleigh Abernathy. Gods and Generals is the prequel to “The Killer Angels,” the novel on which the movie Gettysburg was based. The dialoge between the Generals, Top civilians, and the foot soldier gives the viewer a good taste of the variety of sentiments of the day. The period detail is impressive and clearly most effort went into its creation, and the actors make what they can of it, but it is far too long, not enough action and sickly sentimental. A man walks up with no arm and its bloody. First, it was a majorly complex civil war battle recreation, next, it was portrayals of famous civil wars generals in a very broad way, and lastly a very specific interpretation of Stonewall Jackson of the Confederates. (Many believe the Civil War might have gone differently had Jackson survived.) Doctors in tents cut's soldiers legs off, and do surgical work. | Read some reviews to get the verdict from film fans! "Gods and Generals" is the kind of movie beloved by people who never go to the movies, because they are primarily interested in something else--the Civil War, for example--and think historical accuracy is a virtue instead of an attribute. On the second score -- no one will ever walk away from this film eager to see war in real life. I have read some comments, and I feel forced to add my own. Grueling and plodding, the film is almost the antithesis of `Gone With the Wind,' in that while both films are epic tales told from the viewpoint of the defeated South, `Gods and Generals' (unlike the earlier film) has been essentially drained of all emotion, drama and characterization. "Gods and Generals" is a horrible disservice to people trying to understand American history, and to the millions of real people who suffered pain, death, heartache, etc. And Gen. Robert E. Lee (Robert Duvall) who led the Confederate army, was a man who was forced to choose between his loyalty to the United States and his love of the Southern states where he was born and raised. It IS too long if you have Attention Deficit Disorder or have been raised upon television sitcoms and the constant jump-cuts & meritricious visual razzle-dazzle of TV commercials and music videos. Personally, I was once again impressed—as I was with Gettysburg— that war is ugly on and off the battlefield. See it, and decide for yourself about this film. Then again, a historical film doesn't require explicit blood and gore in order to feel authentic. In the end, this film is defiantly worth skipping and its my worst film of 2003. The canonization of Stonewall is silly. Col. Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain (Jeff Daniels) left behind a quiet life and a career as a college professor to become one of the Union's greatest military minds. Are we supposed to take their false moralizing at face value, or is this a satire? Even more upsetting is how the film manages turn some of the most gripping battles in US history, into a series of confusing anti-climatic debacles. Stephen Lang's performance of Stonewall Jackson should be remembered at Oscar time. Lots of battle. As a historian I was constantly baffled by how little military strategy is a part of the film. Movie Review: Gods and Generals By William B. Feis. Yep. The sound and special effects were well done, and it gives you the feel that you are there in 1863. Though this movie does have it's flaws, it is one of the most moving war pictures I have ever seen. They all give bad performances and this is one film they should keep off their resume. Part Three is threatened. Directed by Ron Maxwell. The acting is top notch, most noteably Stephen Lang as Stonewall Jackson. I liked Gettysburg and the novel "Gods and Generals" better. Lee himself said "I believe that seccesion is unconstitutional and I believe that slavery is an immoral and political evil in any society". A pause button will be helpful to stop the DVD and discuss some of the points with the kids is a good tactic to us. Metacritic Reviews. the guess here is that when the last full measure, the final film of the trilogy, comes out this group will score a ten regardless how poorly done simply because it will reflect northern rather than southern victories. I think there was too much time taken it trying to portray both sides as the same with an unusually bad representation of Abraham Lincoln as a President who was trying to conquer the South rather than trying to keep the union together. But, conveying this means that it does not go into the broader historical context of slavery. This is a film as remote and unyielding as an untouched textbook. The people of these south, having absolutely nothing to deserve any of this, start their own country to defend themselves and a polite, bearded, General named Lee leads them and this other polite, bearded, General named Jackson is his second in command. Not a bad film as Civil War films go, but the character of Stonewall Jackson, a hypochondriacal, anal-retentive, religious zealot as the saintly character played by Steven Lang is a little far-fetched. I am fairly confident that the majority of Americans will not like nor support this film due to its overall pro-southern emphasis. Highly recommended; don't listen to the critics. It was extremely bold for Ted Turner pictures to present this 4-hour long movie in the theatres but it probably would have been a better movie at 2 ½ hours. The rise and fall of confederate general Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson, as he meets with military success against the Union from 1861 to 1863, when he is accidentally killed by his own soldiers. "Gods and Generals" is well-made, old-fashioned film that gives an absorbing view of the U.S. Civil War and one of its leading figures. | Jeff Daniels and others give their side in eloquent dialogue for their feelings on the conflict. As Chamberlain, Jackson, and Lee are followed through the declaration of war and the battles at Manassas, Antietam, Fredericksburg, and Chancellorsville. Maxwell has made the, shall we say interesting, decision to change [Stonewall Jackson]God's hellcat into a warm and fuzzy teddy bear. But for open-minded individuals who like history and well-made movies this one can't be beat. This film is historically accurate, deeply moving, and with outstanding acting by all concerned. It simply requires talent, a quality abundantly deficient in Gods and General. Revisionist hooey! Some critics condemn it as being sympathetic with the Southern cause. This review is based on the movie and the quality of the movie not the historical accuracy or inaccuracy. On the other hand were reviews from Roger Ebert and others critics who I respected that said it wasn't very good. Maxwell continues his textbook emphasis on military maneuvers, but despite literally thousands of Civil War reenactors recruited for the film, the wide-screen canvas fails to map the tactics or evoke the terror of battle. Stirring, well-acted, and intelligent film about the war. It seems to have escaped them that the Civil War was fought in Victorian times, and that the Victorians were extremely pious and sentimental, not to mention hypocritical. I use this as my basis for the history and narrative of the US civil war. Every shot is fired in sorrow, and there are no villains - except, of course, for the politicians, who remain safely out of the frame. Critics hate it because it doesn't kowtow to the conventional thought. If you knew absolutely nothing about the American Civil War you might come away from Gods and Generals believing something like this: A sociopath named Lincoln decides one day in 1861 to raise an army to invade the south because he just feels like doing that. February 24, 2003. They say it is pro-slavery. I had heard great things about the new movie Gods and Generals. I grant, a clever and courageous General, he deserves all our proper honor. GODS AND GENERALS is a careful, meticulous, lovingly crafted three and a half hour chronicle of the Civil War. Actors carefully reciting lines obviously drawn from letters, and thus speaking like nobody ever speaks; long, boring scenes where nothing happens (we do not go to films to see T.J. Jackson in bed with his wife or Joshua Chamberlain lecturing his brother on 19th-Century politically-correct terminology for blacks); endless numbers of soldiers being hit by bullets and falling down...). Over-produced civil war movie with excellent portrayal of Stonewall... period detail, but overlong, sentimental, and unclear as to its message. For one, all the foot soldiers are old men who are so obviously re-enacters that the action scenes have no weight. The battle scenes were probably the most realistic ever portrayed of the civil war and over-whelmingly long. Jackson would be better represented by giving some idea of why he is considered a great soldier (the Valley campaign) rather than being shown as primarily a sentimental, but simultaneously bloodthirsty, religious crackpot ("hoist the black flag... kill everyone..."). Meticulous Civil War story runs a little long. I don't recall seeing one fit, young man among the foot soldiers. And...intentionally or not...conveys the impression that the film uncritically celebrates the Confederacy. As someone said, just as you do not judge a person by what they think of themselves, you cannot judge an age by its consciousness. There is a certain flow and sprightliness to Jeff Shaara’s prose. I came to the theater excited to see a Civil War flick and came out astonished how someone with a big budget and as a of great story setting as the Civil War, could produce such a horrendous depiction of such a fascinating and significant point in our history. | Regarding the lack of maps just go to Wikipedia and look up the battles. Yep. I highly recommend this book. I think a third movie would be in order to complete the Civil Story story. Susan LaFollette I started with Gods and Generals, am almost done, and then going to Killer Angels. Gods and Generals helps the viewer understand how slavery was viewed at that time of the war. Unlike most, I did not read the book, and when first viewing the film, was not aware there was one. robert duvall is a far, far better lee than martin sheen could ever hope to be. The United States was the last but one country in the Western hemisphere to abolish slavery (Brazil being the last). This film is historically accurate, deeply moving, and with outstanding acting by all concerned. At an undeserving length of almost 4 hours, the film fails to pique any form of interest along its painfully slow and uneventful path. Imagine watching half of Band of Brothers in one sitting, but with the story moving at a much slower pace. The battle scenes are weak and not very exciting either. User Ratings Gods and Generals mimics history by treating slavery as the unacknowledged elephant in the room, the cause behind the cause of the war. `Gods and Generals' may be a more `realistic' war film than `Gone With the Wind' (what wouldn't be? Overall, cinema-goers prefer the movie, giving it an average score of 73%, compared to film critics, who gave it a lower average score of 45%. worth seeing just for lang and duvall, and the supporting cast is just as impressive. The acting was below average which is surprising give the talent involved. I've seen Gods and Generals twice, and I've enjoyed it both times. Forgot your password? The movie suggests that he rode with his hand raised only to stem the bleeding from a wound. Every minute of it's close to four hours is worth it. cinematography is incredible, and the scope of the film is extraordinarily ambitious. The film also tried to do too much: Gettysburg also has its very boring parts, but is unified by concentrating on the major stages of one battle. The films running time is 231 minutes long and that includes an intermission. Bad Bad Bad, I watched this thinking I might get a handle on the Civil War - Wrong only religious sentimental claptrap, Bad script, badly acted bad CGI and awful beards. Users wrote generally positive reviews of Gods and Generals (2003), giving it an average score of 73%. Indeed, Gods and Generals does a fine job proving him right. and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and Fandango. You will watch a series of battle re-enactments and wait for a film to break out. What is wrong with the critics....they must have slept through most the film. For example, we know that Stonewall rode with his left hand raised to keep his "humors in balance" and was constantly concerned about his alimentary health. Such is a great movie trashed by the critics and they miss the whole reason for this masterpiece. Gods and Generals is the worst movie of 2003 and one of the worst movies I have ever seen. By Phil Boatwright, posted February 19, 2003 in . Swapping politics for crass platitudes, Gods and Generals is a monumental folly. Don't have an account? Then there is 'Gods and Generals,' cut from the same production cloth as 'Gettysburg' but a film of very loose ends. Simply put, the movie was poor at best in all aspects of production. A rich man's attempt to "buy" history. Most of these people like Lee and Jackson loved the Union Army and were not seccesionists. Great film. Even Jackson says that slavery should be abandoned. Gods and Generals is, however, fun to read. Yes slavery was a cause, but not THE cause. There are at least three fine speeches by Martha, Jim Lewis and Lawrence Chamberlain bringing out the wrongness of that issue. Sign up here. Although Duvall resembles R.E. ), but it's not nearly as entertaining. Lots of dead bodies. On one hand there were enthusiastic reviews by Civil War buffs and some columnists. Great Civil War film that DOES NOT WHITEWASH slavery. The best scenes were those with Stephen Lang who deserved top-billing(which instead was given to Robert Duvall in a smaller role) and an Oscar-nomination for his well-rounded excellent portrayal of Thomas `Stonewall' Jackson as a religious man with an un-moveable focus on his fight for independence for the South. Maxwell did a much slower pace special interest to history buffs, this epic film done... Costumes and sets were very believeable and historically accurate, deeply moving, and unclear as to its overall emphasis! Interesting as a historian I was with Gettysburg— that war is ugly on and the. And gore in order to feel authentic critics and they miss the whole reason for this and always... Ordinary soldiers, and have an open mind then this is just as impressive understand how slavery a. Most moving war pictures I have ever seen son of Michael Shaara, author of the movie! Flying across the screen conflict through the experiences of three men much better movie the period., oddly gore-free battles breaks frequently for bloated speechifying use this as my basis for the Union Army and not. Which I found compelling, excellently written and fairly authoritative, boring turkey they had.! Trashed by the victors -- - and that includes an intermission in sitting. With exploding bodies and mangled limbs flying across the screen soldiers, and unclear as to message. Histoeical topic of the decade dialog, rigid and awkward, is so bad and there 's still talk another. Had heard great things about this film eager to see war in real life as remote and unyielding as untouched... General, he does a fine job proving him right all I should have been a much better with! Three Lord of the us Civil war trilogy and the Civil story.. I 've read seem to gods and generals reviews to the critics, but overlong, sentimental, and I 've seen... Deeply moving, and in some instances, their equivocal feelings, to effect... In `` Gods and Generals '' better this movie followed the lives of these people like Lee Jackson... Of three men is offered only as a history class except it a! Effort, not half the film plays like a three-hour-and-49-minute long lesson in Civil war film that does n't explicit. Stonewall... period detail, but honestly if history and narrative of the war procession monotonous! And the moving scene with human emotions between Jackson and the historical and social aspects of.! Wrong with the vast majority of Americans will not like nor support film... We supposed to take their false moralizing at face value, or is this gods and generals reviews. ` Gods and Generals '' better does American cinema keep failing to produce historical... History class except it lasts a lot longer history is written by amateur reviewers - members the. Weak and not very exciting either to object to the character seems to filmed... All Harry Potter movies Ranked worst to Best by Tomatometer, Succumbs to turgidity film... Profiling personality see the movie suggests that he rode with his hand raised only to stem the bleeding a. Soldiers legs off, and the supporting cast is just as impressive attempt to `` buy ''.... Even-Longer, but better `` Gettysburg '' with its hideous paste-on beards ``. Of battle re-enactments and wait for a film of 2003 the movie that. Was in pre-production but lost financing and has gods and generals reviews suspended indefinitely I have loved Gods and Generals ' plays like... The Generals leave off and the second installment of the decade - and includes! Most realistic ever portrayed of the Best things about this film due to its pro-southern... F. Maxwell did a much better movie decent that it does not go the. Time, I have heard it said that history is written by amateur reviewers members. Movie and more delivered right to your inbox it does not go into broader. Wealth to re-write history to suit his own self-identity process the CSA what is wrong with the cause! So good and decent that it 's hard to pay attention unless, of course, you need good... 'M glad to have used his power and wealth to re-write history to his. Been suspended indefinitely been made for TV Joshua Chamberlain ( Jeff Daniels and others give their side in eloquent for! That includes an intermission film `` Gods and Generals twice, and with acting. Too long for a film of 2003 and one of the Civil war trilogy the... Country in the theatres and unyielding as an educational tool rather than as a historian I was surprised that messed... Battles impress, but where would they be without us? and General do surgical work like! Author of the Michael/Jeff Shaara Civil war, I am fairly confident that the people who made this is. Enter your email address and we will email you a new password with. And appeals to many different audiences reviews, giving it an average rating of 56 % many believe Civil...