View Full Version : Gods and Generals

09-16-2003, 09:08 PM
Have you guys seen this one?

The invasion of Fredricksburg has to be one of the most incredible scenes I've seen in a movie in a long time. To think an invasion DID happen on American soil right in the heart of a populated town - wow!

Now they have to make a War of 1812 movie to top this.

Gods and Generals was awesome.

Note - make sure you see the DVD and the making of the Fredricksburg fight - I think you'll find it interesting.

09-16-2003, 11:06 PM
I started to watch this movie. It was too drawn out for me and I shut it off after an hour or so. I am sure it got better, but I was passing out watching it.

09-16-2003, 11:15 PM
I was curious about this movie, but after hearing A LOT of bad press about it, i passed. To me, the best civil war themed flicks will always be "Glory" and "Gettysburg" I may give this flick a chance sometime though, but only when it's on TNT and nothing else is on. :p

09-17-2003, 03:02 AM
Gods and Generals is the prequel to Gettysberg - made by the same people.

Some of the cast is the same, some did not return:

General Lee is Robert Duvall instead of Martin Sheen. Both did great jobs.



Colonel Chamberlain is still played by Jeff Daniels (excellent actor!)

General Longstreet is played by Bruce Boxleitner instead of Tom Beregner. Doesn't make a difference because the movie's main focus is Stonewall Jackson, who was Lee's top General until his death and THEN Longstreet moves into that position. Boxleitner is capable, but has really a small part.

General Hancock is the same capable actor.


At Fredricksburg it was perfect for the South. Hancock foresaw the Union's loss if they didn't occupy the town early, before the Rebels could get into position. But the Union Commander before Meade wouldn't let them cross the river without artillery. Generally smart, but Hancock was right.

General Bufford (Sam Elliot in an awesome performance) knew to get the North into position at Gettysburg and set the Union up for victory because he was smart enough to engage on ground of his own choosing. Longstreet knew they were going to lose4 Gettysburg and pleaded with Lee to withdraw and flank the Union. But you almost think Lee wanted to lose that fight. It was so simple for them to redeploy and re-engage, but maybe Lee had second thoughts about the South's cause. I don't know. He said he thought they were invincible, but they'd lost Jackson after his perfect victory at Fredricksburg.

OH GET THIS: I never knew, but Jackson was killed by friendly fire while on a night recon. Or he was purposely hit (actually assasinated) by Texans who resented him (a Kentuckyer) leading the South's army. Apparently, Texas didn't get along with most of the Confederacy, and hence, wanted to stand independent as the Lone Star State. Typical of Texas.

Anyway, Jackson, or Longstreet, free of General Lee, might've won the war for the South. They knew what they were doing.

Hancock might've won it a lot sooner for the North if he wasn't impeded by every superior until George Meade took command.

THERE'S GOING TO BE A SEQUEL WITH ULYSSES S. GRANT in command of the Union. I wonder who's going to play him.

It's called "The Last Charge" or somehting like that. I'm looking forward to that.

Who do you guys want as Lee: Sheen or Duval?

Longstreet should be Berenger in my opinion.

Exhaust Port
09-17-2003, 05:14 AM
I loved watching Gettysburg, even though I've never seen it all the way through, and was looking forward to seeing Gods and Generals. Until you mentioned it here, I'd completely forgotten about this movie. Thanks for the reminder, I'll have to remember this when I rent a movie again.

07-15-2006, 12:57 AM
I just watched Gods and Generals again. Superb realism in that movie. It was downright creepy how Chamberlain sleeps with the dead, his men pinned down by enemy fire and they use the bodies of the fallen as sandbags for protection. Fredricksburg was brutal.

Anyway, the sequel to Gettysburg doesn't seem to have yet gotten made. It is about Ulysses S. Grant who replaces George Meade as commander of the entire US Army. Chamberlain plays a role, as does General Lee, Hancock, and many of the other popular leaders who survived Gettysburg.

That was a crazy war. It makes me want to tour Pennsylvania and see the historical sites where all of this happened. Anyone done that?

07-15-2006, 01:36 AM
That was a crazy war. It makes me want to tour Pennsylvania and see the historical sites where all of this happened. Anyone done that?
Haven't been to Pennsylvania yet, but I did take a 2 week vacation starting at Boston, going down to Cape Cod, then up to New Hampshire, Vermont, Maine then back down to Boston. A lot of Historical sites in that area, but mostly from the Revolutionary War. We wanted to go through Pennsylvania but ran out of time. If you go, do it in the Fall, Late September, early October. The turning of the trees is unbelievable along with all the old world historical sites. I will never forget it, was the best vacation I ever had.

Darth Jax
07-15-2006, 05:13 AM
Anyway, the sequel to Gettysburg doesn't seem to have yet gotten made. It is about Ulysses S. Grant who replaces George Meade as commander of the entire US Army. Chamberlain plays a role, as does General Lee, Hancock, and many of the other popular leaders who survived Gettysburg.

the sequel will probably never get made with the bad showing of g&g at the box office. but the 3rd installment is/was called "last full measure." the movies were based from the books ('gods and generals, the killer angels and the last full measure').

07-15-2006, 08:12 AM
i saw both of these movies at the box office and they were incredible. It's amazing to me that ted turner the ,the man who use to own cnn and the other cable stations that he had would finance a movie with his own money.
In some regards there will have to be some recasting of characters since i think 2 of the actors in the movie are deceased now. they had significant parts.

07-15-2006, 10:33 AM
Which actors died?

BTW: It's strange to see Jeff Daniels look older in Gods and Generals, then younger in Gettysburg, as with many of the other cast members - especially General Lee's attachent Major Taylor who seemed so young in Gettysburg. General Hancock, too. The same with the South's artillery commander who they made a point of saying was 29 years old in Gettysburg (Colonel Alexander, that's right). Well he's looking nearly 39 in Gods and Generals, hehe. (He probably was).

I loved the cast in Gettysburg. I wouldn't have minded too much if they recast everyone for Gods and Generals, since the real live heroes were younger at the time anyway. They recast General Lee from Sheen to Duvall. I'm not sure why (would Sheen not play the part again? Was he busy? Did he want too much money?)

But then again, Jeff Daniels and they guy who plays Hancock were a treat to have back in their old roles in Gods and Generals.

There's a thread about Gettysburg somewhere in these forums, but Chamberlain's downhill charge at the Battle of Little Round Top was one of the most incredible Civil War sequences ever filmed. It IS comparable to the end battle in the fort at the end of Glory (just the music for that part in Glory is by far better!)

07-16-2006, 09:30 AM
Has there been any word on when THE LAST FULL MEASURE is going to be made?

07-16-2006, 12:04 PM
No Scruff: people here are saying that it's not going to be. I hope that's not the case though. I don't know how long these films take to make. I imagine casting and costuming expenses are extensive, as well as any possible military drill instruction to get everyone moving correctly - not to mention experiment with camera angles while filming it.

However, Civil War re-enactment groups are probably very well prepared for these occasions - and probably already have authentic uniforms.

It's like if Lucas wanted to make a new movie with Stormtroopers, all he'd have to do is call in the 501st Legion from amongst the fans, and not worry about the casting concerns. (Although LF prefers CGI nowadays).

Darth Jax
07-16-2006, 12:31 PM
Has there been any word on when THE LAST FULL MEASURE is going to be made?
ted turner was the man with the money behind the films. after g&g he pulled the plug since he thought it was a losing prospect. no one else has stepped up to fund the movie.

07-16-2006, 02:00 PM
There were several "problems" with Gods & Generals:

1) The South wins at Fredricksburg (well that's a true story) but the South is usually seen as "the Bad Guys" because history is written by the victor.

The fact is the North was full of big business Republicans who pushed for equal competition with the Southern Slave States who benefitted from minimal labor costs. Freeing the slaves was a combination of a morality decision, but also backed by northern economic interests. The Democrats were on the wrong side of this one. It's ironic how they turned things around and became the most common party affiliated with blacks nowadays (because of their stances on minority rights). BTW, just because slavery was considered by many to be immoral, that didn't mean that racism was unnatural. Those are separate issues.

Now Lincoln was the first Republican president (of the modern Republican Party). I believe the Democrats reformed immediately after the Civil War, but I'm not sure who their first president was following the great War Between the States. (I used to have every president and his successor memorized).

2) The No. 2 issue with the movie might have been Stonewall Jackson's constant appeals to God. Many people are uncomfortable with religion being so prominantly displayed and to see this guy (realistically portrayed probably) praying to God every 15 minutes of the film, might've made Atheists and Agnostics uncomfortable. They attended the film to relish the bloodbath at Fredricksburg, no doubt. It's a spectacle we all stand in awe over - as well as that of an army actually invading an American town on our home soil - even if it was an American army doing it. Also, both movies (inc. Gettysburg by that, I mean) portray Jackson, as well as Longstreet, as being sympathetic to black people - yet I wonder if they actually owned slaves themselves - or were racist? So they might've been nice to blacks. They were great leaders in the South. Why didn't they stand up for black rights?
I'm pretty sure they didn't, but the movie portrays them (especially Jackson) as Southern heroes. Probably only 1/5 of the United States' people admire the Southern generals so deeply - in 8 or 9 states who once flew the Dixie flag. That's it.

If you think about it, a film covering Ulysses Grant's final defeat of General Lee and Sherman's march to the sea has all the elements of "the good guys winning, plus new and strong characters (Sherman, Grant, etc.) I don't know how much action Hancock or Chamberlain saw at the end of the war, nor Longstreet. Duvall or Sheen could still come back and play General Lee.

I so much want to see Last Full Measure made into a movie.

07-24-2006, 12:48 PM
Great movie and one that does a good job of reversing some of the villification of the South that many kids are brought up with. Most of these guys fighting for the Confederacy weren't fighting for the "right" to have slaves (slavery didn't become an issue in the war until Lincoln made it an issue near the end, out of desperation). These guys were fighting for the right to govern themselves as each state saw fit. They wanted to prevent the strong centralized government that has caused so many problems in the US these days.

General Lee and Stonewall Jackson understood that slavery was immoral, but wanted the right for each state to phase it out in their own time. And not be forced into it by a "tyrannical" central government.

Of course, if the US wasn't (forcibly) united by the Civil War, there really would have been no one to stand against the Nazis in WW2.

Anyways, great film and the religious portrayal of Jackson is pretty accurate. Most great military leaders are also devoutly Christian (I stress "most" there will always be exceptions).