A Review

Score:2/5 rounds

Summary:
Gods and Generals is a prequel movie to the television film Gettysburg, which aired on TNT in 1993. I remember watching Gettysburg when it premiered and I loved it, so I was quite excited when I heard about Gods and Generals. The same team behind Gods and Generals made Gettysburg and many of the actors from the first film reprised their roles. With the television film being a classic, I expected a theatrical movie to be a memorable achievement. It would be the first Civil War film to be shown in theaters since Glory in 1989. It was high-time for another Civil War film. Gods and Generals failed miserably.



The movie was four hours long and covers the events leading up to the civil war, as well as the major battles from Bull Run in 1861 up though Chancellorsville in 1863. Fredericksburg is also worth mentioning. With all of the important battles being portrayed and with the movie being so long, one would assume there would be a lot of cool battle scenes and loads of action. I was so sure of this that I brought along three friends to the theater. I sure was embarrassed afterwards because the movie was very slow, lacked action, and was a poor attempt at film making. I cannot stress enough that the movie was slow. It was painfully evident. This movie should have gone straight to television.


The previous film, Gettysburg, was a triumph in that it was chock-full of epic action scenes, was very historically accurate, and gave an equal emphasis to both the Union and the Confederates, creating a well-balanced story. On the other hand, Gods and Generals did not retain these characteristics. There are indeed a number of battle scenes, but not nearly enough to be appropriate. The scale of the shots in comparison to what they were to represent were also minuscule (i.e., 30 soldiers on a ridge are supposed to represent several thousand).

As for historical accuracy, there was an effort to portray specific locations that were relevant, as well as key figures, battle tactics, and even quotations. Yet, then there's the rest of the movie. The vast majority was slow, boring fluff that was added in there to make it... you know, I have no idea why the hell they did that. Why add a tremendous amount of fictional dialogue, characters, etc. to ruin the accurateness of the film? Also, the movie gave a resounding focus to that of the Confederacy. Not just the South, but to a specific general: General "Stonewall" Jackson. They could have chosen the top general (Robert E. Lee), but no, they had to pick a second-rate general. The fluff I aluded to was about Jackson's interactions with his wife, daughter, fellow officers, and his constant praying. It was all pointless. I found this quite annoying and a distraction to what the focus of the film should be: the civil war- the battles, the people, the importance and suffering, etc. No. Gods and Generals should have been titled General Jackson loves God.

Here we see General Jackson wasting the audience's time with fluff.

I have a theory. I think there was originally a dual story to the movie. There are snippets here and there about one particular Union colonel named Chamberlain (played by Jeff Daniels, who was in the original Gettysburg), but when the production was finished on the movie, it was five and a half hours long. Thus they decided to cut out almost everything about the colonel and focus on General Jackson. Perhaps they chose Jackson over the other because his tale was more tragic and he is better well-known. Although the movie would have been more balanced with a dual storyline, it would have been even longer and still lacking in action and purpose.

Here's Colonel Chamberlain.

There was only one thing I liked about the film. I had two relatives in the Civil War, and the exact unit of one of them was featured, although not mentioned. I will do so here. During the battle of Chancellorsville, they show the Confederate army dividing in half in order to flank the Union Army's right. The right flank on the Union line was held by the 11th division under Colonel Howard. My ancestor, Samual Saylor, was in this division. In the 11th there were a number of regiments (I forgot the exact number). For those of you who don't know, a regiment it supposed to be comprised of 1,000 men. Many were at about 700. The regiment my ancestor was in was the 163rd Pennsylvania. The 163rd had 10 companies. Each company has 100 men. Samual Saylor was in company A. This company was *literally* the right-most unit in the Union line. So in the movie they show thousands of Confederates rushing towards a few Union soldiers at the end of the line. This was Company A of the 163rd in the 11th division of the I Corps, Army of the Potomac. The Union soldiers are shown sitting down eating a meal. This literally happened to the 163rd, as I have a book chronicling the history of the 9 month volunteer regiment. The 163rd was forced to flee, which was obvious in the film because they were surprised and overrun. Even though they were not able to hold their ground, I was proud to see the unit my ancestor was in.


After Gettysburg, my expectations for this film were really high. For the facts I have provided, Gods and Generals was way below my movie standards. Seriously, the way this film was produced was unacceptable. The producers and director should be sued for making a defective product. I find this particularly disappointing because I love history so much. To see such a poor attempt at filming history that was so crucial in shaping the lives of all Americans almost broke my heart. I had two ancestors in the Union army who fought for freedom, and if they were alive today would most likely say that this movie was terrible. It was a disgrace to history, to our veterans, to our culture. A better film should have been made. The only people who should watch this are die-hard civil war buffs. No one else should bother.

Gods and Generals Official Website

Can't see a menu to the left? Click here!