You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #12: Not great. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU
carpetbagger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-07-04 08:01 PM
Response to Original message
12. Not great.
Edited on Tue Sep-07-04 08:06 PM by rsammel
I enjoyed Gettysburg a great deal. I own it, and watch it regularly both for the movie itself as well as for the fact that it's the best example of mid-Atlantic scenery I can find on video. I lived in Harpers Ferry for several years, and in Maryland for several years before that. Gods and Generals tried to replicate the format, but failed. Here's my analysis...

These two movies were both the modern equivalent of an oratorio. The characters give stock speeches throughout in an attempt to tell a classical story. Gettysburg, the battle, was a great story to tell. It happened in a narrow frame of time and place, so that you were able to experience on a 4hr=4day scale the events of the battle. The story was the battle, and the asides were just that.

Gods and Generals tried to bite off too large a time frame, several months leading up to the Chancellorsville campaign. You don't get the sense of real-time that made Gettysburg work (and by extension Alamo movies, Pearl Harbor movies, and more modern military drama from Failsafe/Strangelove to The Day After). Also, the asides, especially the intrusion of cute children, were at times the main plot rather than an aside to any of a number of main plots that would have made a good historical play based on the ANV's formative period.

I got the sense that Gettysburg was a story telling the myths, some true, some false, most inbetween, held by most people who have successfully told the story of the battle (Foote, Coddington, Pfanz, the National Park Service, and many of the generals who went on to publish their stories, best collected in the 4-volume "Battles and Leaders of the Civil War"). I got the sense that Gods and Generals was more the telling of the myths held by, well, civil war reenactors (the best recounting of these folks is the book "Confederates in the Attic").

On edit: Definitely record it. Definitely watch through at least parts of it. There's great scenery, and good battle scenes (although I use the term loosely, since the battle scenes are somewhat contrived like most movie battles that occured prior to, say, Saving Private Ryan or some of the Vietnam movies). But if you're expecting something like Glory, or even "The Last Days of Patton", you'll be disappointed. And don't let the oratorio-play style dissuade you from watching Gettysburg, which is executed quite well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC