Gods and Generals


Recommended Posts

just wondering if anyone has seen this, and what your thoughts on were if you have?

i thought it was very good, it seemed like they took alot of care to make it seem as accruate as

possible, but i'm not a civil war buff so i am not too sure. i also thought it was really geared toward the south.

there was not much about what was going on with the north. Stephen Lang did a excelent job playing general Jackson. the battle scenes i thought were well done, not so much cg, gave it a more realalistic feel.

what did you guys think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes it was very much biased to the South. And bloody long. Took me ages to watch it!

I enjoyed it, the battle scenes were pretty good. Makes you wonder if the Americans as a nation learnt all they claimed to about guerilla warfare whilst evicting the Redcoats, seems they reverted straight back to line + column style of warfare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ya the whole time i was watching i was thinking, why not just hide in the damn woods and ambush them when they walk by?

as i understand it, again not history buff, but line+column was a gentelmans way of fighting. i guess if you fought any other way is

was not honorable.

thought i did find it interesting that the south was whopping butt, until Jackson died. at least that is how it seemed in the movie, but like it has been said the movie was biased toward the south.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Line+column style warfare was only honourable in its conduct towards officers IMO.

The Redcoats did *not* fight like gentlemen!

Redcoats = incredably well trained rogues. They were scum, criminals, drunkards, but they were the best trained army without question, and absolutely without doubt the best managed army. (We beat napoleon thanks to efficient management of mules basically).

The French were conscripts who used columns to burst through lines and scare the crap out of the enemy. Most of the men (on both sides) who fought were hideously drunk, and knew they were gonna die, but had little to loose.

Both French and British armies used skirmishers and light infantry, who engaged infront of the main columns, targetting officers, so in that respect the Americans did nothing new at all.

Targetting officers was very much an unnoble thing to do, but from my understanding, as the rifles became common place weapons (replacing the inaccurate muskets) shooting officers became common place practices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but the whole shooting the officers thing, would that not be the best thing to do?

if you take out the top brass then the army will have no leader and will be easier to defeat.

that or they would rally because of it and be stronger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have never seen the movie. I did read the book though and thought it was awesome. I just hope that the movie can do the book justice. The book is part of a trilogy: Killer Angels, Gods and Generals, and The Last Measure(I think) and I guess they were considering on making the final part in the trilogy. Who knows. :happy:

Jared

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ya i have to read the book now, just to see how well they did it justice.

experience has taught that, movies are never as good as the books though. :/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i just finished watching this movie (like 2 min. ago) and i thought it was great the best civil war movie so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no i will have to look gettysburg up.

although it said at the end of the movie that god and generals was part of a trilogy and gettysburg was the second movie.... is that the gettysburg you are talking about.?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.