Posted on 02/25/2003 1:26:40 AM PST by JohnHuang2
Let me acknowledge, upfront, that as a member of the cast of the new Civil War epic movie "Gods & Generals," I cannot, even with my bit part, objectively review this production which meant so much to me.
I do believe, however, that I have the moral journalistic right to marvel at the absolutely incredible contrast in various reviews.
In the Baltimore Sun, movie critic Michael Sragow compared watching this movie to what he termed: "Being forced to stare for an entire afternoon at a statue of Stonewall Jackson in some Deep South town square. Before long, you hope a flock of pigeons will do their worst to it."
Mr. Sragow's notable yearning for bird defecation on a memorial to one of America's greatest military geniuses is a devastating contrast to what this same Baltimore Sun published just nine days earlier, by columnist Greg Kane:
"Ron Maxwell's unrelentingly brilliant film may be rewarded at the 2004 Oscars. In fact, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences should just give [Stephen] Lang his Best Actor Oscar this year, instead of waiting until next. His unparalleled performance as Jackson should be one thing about which there is no debate."
Ah, but there is great debate. A large majority of the daily newspaper movie critics panned this film with excited ferocity – illustrating the price to be paid by any director-producer who is honest and courageous enough to portray Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson and the Confederate Army as anything other than dastardly villains. (New York's frequently incredible Village Voice, with typical understatement, compared Lee and Jackson to Hermann Goering and Erwin Rommel.)
Repeatedly, there echoes throughout these full-time movie reviewer's work the same politically correct historic distortions as by the Baltimore Sun's Bird Dung Sragow, who wrote:
"Writer-director Maxwell falls in love with Jackson and lets him and Lee dictate the movie's political and dramatic terms."
Is it possible for most of our nation's daily newspapers to cover historical films with writers having some historical knowledge and perception?
Stonewall Jackson's definitive biographer, James Robertson of Virginia Tech, praised this as: "The best Civil War movie I have ever seen and I've seen them all."
But Sragow and several of his fellow full-time movie critics – who must watch and review all of Hollywood's large percentage of garbage production writes:
"His equally preachy yet more perfunctory scenes are simply a way for [director-producer] Maxwell to cover his left flank against attacks on his film's reverence for secessionists."
Thus speaks the left-wing in review, after review, after review – by the full-time movie critics.
But one editor who covered Hollywood for 10 years and writes that with some exceptions "Hollywood is a garbage factory, a moral cesspool with precious few great films being made," is Joseph Farah, CEO of WorldNetDaily, which reaches 5 million people on the Internet.
Farah writes that "Gods & Generals" is "A must-see – as perfect a movie as fallen human beings are capable of producing. Uniquely, this film recognizes the deep spiritual values of those involved in this conflict on both sides. Soldiers pray in this movie, they pray heartfelt, sincere prayers. They read Scripture. They make great personal sacrifices to carry out their duty. They love and revere their wives ... this movie will make you proud to be an American – from the North or South … I can honestly say I have never seen a better movie than 'Gods & Generals.'"
But the Baltimore Sun's Sragow, like his fellow movie critics writes: "'Gods & Generals' is a fiasco as a movie and as history, partly because it fails to dramatize the contradictions in the positions of Jackson and Lee – men who say they love the Union but love their native state more."
Is reviewer Sragow at all acquainted with the extraordinary combat heroism of both Lee and Jackson during the Mexican War as officers of the United States Army?
Has he ever read Gen. Winfield Scott's salute to Lee's extraordinary courage and ability, which doubtless led President Lincoln to offer Lee command of the entire Union field army?
And what do such movie critics think of the Treaty of Paris and the Declaration of Independence with their references to "Free, sovereign and independent states"? Can they find anything in the Constitution denying the same right to secede from the Union as was insisted upon in the New York and Rhode Island ratifications of the U.S. Constitution?
Baltimore Sun critic Sragow also charges Director Maxwell with "Driving slavery into the background and fringes of his movie. The subjugation of black men and women emerges as a theme only with cringe-worthy clumsiness. A house slave who takes charge of her Fredericksburg mansion (while her white family runs from the Union invaders) tells Gen. Hancock that no matter how devoted she is to her owners, she wants to die free."
How is it that this movie critic failed to mention the name of this superb actress who played the part of the slave Martha?
Her name is Donzeleigh Abernathy, and I marched in the same procession of the Selma March with her father the Rev. Ralph Abernathy.
Sun critic Sragow also charged, as did other movie critics, that Director Maxwell "handed the film over to Jackson ... turning him into a plaster saint."
By striking contrast, American Enterprise magazine's writer Bill Kauffman wrote:
"'Gods & Generals' is not only the finest movie ever made about the Civil War, it is also the best American historical film period."
Along with the negative newspaper movie critics, there is from CBS' David Sheehan: "Stirring, spectacular epic achievement. History has never been brought to life with such insight and vivid detail, with such vibrant emotions, with so much to learn and so much to live in a movie experience that is awesome to behold."
As for the vast majority of daily newspaper movie critics who roasted "Gods & Generals," I am led to recall four of the major daily newspaper critiques of Abraham Lincoln's Gettysburg Address:
I liked a lot the first half of "My Big Fat Greek Wedding." Then it went a little flat (however, last night the TV show based on it was boring). "Sweet Home Alabama" also was pretty good.
I have heard that "Barbershop" is good but haven't had a chance to see it.
Watched it this past weekend w/ my 13-year-old son. He's still talking about it, which is amazing since his attention span right now is about as long as a gnat's.
See this movie if you haven't!
Well, I guess that depends on your definition of "heroic."
While it is true they were fighting for a repugnant cause, they believed that cause meant life or death for the slaveholding states. In a sense they were right, but ultimately history is the judge, and they were very, very wrong.
It is difficult for us to understand the ambivalence toward "African slavery" that existed at the time, even for most people in the "free states." Although their cause was wrong, given the climate of the times they thought they were doing the honorable thing.
The result of that war was a true UNION of the states into a single nation, ironically. Before that time, "the United States" was spoken of in the plural ("the United States are a Repubic"). Afterward it was spoken of in singular as we do today ("the United States is a Republic"). Before, people thought in terms of their state or their region. That is what people like Robert E. Lee thought they were fighting for.
A very kind, as well as erudite, man. He sent my son Thomas Jackson an autographed copy of the book for his first birthday ... arranged by my Dad!
The reenactors did okay, but didn't portray the gore of a Civil War battle accurately. A real CW battle rivaled the opening scenes of Saving Private Ryan in terms of horror.
GAG has all the hallmarks of a 30 minute history channel documentary. While I appreciate the noble effort involved in this movie, it was still a bad movie by any standard. Being politically incorrect and having a positive depiction of Christianity does not a good movie make.
If anything, Civil War buffs should be disappointed in this movie; the financial losses it reaps will insure there are no epic Civil War movies for some time to come.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.