Civil War epic shut down by 'PC crowd'? 'Gods and Generals' a painful disappointment at B.O.

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Saturday, March 22, 2003 | Art Moore

[Zeroisanumber]

Well now...isn't it interesting that a poster can be ripped apart for supporting one of the founding principals of our Republic? That every citizen should vote for whom they choose and that a well-informed electorate is the key to keeping us free from tyrrany.

It's amazing the amount of panty-waist liberals on this forum claiming to be "center-right".

Sorry that I'm not a pure enough conservatve for you, but unlike those miserable few in your sucker...I mean "Taxpayers" party I actually like to accomplish my goals from time to time.

[plusone]

Excellent points. I haven't seen this movie, but I did see Gettysburg. There were some decent battle scenes, but every fifteen minutes or so, the movie would just grind to a halt so that one of the main actors could (literally) step forward into a pale light and give a five minute long sililoquie (sp). It just seemed corny. From other comments, this movie seems similar.

[rwfromkansas]

Really? Well, I have not seen it yet (too late now, so will have to wait on the DVD).

I talked to one of the history professors at my college who saw it and he said it was fantastic and he is going to buy the DVD.

[rwfromkansas]

It depends on what thread you pop on. Some have rave Freeper reviews for the majority of the thread.

This one is mostly being read by the people that hate the movie though.

[rwfromkansas]

ditto.....60 miles here.

[Godebert]

"Sorry that I'm not a pure enough conservatve for you, but unlike those miserable few in your sucker...I mean "Taxpayers" party I actually like to accomplish my goals from time to time."

You're not a conservative, pure or otherwise. You blue-zone trolls are so transparent.

[Bismark]

I'm as un-PC as they come, and I have no ideological axe to grind over a 140-year old war, so I can tell you "Gods and Generals" fully deserved to tank.

I disagree. It was a long movie, and it did require that the viewer keep his brain engaged which will cut into it's market share, but it was well done and Lang was surprisingly good as Jackson.

[HitmanLV]

I dunno...release a 3 hour movie about a war that the average 14-39 year old knows little or nothing about, and I expect it to do poorly at the box office.

[rwfromkansas]

got a problem with a movie talking about love of God?

[Polybius]

I loved the book, I like studying about the period, but for God's sake they spent more time on that lame 'Bonnie Blue Flag' scene than on Bull Run. I don't know what Turner was trying to do with this turkey.

For Ted Turner, that scene was the most important one in the whole movie.......It was the one where he had his cameo speaking part. ;-)

[TheBattman]

The problems this movie faces at the box office are from the following, in no particular order:

1. Ted Turner produced - turns off a lot of conservatives.

2. 4 hours long - most people don't have that long of an attention span.

3. Truth hurts - It's not PC to portray the Confederacy as "good guys" - especially good guys who are unabashed Christians.

4. Leftist media - mostly because of #3 above, the media and it's reviewers poopooed this film from the get-go.

My wife who normally cannot stand war films, including historical stuff like this movie loved this film. In fact she insisted on renting the other movie the next day.

[Non-Sequitur]

Maxwell had to leave Antietam out of the movie due to its length.

And Second Bull Run. And the Penninsula campaign. And Jackson's valley campaign. The whole war is an after thought. Just a prop to hook Jackson up with that 5 year old girl who, by the way, took up only part of three or four pages in the book.

[Zeroisanumber]

Other than the fact that it was frigging boring.

[rwfromkansas]

They left that out? Wow.

[Non-Sequitur]

Yeah, I walked out of the theater in Olathe and I swear this girl ahead of me turned to her boyfriend and asked, "So what was so great about this Jackson guy anyway?" If you didn't have any idea of Jackson and his genius going into the movie you sure didn't have any idea of it when you left.

[rwfromkansas]

Well, that's Olathe for you. j/k

My brother lives in Olathe.

[GOPcapitalist]

The South remained solidly Democrat for a century after the Civil War, as electoral maps of previous elections clearly show. The 1860 Republican candidate got ZERO votes in ten of the soon-to-be rebel states, and every single person elected to Congress (though none were seated) in 1865 by the former rebel states was a Democrat.

Considering that what was the Republican Party at the time had just concluded a war of invasion and coercion against them, itself with terrible tolls on southern civilians, can you honestly blame them?

[faithincowboys]

cuz of ted turner-- no other reason!!!

don't alienate the film's target demo, ted, you moron!!

[GOPcapitalist]

And Second Bull Run. And the Penninsula campaign. And Jackson's valley campaign.

What gives, non-seq? A few post back you were whining about the film being too long and boring. Now you're complaining that it left out some of the battles in between. If they had included those battles, the film may well have been six hours instead of four. And I have no doubt that, had it been six hours, you would be one of the first to whine over that point.

[Protagoras]

Too long for anyone. I saw it and was disappointed in several ways. It wasn't a bad movie, but it just wasn't a good movie.

Many scenes were torturously long, needlessly. The length added nothing in my opinon. Script was written as people write, not speak.

Battle scenes were excellent.

It has nothing to do with the MTV generation. They don't see these kinds of movies anyway.

Two and a half stars.