I never understood why people did not seem to like this movie. It is a rather amazing Movie and really a “documentary” of Thomas J. “Stonewall” Jackson’ role during the first 2 years of the war.
probably the long discussions scenes towards the beginning. the other thing being that it's pretty hard to follow up gettysburg. there's alot of inbuilt drama in gettysburg because it's constantly building towards the battle of little roundtop and then after that building towards pickett's fateful charge. it's hard to capture that kind of buildup when you're following someone over the course of their career and the thing you're building up to is their accidental death. while it is interesting to have a character study of jackson i think having to follow up the expectation created by gettysburg is a major part of why it didn't do very well. perhaps if they had trimmed some of it in editing or made some different writing decisions to make the earlier parts flow more it could have done better.
I look at the cover of this soundtrack, then listen to this song, and it really reflects how great and noble of a man that Lt. Gen. Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson truly was. "Let us cross over the river, and rest under the shade of the trees." God bless him!
@@bourne817 Sorry, my younger brother who has a whole "Lost Cause" mentality went and spammed a bunch of pro-Confederate content several years ago using my account and I'll still find stuff he's posted every now and then.
Every time I hear this song, I can picture the two lines of armies in blue and gray trading manly blows in a rainy, foggy field. Everything is in slow motion with commands being amplified and echoed as men pour lead into other men.
Maxwell did do a movie after this about "Copperheads." But was a really low budget film. Nothing to the quality of "Gettysburg" or "Gods and Generals." I would Love to help write the script for the third movie.
@@connerwills6802 It is a prequel.... lol "Gods and Generals" Fredericksburg and Antietam was fought before Gettysburg... But Ron Maxwell made the Gettysburg movie first. I Love both movies.
@@connerwills6802 The Last Full Measure was supposed to be the final movie and I blame Ted Turner, he had a responsibility I feel to complete the third film, sad we will never see it
The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? The Lord is the strength of my life; of whom shall I be afraid? When the wicked, even mine enemies and my foes, came upon me to eat up my flesh they stumbled and fell; Though an host should encamp against me, my heart shall not fear; thought war should rise against me, in this will I be confident.
I had ancestors fight on both sides during the Civil War. Two or three gave their lives. One actually survived getting his leg blown off but died a few days later due to infections
I own a portrait of Stonewall Jackson and a small statuette of Joshua Chamberlain in my room. I keep both films close by them, to remind myself of what sparked my love of history. Two brilliant men who fought courageously in a great, tragic war.
The CSA-soldiers can be said to have fought for the staying of slavery, and of the Union soldiers you can say that they fought for the considerable revenue produced by the Southern States. But in the end, both the CSA-soldier and the Union soldier did most likely fought for their interpretation of the constitution, as soldier´s letters of the time has shown. Im not putting blame on any side, I just want the memory of these men to be fair.
In many ways that war was very like the one between Athens and Sparta. Sparta was an agrarian state farmed by slaves and protected by men who were feared as soldiers. Athens was more diverse and relied on it's Navy with great freedom for it's "polis" to represent the citizens. Yet for both and for anyone who knows America, the common stance is "Don't Tell Me What To Do."The South knew slavery was fading with the invention of the cotton gin, the steam engine, the reaper and electricity. The North had heavy industry and the power of the railroad. The South had cotton and farm produce. but lacked competent coinage and reputable banking facilities. The war decided the matter of states rights and also of slavery but the criminal conduct of Reconstruction held the South back for at least two generations. The deep south was still behind until Atlanta put in a modern international airport and finally, the Olympics.
Gods and Generals has one of the best soundtracks of any movie I've ever seen. God bless all those who made this excellent movie. Men like Robert E. Lee, Thomas Jackson, and so many others trusted in the Lord and prayed for His will to be done. God bless the South. -Deo Vindice-
Ethan Kemp The only state to threaten to not join the original thirteen colonies was Georgia, because the original articles of confederation prohibited slavery. It was removed and ever since that day to after the civil war there had been a divide between north and south. It's impossible to claim that slavery was not explicit to the south, as it was universally abolished in the north long before the prelude to the war began. Indeed the entire cause of the war had been the unwillingness to come to terms about it. The north feared its expansion while the south needed it to counter the creation of so many free states. The south constantly faced an uphill battle in congress due to the sheer difference in population and the senatorial divide. It was only a matter of time before the north had the capital to outlaw it in Washington. It's also a fact that every president that had taken a pro-slavery stance won support in the south and disfavor in the north. Lest we not forget about the political turmoil that Buchanan, the southern democrat, brought forth and fought ferociously to preserve the institutions of slavery. No one had done more to sow bitterness between free states and slave states and it hardly stopped there.
With all due respect, the north outlawed slavery but sold their slaves south. They did nothing to end slavery. By 1861, there were over 16,000 illegal slaves in the north. New england pratically thrived on the slave trade, made illegal in 1808 by the Constitution. By 1861, new england slave ships were still trading slaves from Africa to the Carribeans and the West Indies. At the start of the war, Lincoln asked the Confederate States to come back into the Union and he would make an ammendment (The Corwin ammendment) to legalize slavery forever. THE SOUTH SAID NO! We wanted our independence from a tyranical ruler. In the Hampton Roads peace conference late in the war, Lincoln again asked the South to come back into the Union and he would legalize slavery. THE SOUTH SAID NO AGAIN! President Davis himself said that we were not fighting for slavery. The CSA was fighting against the enslavement of the entire American people by the oppressive federal government. The South was actually looking to make plans to free the slave but the war started and that went out the window. I suggest you start by stop reading those politically correct yankee propaganda twisted textbooks that make the South look like the bad guy. Again, no offense. Just trying to protect true American History. (Try the Abbeville Institue for further reading)
Naomi Washington Delaware and Illinois both had about a million slaves between them by them by the start of the war, yet fervently supported the union. Asides from a minority of their citizens. Democratic politicians did not seek to expand slavery, rather, they sought to preserve the right of the state to determine its legality. The federal government has no right to abolish slavery. It only had the right to abolish the international trade, which it did in 1808. The cause of the war was the refusal to remove mobilized troops from a sovereign nation's borders by the US.
I think of a great big battle too. The armys charging over a vast field, and when they both meet a sound of swords clashing and many fights being fought..... yeah my soldier!
i'll take your word for it. i read the book a long time ago, as well as his father's book and other of jeffs books. my favs were the ones on the american revolution.
"In the Army of the Shennandoah, you were the First Brigade! In the Army of the Potomac, you were the First Brigade! In the Second Corps of this army, you ARE the First Brigade! You ARE the First Brigade in the affections of your general and I hope by your future deeds and bearing you will be handed down to posterity as the First Brigade in this our Second War of Independence! God's Speed!"
@jenkinsmta The movie "God and Generals" starts with Lee in Washington D.C. to be offered command of the Army to suppress the rebellion in the South. In the book, that part begins on pg 94. The movies skips Lee being stationed in Texas, Hancock in California and Chamberlain in Maine before the outbreak of the Civil War.
It deviants from the book a lot, and was seen as too pro-southern. The latter is the most unfortunate since its predecessor, Gettysburg, which had a more balanced perspective between south and north came at a time when the pendulum was switching from the old pro-southern views to a pro-northern
The casting was crap compared to Gettysburg. Martin sheen should have still played Lee. He did a fantastic job at it in Gettysburg. And why change Stephen Lang's character?
@@jessenester3035 if I recall correctly, Sheen had either a prior contract or had an illness. And Lang was supposed to play Pickett but something similar happened with that actor and the directors knew he could do an amazing job as Stonewall, so they asked if he would be willing, as they pulled the Pickett actor from the reenactors...
This is a beautiful movie. My eyes well up in tears when I see it or hear the music. The South seceded from the USA just as the patriots before them seceded from England. BTW my great-great grandfather was a Capt. in the 2nd Massachusetts infantry. The South was constitutionally right.
This movie made me interested in the American Civil War. Right now Im studying the causes and effects of the Civil War and I would play this straight from my phone.
I play Empire: Total War to this song, and it fits perfectly to each battle. It shares the "chills-up-your-spine" feel as the Gettysburg soundtrack, but there's a contrast - Gettysburg's soundtrack made you think about the glory of battle, but what I get from Gods and Generals is more of the horror. The glory is there, certainly, but this piece never takes you away from the fact that war is terrible.
Goosebumps? Dread is what I would think. Being either Northerner or Southerner being in the first line of an advance upon a defended redoubt with musket and cannon staring straight at you, and not knowing if the sound you will not hear is the one that is decapitating you from a flying cannonball. Albeit, toward the end of the war, the cannonball had been replaced by the contemporary shell shaped ordinance and the musket with the repeating rifle. If you look at pictures of the Confederate cavalry nary a one had a rifle, but rode into battle with a six-shooter revolver, and a sword. The Union cavalry charged with sabres drawn and fell to pistol shot. As a native Texan, I hate the damned Confederacy. Timber speculators from the other Southern states moved into East Texas and brought their secessionist ideologue with them along with all the slaves. Whereas, the men who had fought at the Alamo were spread from Austin to El Paso and over to Brownsville and North to Lubbock. Sam Houston said the Confederacy would be the death of the Republic of Texas. Note he said Republic, because in 1860 Texas was still an independent nation. So, damned the fire-eaters of South Carolina for destroying the independent nation of Texas.
I have read almost all of his books except for "To The Last Man" witch i will read after finishing "The Glorious Cause" and am waiting for him to finish writing the 3rd book of his World War 2 trilogy.
It's very accurate actually. If you're referring to idealistic as everyone believing in God, that was true. Everyone was very God-fearing back then... pity we've lost that
@RevBillyRayCollins Its also a fact that Lincoln didn't have the Constitutional power as president to free the slaves, so it was a military command as Commander in Chief, and after the war Congress passed the 14th and 15th Amendments. Also, thank you for having a civilized discussion with me, usually I get flak'd hardcore for speaking my opinion :) I agree too, slavery was property and an economic means to the South so of course it is understandable why back then it was such a sensitive issue
I may be uncomfortable with the Lost Cause slant the movie has, but this soundtrack is one for the ages nonetheless. Unrestrained is the first word that comes to mind. It doesn’t just settle for being epic but strives towards the mythic.
Good point. Im not from the U.S either, but one of my ancestors emmigrated to the U.S, and was drafted into service by the federal government. He did survive, though.
@@mikeg2491 Foolish for trusting the South who had just as expansionist ambitions in the West as the North. But their situation was a lot more understandable and options limited, as their reason was infinitely more noble than the slaver South’s.
@TomdebombHD It was General Longstreet who is Said to have Said this to British Army Col. Sir Arthur Freemantle on the 2nd Day of the Battle of Gettysburg
Fun fact about Andersonville prison: The Union mortality rate was about 24%. The guard mortality rate was 22%. The Guards had the same rations as the prisoners. The real reason why the mortality rate was so high was blockade of all medical supplies to the South and the rejection of Southern prisoner exchanges. The North had no such excuses.
It's a shame that people nowadays don't know why they fought, or at least the real reason anyway state's rights, some people tend to think it was all about the slaves, it's disgraceful for those who fought and died for our country.
Slavery was a big issue though. It's easy for us to criticize today, but let's consider things from a 1860's southerner's point of view for a sec. Slavery as morally wrong as it is, happens to be the main economic drive of the region. I am wholeheartedly against slavery. Don't get me wrong. But it was allowed to flourish to begin with. As such, it could not be taken away as fast as was asked. Simply not viable. It would have crippled those states beyond recovery. It would have needed a complete and profound change of the south's way of life. It was a necessary change of course. But who wants to see his world violently rocked by some guy seating in a chair having second thoughts on something that is basically part of you day to day life ? How do you feel when you're basically told that your workforce isn't your workforce anymore, that they will become your equals, that you will need to pay them wages, adapt to this model ? It IS the right thing to do of course. But realistically not possible in such a short time frame. That said, Lincoln did step in at a time when the southern states wanted to extend the use of slavery thus making that model worse from a moral standpoint. That stopped it from going downhill for a time. But ultimately acting the way he did was a mistake. American identity is built on that sense of patriotism and independence that persists (and I must say irks me quite a bit when interacting with some) today. Because it's still a recent achievement historically speaking, and one American's have bled for quite a lot. It was obvious things would take a turn for the worst. Marshaling armies to crush rebellions is the one thing history taught us was a bad idea on countless occasions. It seeds bitterness and resentment. Ultimately meant to sprout into another conflict. And look at today's USA. North and South division is still a thing. More than ever. It has festered overtime. Doubtful it will come to conflict though - but I'd say the "United" part of United States of America is kind of prodigious overstatement.
@RapidFire740 Well I thank you also for having a civilized discussion, I too have been dragged into very imature arguments. But I can't really talk too much about slavery because I know more about the actual war rather than the civil issues like slavery.
Slavery was (by the words of the very leaders of the South} the sole reason they tried to leave the Union. So the Confederacy was built on the purpose of keeping millions in chains.....
@@andreworiez8920 the soldiers themselves weren't fighting for slavery. Many of them were poor, illiterate farmers, and didn't even have the money to own slaves. They were fighting to protect their homes. Their farms. Their *families.* Their leaders knew that, and used these patriotic young men's fervor as cannon fodder for the horrific cause of slavery.
@RevBillyRayCollins You raise good points and a common misconception is that the war was about states rights, but when you think about it, the war truley was about slavery. Look at the Missouri compromise and the compromise of 1820. The South was MORE than happy to accept the strong federal government when it ensured federal officials would return run away slaves. My own judgements based on the facts ive seen is that the war began because of slavery and ended because of that issue
The reasons about why these men fought during the civil war are going to be contemplated for as long as people have interest in it. Me being a civil war reenactor have heard various reason only for me to conclude that everyone has their own opinion about what it was fought for.
Somehow this song just gives me an image of Stalingrad, or a movie enemy at the gates. With soviet soldiers charging up a hill with a flag, and lots of gunfire and artillery in the background. Does that... does that make me communist? Anyone else have any similar images? Please, I don't want to be the one guy here that isn't debating between Gettysburg and Gods and Generals...
Makes me think of the fall of Berlin. Desperate German soldiers barely holding on, fanatical SS soldiers shooting anyone who runs, the Soviet army taking it's bloody revenge... Or the Battle of Austerlitz - the Russians and Austrians charging down from the hills towards the small French right flank, only for the hills to be swept up by the French left flank. The two mightiest empires of Europe, defeated in a single stroke by a minor noble from Corsica.
@jermster17 na i disagree, I was lucky to see the 5 hour version, and it was good enough to get a standing ovation from me and the entire croud. I do think that this move suffers from intense editing issures, like Antitam should have been kept in but it wasn't
I liked this movie too. Another magnificent soundtrack to compliment the GETTYSBURG one. I had ancestors on both sides of that war. I don't care what the cancel culture hyenas say. The majority on BOTH sides deserve our respect and honor.
Its sad that own confederate soldiers shot Jackson in confusion. If he had have lived, I am sure the war would have went very differently, and maybe even Gettysburg might have had a better outcome for the confederates.
@RapidFire740 That is true but my point is that the CSA left because the states rights were being dimenished, because slavery was being slowly banned. In my view slavery was the example of states rights being taken away. Besides if the war was only about slavery then why did the union free the slaves three years into the war, and then free the rest once the war ended? If it was really about slavery then why didnt the union do anything any sooner?
The reason they banned slavery in the South first during the war before the rest of the nation was because they didn't want the other slave supporting states that were loyal to the Union (Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland and Delaware) to secede as well. Plus, the emancipation was a political maneuver by Lincoln to get the European countries that already denounced slavery to stop buying cotton from the South so he purposefully banned slavery in the rebelling states so as to not ostracize his remaining allies while keeping the south from receiving any European support. Also the argument of states rights did NOT start in the South but the North. After the passage of the 1850 Fugitive Slave Act, the Northern states were forced to cooperate with slavehunters and federal authorities to assist in hunting runaway slaves. While many had little regard for their plight, Northerners actively refused because they despised the idea of being told what to do by other states that depended on a slave economy they thought backwards and stealing land from Free Labor supporters. Thus many ended up refusing to turn slaves over and more assisted in helping them flee to Canada
@Amerikaner2 are guaranteed in the tenth amendment of the Constitution, the Feds wanted to take that away via slavery so the C.S.A. fought back. So hopefully now you can see that slavery was just an example of the states rights.
@RevBillyRayCollins The reason slaves were released 3 years into the war was because it was Lincoln's solution to the issue of slaves who ran and hid behind union lines. Once the Union army began advancing in th South, "liberated"slaves went to the Union army for protection, and the military didnt have the resources to support, what became to be thousands of slaves that technically werent free yet. the Emancipation Proclamation was Lincoln's military order to his generals who dealt with slaves
individual state rights to them were as important to them as our decleration of independence. I honor the south and i respect them with everything, even though i would have served against them in the civil war supporting the Union. have you ever read the Last Full Measure? FANTASTIC BOOK. get it and read it. your perspective on the war will change
@jermster17 haha. I respect your opinion, but i loved this film, and the book. I can understand why it didn't follow the book much. it all comes down to moolah! lol Let's hope I can make the last full measure
Actually, long before the war, the South made clear to the abolishionists,including Lincoln, that they were willing to compromise when it came to the slaves. They offered to gradually decrease the number of slaves, over a certain time period. For it was impossible for the South to just throw away their workforce and the competence of that workforce, if they did, they would have a economical disaster, which would affect the whole Union. But the federals pressed on for immediate action.
Totally agreed. The movies battle scenes were good and all but it strayed too far in different directions. It completely played down the horrors of slavery
Yes, completely. Although, further studies into the subject has radically changed my standpoints about the Civil war - i am no longer so eager to defend the slave states as I was a couple of months ago. Nevertheless, it is quite true that a too rapid abolishment of the slavery would have meant (or did) economic disaster for the South, so in purely practical terms, their cause was just, although they had only themselves to blaim that the North became aggressive.
Faxe90Swe slavery was not a beginning rallying cry it came along with the war most southern knew that slavery was going to end and most of them wanted it to this civil isn't as black and white as most people portray it today
Don't forget the overall mortality rate for Confederates in Union prisons was 12%, to the 9% for Union prisoners in Confederate prisons. So the South, which could barely feed it's own army managed to keep more Union prisoners alive than North. Not to mention that there were far more Union POWs than Confederate ones.
They were fighting over state's vs. national rights, not slavery, how many times do I have to say that? Slavery was the issue that finally brought the conflict up, the war could have been over education reform but it wouldnt matter what it was anyway since its still state v feds. My slavery didnt exist was just me giving off steam from having to deal with people who think 620,000 died for a debate over conditions of servitude when they died trying to restructure the govt.
By the way, are you American? Americans tend to be on one side or the other, which is understandable, and usually cannot imagine that there was something good with the cause of the other side - that sadly fact goes for both schools of opinion in this matter.
@DrKorn5 If you still don't believe me, and want proof of documentation read general Longstreets Memoirs. He describes that the public outcry for the British would be too extreme if it allied with the CSA. Do some research. Im done here
So you do not agree that Southern economy would have collapsed if slavery had been instantly removed? And even if economic stake was limited to the upper class, the poor and middle class also was for the slavery and the expansion of slavery and they fought for it - how else can one interpret the resounding popular cheer that swept the South after the caning of Sumner and popular support of the Kansas-Nebraska Act. For the record, i never said that there were only one reason for the war.
The same time Poland also fought for independence (January Uprising 1863-64) against Tsarist Russia, an ally of Lincolnite USA. Both Lincoln and Alexander II claimed they were liberators. Only their victims know all the truth.
And the memory of those CSA-soldiers is constantly being violated by ignorant laymen, whom goes by what others say, and people who gain something from modifying the truth about the CSA cause.
No, our thinking is not racist, it is, as i said, realistic in relation to the period of history we´re dealing with. We can´t judge history by our own modern ethics! Americans are, or were, extremely touchy about property, and the slaves were property. So the slave holders were, even according to the Constitution of that time, entitled to decide and have a say - it was, after all, their property. Please don´t throw irrelevant accusations at me.
@JudgeMagisterDelita Admittedly I have not seen the DC, and my assessment of the movie is probably even more unfair seeing that I never read the book. As long as the extra hour of footage isn't more of the poorly acted/written "civilian" scenes, I might owe it a watch, if I can find/afford a copy...
I was being highly objective in my comment. Have I said anything about the Union soldiers? But, sure, i´ll include them as well in my statement of thoughts: they, as the CSA-soldiers, fought for a cause (though it in most cases was not the abolishment of slavery), and im fine with that, the thing is that other people can´t be content with the thought that the CSA also had a cause. My forefather fought on the Union side, just so you know that.
@RapidFire740 I got to point out that the republican party wasnt made to end slavery just keep it out of the territories won in the Mexican American War but you are right on the fact that the South seceded because it didnt get its way, like a spoiled child
They were fighting over states rights not slavery! Thats my point on this, and no I dont think there intertwined, As far as Im concerned slavery never existed, but if it did and if the CSA had won then Im sure slavery would have lasted for a little while longer after the war, but the CSA would be in such a financial mess since foreign powers wouldnt find them respectable they would eventually repeal slavery, besides its not like the north werent racists towards blacks, everyone hated them
Although the CSA did cease to exist, to say that they were beaten badly is an exaggeration. Much of the war saw the confederacy with the upper hand, albeit on the defensive. However, by the last year of the war, it became clear to President Davis and the war department that the current loss of life and destruction of land could not be sustained, and they surrendered. Essentially, Grant's idea of Black flag warfare had worked.
@Amerikaner2 Damn right! No you fool, slavery was the example used for state's rights but not the actual issue at hand back then. Had the CSA won, slavery would have eventually died out do to pressure with international relations and eventual enlightenment over moral values, don't listen to that Spike Lee production, "C.S.A. The Confederate States of America", nothing in that film would have ever happened. You need to realize that the C.S.A. wanted to preserve state's rights, something that we
If we look at this conflict in terms of constitutional matters, the CSA clearly had the better part of good moral and ethics. After all, it was their legal right to walk out on the Union. And you know as well as me that the abolishment of slavery did not become a motive for the Union until the emancipation act of -62 (or was it -63). So we can, based on facts, say that the Union cause was not as glorious as the CSA:s, at least not to begin with.
I believe that the states had the right, back then that is, to leave for any reason possible. Well, we can at least agree on the fact that the CSA-men on the battlefield did not fight for the staying of slavery, right? I mean, they did not have any reason to want slavery, since it robbed them of their jobs. Only a couple of hundred aristocratic planters actually wanted the slavery. By the way, did any of your ancestors fight ion the war?
I'm trying so hard to like this movie, but some parts are just so awful. The battle scenes are great though. This track and the soundtrack in general are excellent too.
I'm confused -- it was the main example, yet not the issue? Don't you agree that the two might be intertwined at a certain point? You're speculating on something you can't possibly know; a culture of racism bred from 16th century England and fostered through the slave codes could very well have kept slavery around long after the war. The southern ideal of a slaveowning, gentlemanly society was what differentiated the south from the north -- I doubt they would've just given it up outright.
