Just watched this over the course of three nights. First things first… THIS IS A LONG MOVIE.

Ok, so it's the first of three movies documenting the civil war. How historically accurate it is, I'm not sure, as I'm not all that up on my civil war history. However, I did read a book about the civil war generals a year ago, and this movie appears to portray them in an accurate light.

Now, the thing that has been bothering me the most… Whoever invented that whole 'line of battle' thing, where large bodies of men march towards each other, stand still and shoot until the other side is all dead, should have been stillborn. Honestly! Watching one of the last battle sequences was painful. Men marched out, stood still, and exchanged fire. Signing up for those armies is like signing a suicide note. The only explanation I can think of is that the American's were trying to emulate the Europeans, and their fine and well-developed war tactics. They some how forgot that guerilla tactics worked best against the lobster backs (no offence, Seth).

All in all, a decent movie for those of you who like to watch your movies, and yell at the characters for their stupidity.

LOL.

Well, the French did try columns. But that didn't work so well, either.

But while your bitching, what about the naval commanders who pulled up alongside enemy ships and exchanged cannon fire, hoping the other guy would sink before them?

Well, at least with the naval warfare you had a chance by building a better boat. I don't think they used flak vests back then for infantry.

I saw this movie in theaers and frankly was not impressed. I have seen Gettysburg to which Gods and Generals is a prequel (sort of the SW relaese the prequels after the later movies deal)

Gettysburg in my opinion is a much better movie.

Gods and Generals has a large amount of unimportant stoyline, which clog this movie and take it to its 4 hour length. Also, it has an almost exclusivly Southern Point of view, as opposed to Gettysburg, which has a more balanced perspective from both sides.

As for the line of battle comment- Kas I agree. Whomever thought it up was an idiot- I am guessing it came from ancient styles of fighting, such as Greek and Roman tactic, when close sheild walls were effective tactcis. Until the 19th and 20th centuries, generals and tactical theorists were remarkable unwilling to alter time tested tactics and often honored tradition over innovation.

A perfect example comes as late as WWII, when Polish cavalry charged German panzers, assuming that such a charge could stem the "mechanized cavalry". Logic would say this is suicide, but in a match between logic and tradition, for a long time tradition won out. I have other examples, but I don't have time to put them down. (Reads- wants to end incomprehensible rant)

Anyway, yeah thats what I think about that movie. :p

I think they lined up because their guns didn't really hit what they aimed at. So the line sort of concentrated their fire. But with the improvements to firearms, the tactics should have changed...



I didn't like Gods and Generals as much as I liked Gettysburg. A friend of mine, during the part when Stonewall Jackson was going off to his last battle and encouraged his wife to go read with him, he (my friend) blurted out into a quiet theatre, "Let's go read?"

Then

"I'd be, 'Let's get it on!"


lol

lol

lol, Simon.

Simon's right about the accuracy thing. There were more accurate weapons but the reloading process was much longer. That's why whenever the British kicked ass in Europe because they had very well disciplined troops who moved together. And the psychological effect of seeing a shitload of guns shooting at the same time is a lot more than just a shot here and a couple shots there.

I have never understood why Americans so cherish their brutal war-like history so much. It baffles me.

Canada has had an equally brutal history, filled with just as much (if not more) bloodshed when compared to the United States of America. Note...

Canada does not have, anywhere in its Bill of Rights, anything that vaguely resembles the American equivalent which enables any yankee-doodle-dandy to tote around 'arms'. Namely because its people are not afraid that their neighbours... or the British, or even French for that matter, might come romping into their homes and start demanding... Oh, I dunno... tea, escargot or... their wives, daughters, and sisters.

Canada has had a long history of war with itself and others, but... its people do not gather to barbeque whole animals and consume great amounts of beer to celebrate their glorius independance or oppresion of or from... Other humans? They do not, on a regular basis, bask in their own crapulence at managing to subdue a mainly peaceful race of the First Nations. In Canada, nations across the sea are just that... Nations across the sea... Not ancient enemies.

Canadians do not have monuments to War planted on every spare inch of government property, but rather; monuments which celebrate peace, well being, and the traditions of the people who lived on this land before us.

And I think this is most important...

Canadians look ahead, to the future. Americans, it seems, are bound to drag the past along with them. I look ahead to the day when the people of the United States of America can travel abroad, around the globe, without having to stitch Canadian flags to their bags.

On another topic... I live in North America too, why is it that people from the United States of America, are Americans. I mean... How many people live in the Americas? But only them folks get to use the name? Bah.

Mwah!

Canada has had a long history of war with itself and others, but... its people do not gather to barbeque whole animals and consume great amounts of beer to celebrate their glorius independance or oppresion of or from...

What a boring nation.