*** Official "GODS AND GENERALS" Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

I was so looking forward to seeing this movie tomorrow. However, the reviews have been abysmal. I was wondering if anyone has seen it. Many of the reviewers also negatively mention the predecessor "Gettysburg", which I thought was a fantastic movie. I can't decide if G&G is truly a bad movie (and should wait for the DVD) or not. Any thoughts are appreciated?

I was planning on seeing this film tomorrow as well. With a running time of almost four hours, I am curious if this film includes an intermission. If it does include an intermission, how long is it?

The reviews are pretty bad. It currently has an 8% on the tomato-meter.

Bill,
I've heard from a few people that it does have an intermission but I have no idea how long it is with intermission. 10-15mins tops wouldn't it?

How many screens in the US is it opening with?

The intermission was 12 minutes, according to the sign that was posted at the theater I saw it at today.

And I thought the film was awful...

DJ

The 12 minute intermission is actually FORCED on the film. This is how much black film WB spliced into reel 8. This is followed by a 4 minute Entracte, then part two.

Damin im just curious, did anyone leave before the film finished? There hasn't been much good discussed about this project.

Most of the reviews that I've read have said that it's boring and two times too long, but everyone has said that it was definitely accurate for the most part (obviously the lack of bloodshed is incredibly inaccurate, but oh well), so all of them said that Civil War and all-around history buffs would be having a good/great time with it, and most other people probably wouldn't care for it.

Damin J Toell said:

And I thought the film was awful...

Hmmm, all the reason for me to go and see it.

Seriously, I've been wanting to see this for quite some time.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I've seen the movie. It is, unfortunately, quite awful. :frowning:

I just saw it a few hours ago and it pretty boring, in fact a few people got up and left. Obviously the best parts where the action sequences, but the dialog scenes where sleep worthy. One thing I guarantee you will get out of the film though is a sore ass.

MOVED TO REVIEW THREAD

Sorry to hear all of the negative reviews, since I loved "Gettysburg". I'm kind of short on time, I might have to skip this one and wait for the dvd. Anyway, I was going to go see it this afternoon, but today I received dvds of "King of Kings", "The Cardinal", "The Talk of the Town", and "Gloria", I'm going to stay out of the theaters this weekend and spend my time using my home theater.




Crawdaddy

Damin J Toell said:

Do I have a notoriously bad opinion of movies or something?

Naw, just teasin' ya. Just remembered our good discussion back when The Ring came out.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I just got back from the movie.

It is OBVIOUSLY not going to be filled with realistic action sequences, nor superb special effects. If you go in expecting the action from a Gladiator or Saving Private Ryan, you'll be thoroughly disappointed.

It's VERY similar (IMO) to Gettysburg in terms of action, effects, etc.

If you liked Gettysburg, I'd strongly suggest Gods & Generals.

Not quite yet. I still have to see it.

Well I decided to take the plunge and see it. Based on all the negative reviews and commentary on the net I almost stayed home but with all the rain in the area, I figured what the hell. I am glad I went and enjoyed it very much. I thought Lang did an excellent job portraying Jackson.

The first theater I went to surprised me by being sold out. The theater where I saw the film was about 3/4 full. No one walked out and the bits of conversation that I picked up at intermission indicated that others around me were enjoying the film as well. It is similar to Gettysburg but there are some key differences. Gettysburg is entirely focused on one 3 day battle which allowed for much more of the time to be spent on many of the details (preparation and manueveurs, tactics, and the action itself). The men were already on the road and in battle for a couple of years. The timeframe for Gods & Generals covers at least 2 years starting at the point each side's army is formed so each event in the film would have to be covered in much less detail. Hence the comments from a number of critics that it is jumpy but I had no trouble following it.

Also Gettysburg and Gods And Generals have completely different looks. To my eye the color scheme seemed much paler than Gettysburg. Also the focus seemed softer as well. This hindered my suspension of disbelief and kept me thinking that I am watching a period piece movie. I didn't have this experience when I watch Gettysburg. THe colors are more intense and very modern looking and the film's focus is much sharper. I think this allowed me to become more immersed in Gettysburg because aside from the weaponary and costumes it looked very real to me whereas as G & G is more like studying a painting.


Regards,
Robert