Historian Reacts to Gods and Generals Part 2

[@stflaw]

"Jeff Daniels is Chamberlain." True that. I visited the Chamberlain home in Brunswick, Maine some twelve years ago. The docent showed us a portrait of Chamberlain hanging on the wall. He told us how he took Daniels on a tour of the home when Daniels was preparing for the role in Gettysburg. He described how Daniels stood in front of that photo for a very long time, certainly thinking about how he was going to portray this important man. He spent a great deal of time in the home and asked a plethora of questions. Clearly, he took the part seriously and prepared carefully before shooting started.

[@macsh6434]

When I got promoted to Supervisor people liked my leadership and would compliment it. I told them my style was a mix of Joshua Chamberlain 🇺🇸 and Jean-Luc Picard. 🖖

[@MM-qi5mk]

Bloated Jeff Daniels was hard to see compared to Gettysburg

[@BELCAN57]

@@MM-qi5mk The way I saw it was that this was Chamberlain before the war had worn him down, hence he was a bit "chubbier" than he appeared "a few months later" at Gettysburg.

[@tsdobbi]

The Civil War like the 2nd Punic war are shining examples of why strategic decisions have a significant impact on the outcome of a war. If you win battles, but don't know how to exploit the victory strategically you will lose the war.

[@lonnietoth5765]

10th Legion : It was said of Hannibal " He could win battles , but could not win the war " .

[@danporter1176]

both of their only viable strategies was to win some battles cause some chaos, to sue for peace.And the Union basically did do a version of the Fabian Strategy. The souths main flaw was that they were too small and undeveloped, and what population they did have, a 3rd of it (slaves) was taken out of the fight ideologically. Hannibal had political rivals at home that syphoned off his resources as well as his reinforcements getting slaughtered in a trap with his brother. I think 9 times out of 10, both wars pretty much happen how they happened regardless of the "strategic decisions". The south and Hannibal were pretty much pidgeon holed into having to do what they did to try to win.

[@harrissyed1417]

It's basically a Civil War reenactor's dream come true.

[@alancoe1002]

They fed us well. The actors were infallibly apprective of us and vice versa.

[@harrissyed1417]

@@alancoe1002 Ah, a reenactor part of this movie.

[@savanahmclary4465]

It sure is...

[@savanahmclary4465]

You should have seen the Premier of "Gods and Generals" in a Northern Theater.. In a packed theater.... of "Confederates and Southerners." A NIGHT I will NEVER FORGET! and now 2021 so many of US are gone. I seriously doubt, that the theater owner... even realized ... We were pro South .. but All of us were Local .... We know what side our bread is buttered on.

[@savanahmclary4465]

@@alancoe1002 We are Americans!

[@j3bryan100]

Enjoyed your nonjudgmental review of the film

[@JohnnyRebKy]

Young George Patton, famous General of ww2, once said his mother had 3 pictures above the fire place. Robert E Lee, Stone wall Jackson, and Jesus. Patton as a child thought they were the father , son, and holy ghost lol

[@macsh6434]

I ran into Ron Maxwell at the airport once. He was surprised that anyone would recognize him. Asked him if we were getting the Last Full Measure and he said he's trying and we'll see. Then before he left I said: "Hey Ron if you do make it; General Sherman...Hugh Jackman." 😉 His eyes widened as he pointed at me and said: "Hey, now thats a great idea." 😯 I pointed back at him with a smile and we went out separate ways. This was back in 2008.

[@HistoryGoneWilder]

That's awesome

[@gennymikel4296]

Hmmm, when i think about it that would work.

[@thereturnofdarthcaedus]

@@HistoryGoneWilder which charge was far more epic freericksburg army of the potomac or picketts charge army of northern virginia or the charge at chancellorsville lead by legendary stonewall jackson

[@jamiegagnon6390]

I think the parts with the little girl were very necessary to the film and to show us the contradictions of Jackson's character. We all have them and they tell us more about a person than you might think. I have two questions; was the little girl a real person? Were the circumstances of their friendship as depicted? I would hate to find out that it was just put there to manipulate my sympathies.

[@Ruimas28]

no need to hate. The Corbin family did exist. The general spent his last winter at their property and he did indeed make friendship with a little girl. Its possible he spent also some previous winter there but I am only sure about the last one. Jane or Janie (the girl) died some time before the general (around a couple months). So...the spirit of the story is indeed true. The little details....harder to come around. Jackson´s wife confirmed they were friends. She also confirmed the little girl at some point was authorized to visit and spend time with the general (inside their own property obviously). So....there was this real friendship going on.

[@jamiegagnon6390]

@@Ruimas28 Thank you for the confirmation.

[@ashleighelizabeth5916]

I agree it is a nice little piece of history that brings the man to life, and it shows a different facet of the man's character that most people are unaware of. I remember crying when I watched this and he found out she died, and then again when he died at the end of the movie.

[@stevenwiederholt7000]

@@Ruimas28 If only Gods & Generals had been 2 movies instead of one. SIGH!

[@marie-madelaineclobus8124]

The titel of this film could be "life of general Jackson" :-)

[@JeffreyDeCristofaro]

Yeah, the film does show some personality in Stonewall Jackson's character, and Lang does do a fine job of embodying both his quiet, restrained moments and his pious intensity during the fights, but sadly, both Lang's efforts and the well-attested historicity of the real-life Jackson are in vain when weighed against director Ron Maxwell's rather pedestrian execution, particularly during the battle scenes. And the continuous use of over-insistent music and squeaky-clean violence in the battle scenes does NOT help! Perhaps the biggest problem that I have with this movie is, apart from omitting the true horrors of slavery, focusing on historical fact at the expense of story and superb technical execution, constant speeches and dialogue exchanges at the expense of action, and the aforementioned PG-13-rated clean violence, is that it also had to come at the wrong time. Had it been released in, say, maybe the late 1930's or early 40's, perhaps as a rival to GONE WITH THE WIND (which I am also no fan of but have respect for its cinematic brilliance under the restrictions of the Hays Production Code, I would cut it some slack and even go far as to say that it was ahead of its time. But it wasn't, so I didn't. So there!

[@BELCAN57]

I agree that the "home life" vignettes were largely unnecessary as they made the movie drag. "Gettysburg" lacked such a device and I found that the movie "flowed" much better.

[@kents.2866]

They did a good job on the homes, the decorations, and the women's clothes and hairstyle were done really well.

[@danquixote2296]

I’m happy I found your channel, I have a new interest in the war due to uncovering my great x5 grandfather being in it. 40th Mississippi infantry and oddly enough a 52 year old man at enlistment. Definitely will sub.

[@royfairchild6895]

I totally disagree about showing Jackson. I'm glad they left it in, I think it shows a different dimension I think it shows his humanity. That hes not just a feared soldier, but that he has a normal world as well outside of the war. I like the emotion.

[@glengearhart5298]

Having grown up in the Fredericksburg\Spotsylvania area, I have walked those battlefields many times. I can remember riding my bicycle to Jackson's Shrine and touring it as well. I agree that they showed the battle for Marye's Heights well. If this movie was just meant to be a war documentary, I would agree with you about the addition of the scenes with Stonewall Jackson and the little girl, but it taught me something new about the man. I never knew he doted on children the way he did. Also, I believe, God's and Generals was meant to teach about the personalities of the leaders of the armies as well.

[@drdecker1]

The small details that you see like the music and the child. It represents the details in life that we all should recognize. It is very important to understand the dialogue or singing that you see. It represents the joy that should fill our lives. The child is why often wars are fought. So that they are given the freedom that soldiers fight for today. It is also why Jesus love children so much. They represent the future of humanity. Jackson understood what was really important to each of us. He was helping shape the kindness and innocence that a child brings in life. Which should never be discounted. Why ? He was helping frame in the child's mind the fun and kindness that all mankind needs in this world.

[@ImperialGamer5]

I started this movie just watching the Battle scenes (cuz of middle school history class), and I kinda went deep into review videos of this movie, and as stated in this video, the humanizing of people during conflicts like the first American Civil War and WWII in movies shows that in real life, and this goes for everyone, we are all people doing what we are told or forced, but in the end we fight other human beings, yet, we sometimes forget that people are different, and those people are just like us, humans, people fighting for what they believe, or they may have forced to fight, and other soldiers may not know this until they come into contact with them and make a conversation, like the short but warming Christmas Truce of WWI. That's all I have to say, may everyone, EVERYONE, stay safe and Respect To All.

[@HistoryGoneWilder]

I also have a video on the Christmas Truce during World War I. Thank you so much for commenting.

[@bman6065]

That run on sentence was intense

[@vintagebrew1057]

The WW1 movie Joyeaux Noelle is a great film about the Christmas Truce. Its seen from all sides.

[@Rebel-Rouser]

To not give Jackson's brilliance in the valley campaign any screen time is quite criminal...

[@jfridy]

The scene with the "Musical Interlude" is there because it lets the characters thank "Col. Patton" for organizing it. Col. Patton is played by Ted Turner, who basically paid for this entire film out of his own pocket.

[@USGrant-rr2by]

That, and Jane Fonda's 100th plastic surgery procedure!

[@zoanth4]

And ironically enough he owns cnn, a Democrat and CCP propoganda mill. Even more ironic is that this movie is in all technicalities a propoganda film itself

[@jfridy]

@@zoanth4 Wait, CNN is a Communist Propaganda Mill? It was the first creation of the marketing of 24 hour news coverage, pushing the idea that television news was a sellable product, as opposed to just an information source.

[@zoanth4]

@@jfridy I'm aware of that. They gave into crony capitalism and now have aligned themselves with maoist principles and the command economy structure of the CCP. Just the other day one of their primary show hosts called on the us government and fellow networks to censor all conservative news, journalism, and thinktanks in the USA, with one of their overlord AT&T higher ups on the show agreeing. Most of the "fact checking" businesses hired by Facebook and Twitter are Chinese run companies with mostly ex or current CNN employees on payroll. All Chinese businesses have CCP members on their board amd answer to the regime directly fyi. I'm not much for conspiracy theories or anything amd acknowledge that CNN is the only compromised news source that i know of. But CNN's recent actions and alignment to CCP principles shows where their true loyalties lie. I used to like CNN back before 2012 before their treasonous behavior in pursuit of the China bucks

[@playsauce]

@@zoanth4 Enjoy losing yet another election, Dumpflake. Libs own you. :)

[@zach7193]

Have History Will Travel, I have this movie. I would have to agree with what you said. The movie skips from the spring of 1862 to the winter of that year. Didn't show the Valley campaign, the Second Manassas campaign, and the battle of Antietam. Though the battle of Antietam is seen in the director's cut. The battle of Fredericksburg was greatly accurate in detail. Atun-shei Films breaks down how the movie was bad on his channel. It's like the movie was downplaying Southern propaganda as it was. My question to you is Have History Will Travel, what did you think of the movie?

[@HistoryGoneWilder]

I guess I didn't offer my opinion lol. There are historical accuracies that make it valuable and when explained like in my video, can teach people a lot about the Civil War, but without the proper context of what the viewer is seeing, it can be misinterpreted.

[@zach7193]

@@HistoryGoneWilder you're absolutely right. Did you think that the Grant miniseries was bad?

[@HistoryGoneWilder]

@@zach7193 I think the Grant Documentary was good as far as content to get a surface level history of Grant. The reenactment scenes I had a problem with doesn't really impact the information presented.

[@zach7193]

@@HistoryGoneWilder yeah because the cadence marching wasn't used in the war. I never seen name tags on the back of soldiers uniforms. Overall, the documentary was good.

[@Johnny-Thunder]

I like Atun-Shei's humour but I think he's overly harsh on things he doesn't like and seems to be very convinced that he's always right about things. I agree with him that G&G doesn't show the unglyness of slavery but he didn't mention Chamberlain's long anti-slavery speech, or Jim's prayer, or the other moments were the movie is critical of slavery.

[@taun856]

While this movie wasn't as good (IMO) as Gettysburg - I still really enjoyed it. Have you reacted to "Waterloo" yet? The Rod Steiger version (1970).

[@dinahnicest6525]

Overall, I think this movie really sucked bad. However, it did have a lot of excellent stuff in it. Most of the most emetic scenes were just confederate propaganda, like the loyal slave family that just loved their masters, the "Bonnie Blue Flag" scene, and General Jackson crying. I think it should be possible to cut out the awful offal, and have a truly magnificent edited version.

[@USGrant-rr2by]

@@dinahnicest6525 Awful Offal...I'm officially appropriating that. Thank you! See some of my replies to others! You'll learn stuff and laugh. Especially to "southern douche bag"!

[@reenactingjunkie2146]

Do Gettysburg next, I enjoy both these films

[@stonewall01]

Jackson's attack at Chancellorsville also occurred much later in the day than they wanted. In the map that was shown, it showed the original plan of attack. Unfortunately for the Confederates they learned when they got there that the Federals had extended their line past that point, so the Confederates had to march even farther to get on the flank and behind the Federal line. They only had a short amount of time left in the day to make an attack before nightfall. Also, it is crazy to read the Federal accounts of the attack. The Federals that were attacked first, so those at the extreme right flank, already stacked arms, setting up cooking fires for their evening meals, and generally getting ready for nightfall. Their only indication that something wasn't right was when deer, foxes, and other woodland animals started running through their camps. Moments later the Confederates attacked, so it was the Confederates that flushed the animals out of the woods. It is pretty interesting reading the accounts. Finally it shows how much Lee both gambled and trusted Jackson. Lee had already divided his army. So he was already fighting with half an army. When Jackson proposed the flank attack, Lee asked "What troops do you need?" Jackson replied "My whole Corps." That would leave Lee with only a handful of regiments to hold off the whole Union army for most of the day. The fact that Lee agreed is crazy.

[@jefferyhorton7496]

About lemons. We visited the Alabama Confederate Soldiers Home which was now a museum. The guide was a history professor at a nearby college. He said Jackson was a lemon sucker. This movie was not released then. But every time I have seen this movie I remembered that about him being a lemon sucker. Something many of my relatives in Mississippi did. Sure he loved to eat peaches like you said.

[@darthcheney7447]

Really good review. I concur on a lot of issues with you in the movie. Also, Jackson's masterpiece wasn't Chancellorsville, but his Valley Campaign. The only thing Jackson achieved at Chancellorsville was his own death. But in his Valley Campaign he achieved everything he was there for, fighting off 3 Federal armies each larger than his own in a spectacular series of maneuvers. Keep it up love your content

[@davidwilliam9681]

Great movie. Would be even better in longer form as a television series that covers the whole war with multiple point of view characters. Similar to Game of Thrones but make it historically accurate and don't modernize or politicize anything about it.

[@USGrant-rr2by]

To actually do it right it, the series would be about 20 seasons long and cost at least a half billion dollars if not more. But I would be the first member of the "The American Civil War" series fan club, and would be the first viewer in attendance at the "watch parties" at my local watering hole! However, I also believe such a series (actually being historically accurate and non-political) would literally incite riots! Sad....but True!

[@ashleighelizabeth5916]

Agreed, the time period, events and personalities covered could fill a mini series 3 times as long as this movie and it would still just start to scratch the surface of this history. But it still would have been a better choice in my opinion.

[@aaronfleming9426]

I'm not sure how you could make an accurate but non-politicized series about the Civil War unless is was a 30-hour action flick that focused on nothing but combat. The conflict grew out of politics, was intensely political from start to finish, and has been affecting our politics ever since.

[@USGrant-rr2by]

@@aaronfleming9426 Amen. brother! I've just been on an intensive study of "Tariffs" in relation to causation(as "some" people surmise) of the CW! Even more in depth than what we covered in University! Very enlightening as to the "arguments" put forth by lost causers. I WOULD LITERALLY POOP MY PANTS if what you propose for the 30 hr. action flick was made! Hello benzedrine! Especially if it was as realistic as "Saving Private Ryan" or "Fury", no I'm not forgetting "HackSaw Ridge". If you haven't seen the last 2...well, you need to. As to our politics today...just turn on the news and see the concerted effort to divide this country.

[@megmcgregor1188]

@@USGrant-rr2by o

[@Medraut00]

thanks for discussing this film in an intelligent manner. most vids reviewing this movie are like 'this movie sucks' blah blah and don't really examine it in an intelligent manner

[@HistoryGoneWilder]

Thank you so much. I have other videos analyzing movies. Please check them out.

[@Medraut00]

@@HistoryGoneWilder will do.

[@McReb]

Jackson and the little girl was my favorite part, it humanizes the General.

[@dovidrotenberg4690]

Part of the desertion scene was to emphasize the irony of the Confederate soldier siding with the VMI over his father's decision to abandon Virginia for Pennsylvania and the union. The soldier said that he was prepared to remain and to die as a Virginian rather than follow his northbound father. His death in Virginia however was a result of desertion as opposed to the sacrifice in battle for his "beloved" State.

[@timd4709]

Big CW buff. It’s not that I hate this movie entirely, it’s that I HATE that this is all we get. Ron Maxwell’s ‘art.’

[@bassmangotdbluz3547]

Jeff Daniels moustache needed to be bigger and longer. Stephen Lang embodied Stonewall.

[@chaplainkelley8251]

I loved the movie and I also loved your comments on the movie that add a new dimension to the story line.

[@Pandaemoni]

On the Christmas scene with the little girl, I found myself more wondering about the details, like: how prevalent was Santa Claus folktales in the South at the time given that Santa in his modern form was mostly a 19th century invention? Did the South have ready access to Christmas trees? Even of they did, Christmas trees were a German oddity in America for most of the 19th century, at least until later in it when Queen Victoria was shown as having one (thanks to her German husband). While I cannot say for certain, my guess is that the just assumed all of the modern trappings of Christmas are old enough to have been in place in the 1860s without checking.

[@jacksonraulerson6538]

I liked this movie in its entirety. Have watched it several times and will watch it again !

[@Rebel-Rouser]

Jackson's loss was the nail in the confederacy's coffin. Another great calvery commander was lost during the valley campaign. Turner Asby. Had he lived he would have made a big impact as well.

[@Oscuros]

AFAIK a major geopolitical aim of the emancipation proclamation was to knock the British out from helping the Confederacy. They were running the union blockade and they were concern-trolling their aid as being for "free trade" reasons. Also a loose confederation was more like what the original colonies were and why they had their own parliaments and separate laws, the origins of State's rights. I apprehend that the aid was not enough or that great, since it was consistent with modern US material aid that the weapons were not the top grade weapons, in case you end up having a war with the person you are selling to, so it was smoothbores and infrequent, but Lincoln rightly calculated that making it about slavery would get the British right out of it, given their provenance enforcing the transatlantic slave ban since 1803 of the US coast. It was a canny move. Agree that desertion was endemic in that era of warfare. Waterloo was the last battle that the men were flogged into battle by their own NCOs. Prussian discipline was extremely harsh, because they impressed men from outside of Prussia to keep their subject productive and paying taxes. Therefore coats of bright or distinct colours were used, in case you strayed away from the awful discipline and conditions, maybe get pressed to fight for the enemy when caught up in patrols, turning your coat would be difficult. It was the same in the Civil war with the colours chosen, even if more for industrial mass production than looking nice on the parade ground as well.

[@Oscuros]

Some modern Brexit arguments are again predicted on confederated, and not federated trade. Virginia's problem was wanting to have its crown colony cake and eat it. There was a crown colony with a royal charter historically, named after Elizabeth, the Virgin Queen, Richmond is on the banks of the Thames and where decent people live, even today. This crown colony was like a mini-state, a country with unique laws, like the charter. Virginia the State was necessarily a State in a Federal Republic from inception. That was basically what the States signed up to and under, a nation of laws. You can't trammel and rip up your royal charter to join another entity and then try to allude to that as reasons to break away, it'd necessarily be a negation of the entire principles on which the state was founded and why state's rights are necessarily more limited than they were under the Royal charter, people can't have their constitutional cake and eat it as much as they can think that man is born free as a natural right but there can be slaves at the same time. That's why John Locke's ideas fell from grace among the English and in the North. The real reason for "All men being equal" not applying in the South right up until the imposition of the electoral colleges was the fact that African Americans vastly outnumbered those of questionable European descent there and this, right up to recent electoral laws in Southern States is still an issue and a bit of an elephant in the room.

[@Oscuros]

Excuse me, by "concern trolling" I meant that the real or main geopolitical reason was to have a weakened United States, obviously that doesn't look good in the newspapers or to Lincoln's diplomats, so "Free Trade" it was, ostensibly. Lincoln knew this and needed to get them out of it and running the Union blockade, which he then did by changing the war aims, though that was not his only reason either.

[@paladinsix9285]

I was Distracted by the occasional interruptions intoned to flog your T-shirts and other merchandise by brief snippets of ACW battle footage, between the Loooong video about Super Beats, Lamps Plus, Battery Chargers, Genealogy, Weight Loss, Car Sales, Reusable Food Storage Bags, Newspaper Subscriptions, Etc., Etc., Etc.

[@volslover1504]

Great job. Have you done a coverage of Jackson's Valley Campaign? I would love to learn more or know of a good source on the subject. Do you have any recommendations?

[@MegaGamer-lg7sp]

I do thoroughly enjoy your videos and I thought I'd take a moment to thank you for content! I've requested this a few times but I thought I'd do it again real quick but I was wondering if you could do a versus series on A.P. Hill vs R.S. Ewell as Jackson's division commanders, as both seem credited as the latter's premier and senior commanders.

[@HistoryGoneWilder]

Thank you so much. I think that would be an excellent versus video. Militarily, I am a fan of A.P. Hill. But a look at their value as division commanders and as corps commanders would be a great analysis. I have one versus video coming out before it, but I will put that as the next one. It will probably come out in November. Thank you so much for being a subscriber.

[@MegaGamer-lg7sp]

@@HistoryGoneWilder Thanks! Personally, though, I have to personally give Ewell an edge for DIVISIONAL, haha, if we are to debate. I think his reputable conduct in the Valley after loosening the tension he had with Jackson, as well as at Brawner's farm, gives him a solid edge over Hill. BUT, I will say that Hill does have alot more experience due to Ewell's wounding and inability to take command, which would later marginally affect his ability as a corps commander.

[@HistoryGoneWilder]

@@MegaGamer-lg7sp I was going to mention Ewell's actions in the Valley as an incredible display of generalship. Hill's tenacity puts him ahead in some aspects (not all) especially during the Overland Campaign. But Hills actions at Second Manassas may have been brave but not smart.

[@MegaGamer-lg7sp]

@@HistoryGoneWilder I do believe these two are good qualifiers for a round between division commanders, but I do think Hill has fared undoubtably better than Ewell in his roll at the CORPS level. Especially when Ewell's stress took the better of him when he began to beat his men in the presence of Lee, leading to his subsequent removal. But I think the divisional level leaves more for debate.

[@USGrant-rr2by]

@@MegaGamer-lg7sp So, do you think Hill's "medical indiscretion" affected his command ability (Gettysburg and other critical battles) as opposed to Ewell's inactivity (almost a full year) and his obvious failure at Gettysburg, as well? My own opinion is neither one should have ever been Corps Commanders. But the South was running out of competent generals, and personal grudges (DH Hill for one) took out a few.

[@billgrant5515]

Outstanding review. I play Fife and have done some reenactment work and very much value input from an Historian such as yourself, so thank you sir. And I had a rather famous cousin involved in that war who had the same last name as me thus my interest in this particular conflict. I will look to become one of your subscribers.

[@HistoryGoneWilder]

Thank you so much. Yes, please subscribe if you have not done so already

[@josephcrook9921]

As a laymen novice student of history, one scene I enjoy in this movie is Jackson's funeral procession, particularly showing the soldiers marching at reverse arms, common at the period in times of mourning but no longer in use. I am a fan of attention to detail like that.

[@casualobserver3145]

Good analysis. BTW....I would’ve liked if they’d added the deer & rabbits bounding out of the woods and into the Union lines just ahead of the Rebel infantry during the flank attack at Chancellorsville!

[@BradanKlauer-xh3hm]

The best things about this movie are Jeff Daniels as Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain and Steven Lang as Thomas J. Jackson.

[@bjohnson515]

8:30 of your video and the flank attack on Howard. I had wished they had shown the Union troops in camp playing cards, etc...and then first and suddenly rabbits and deer start darting through the camp...flushed out by the advancing Confederates....which is what happened. That panicky scene would have been moving, IMO.

[@USGrant-rr2by]

Yes, in the book 'Darkness at Chancellorsville" by Ralph Peters that is what happens. It is a good read!

[@HappyHussar]

@Have History Will Travel I appreciate your very moderate and delicate take on the scenes with Jackson and the girl. Many other KZbin historians scream at this film for being Confederate glory propaganda. Yes some of the scenes were a bit gratuitous and unnecessary, and I agree they should have been left out. But so many people get mad at the film; because god forbid we show the confederates as human beings and highlight some of their military successes. This movie isn't Song of the South or gone with the wind. Love your channel and your accurate and moderate take on history!1

[@HistoryGoneWilder]

Thank you so much for the kind words and support. I really appreciate you watching.

[@randallgschwind3799]

Before the Final Salute between Gordon and Chamberlain at Appomattox! Gordon was considered the reincarnation of Stonewall Jackson!!!

[@kelseydelrio8636]

I love all of the Jackson scenes. It’s so rare that the positive traits of Confederates are showcased, they were people with good attributes too.

[@dick_richards]

Amen Sister! You and Me both!

[@logon235]

So did the Nazis but the totality of what they did and fought for is why history condemns them.

[@dick_richards]

@@logon235 Yeah but when the society brings up the crimes of a hundered and thirty-five years ago, like it happened last week, then that proves it is being used by evil people of influence, to divide the rest of us. I don't know how old you are Brother, but this was never an issue in the 80's, 90's, and early 2000's none of it. This has all been brought back into the mainstream by the manipulative mainstream forces that be. That decide which music is cool, or who the Stars are, its all a sham thats manipulated. Including all the items of importance talked about in the media. Its all orchestrated. Exactly like in this instance for example. And is being used to mask a communist take over of the country. It isn't the first time these 5th columnists have rehatched a long settled issues in a country to use them, as they are here to do nothing but breed hate and division. Especially the issues of Racism, and class division. Gotta look at the Bigger picture my Man. You might wanna investigate which group is really responsible for The Civil war, and ALL war's since, and how they are also responsible for this recent upswing in mainstream issues about racism..... and all the other madness. Everything is manipulated Friend, and has been for a long time.

[@drewdurbin4968]

Um maybe because nazis and confederates are completely different

[@kelseydelrio8636]

@@logon235 comparing Nazis to Confederate soldiers just shows how ignorant you are to the history of the American Civil War.

[@flak509]

A book that does a really good job of explaining Chancellorsville and Gettysburg by a man who was there is Abner Doubledays book Chancellorsville and Gettysburg. Great video Will

[@stevenwiederholt7000]

If God's & Generals had been divided into 2 movies...it would have been better. Funding may have been a problem, but....... The Books are Marvelous. I have recommended them to those who know little about that war.

[@aaronfleming9426]

Can we talk about Chancellorsville? Why was Lee even fighting there when a third of his army wasn't present? Okay, it's cool that Jackson got lucky and the Union generals ignored the reports of his movement to their flank, and that Hooker freaked out and ran away. But what did Lee actually gain in this battle that was worth 22% casualties and the loss of one of his two best corps commanders?

[@USGrant-rr2by]

"What did Lee actually gain in this battle that was worth 22% casualties and the loss of one of his two best corps commanders?" I can answer that! The utter DELUSION that the ANV could never be defeated on any battlefield by any Union Force, even when outnumbered more than 3 to 1. And the confidence to march (2 months later) his army North, deep into Union territory, divide his forces, and send his cavalry on another wild goose chase. And then face the AoP, holding the high ground, and allowing it to entrench and bring up reinforcements for 3 days. And to cap it off..... By not ordering the prudent military decision, against the advice of his other "best, still living" corps commander, of either trying to move around the AoP or just taking your "draw" and the ample supplies you've captured and retreating to safety to fight another day.....but counting on the "human beings" that you think are "invincible" and send 13,000 of them across an open field covered by a hundred Union guns and 30,000 troops behind a stone wall just to satisfy your own anger and contempt, that a competent Union General and the AoP actually had the balls to prove you (Lee) WRONG!! What was that line again? Oh, yes...."Discretion (in this case a strategic withdrawal) is the better part of valor."~ Shakespeare. Does that answer your question?

[@tsdobbi]

@@USGrant-rr2by "What did Lee actually gain in this battle that was worth 22% casualties and the loss of one of his two best corps commanders?" That is literally the story of the entirety of the war. Lee was an amazing tactician, but a blundering strategist. Look at the US in Vietnam...winning battles doesn't mean jack shit if they don't accomplish anything on the strategic level. I honestly don't think there is an example in history where the act of simply "out killing" an opponent has actually won a war. You have to take an important piece of ground, hinder an economy, deprive them of resources. DO SOMETHING, that makes any manpower they have access to irrelevant. What was that old saying from one of Hannibal's commanders? "You know how to win battles, Hannibal, but you do not know how to exploit them.". I mean we're still in Afghanistan going on 20 years.

[@USGrant-rr2by]

@@tsdobbi And one of the main reasons Lee was a blundering strategist was due to his Virginia centric view! He almost never thought about what impacts the war in the Western theater were having in the overall, CSA's prosecution of the war! That's why I can't understand how "some people" think Lee was a better overall general than Grant? Grant was able to coordinate basically 3 theaters at one time: the East, the West, and the Deep South (Sherman) and develop the "Hard War" tactics (with Sherman) that SAVED tens of thousands of lives because of the swiftness that it brought the war to an end!

[@aaronfleming9426]

@@USGrant-rr2by hey old pal! I couldn't agree more! I'm still hoping for a dissenting voice, though. I'm trying to be fair and openminded. Plus I like to argue :D

[@aaronfleming9426]

@@tsdobbi I'd say you're right on the money with all the comparisons...Vietnam...Hannibal...Afghanistan.... I suppose that out-killing the other side might work if you have far greater reserves...that's almost the story of WWI. Although even in that case Britain's naval blockade was strangling Germany economically. And anyway, Lee didn't have deeper manpower reserves and his wins weren't nearly lopsided enough.

[@Ivyoffroadadventurefamily]

For part two you mention union and confederate soldiers meeting up between the enemy lines. Which is fine, but at least mention the fact that southern soldiers couldn't come by coffee, and northern soldiers had a hard time finding tobacco. It's good to show what their daily life was like. Overall, it was a good movie that did a good job showing how their lives were. It made you feel like you were in the movie. That's the reason they show all these side cuts so you can know who these people were and what they were like. Thomas Jackson AKA Stonewall is my hero.

[@americanschweitzer45]

Excellent take on this motion picture!

[@jedighostbear4401]

I've never seen the extended directors cut, though I've heard it's much much better. Would you consider taking a look at that?

[@elliottjames8020]

Interesting in both analysis of G&G you have not touched on the emphasis film ups on the myth of the "Lost Cause" and which ruins whole thing.

[@HistoryGoneWilder]

I did mention it in the first part of the Gods and Generals review. It was a problem.

[@johnfoster535]

This movie and Gettysburg suffer from the lack of reality in the combat scenes. Steven Spielberg got it right in "Shaving Ryan's Privates", and even better in " The Pacific", where the shocking gore stunned the horrified audiences so they would realize what hell the soldiers actually endured and why survivors were mentally scarred forever. They should have shown scenes like what really happened to the men....like at Gettysburg, where loose pigs found wounded men laying on the field who were helpless and could not move . If the soldier could not beat the pig with a sword, the pig would devour the man's entrails while he screamed in indescribable agony !!!......THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT !!

[@thomasjmitchell2306]

So True, the battle scenes in both movies, Gettysburg & G&G are totally unrealistic, both being oververly romanticized and not presenting a true depiction of the horrors of one of America's most bloodiest war! Say what you want about Glory, but all of its battle scenes, in particular Antietam, were very gory being true to form and way more realistic in thier portrayals of civil war combat! Also, I believe that the movie, "Cold Mountain " did a phenomenal job of its depiction of the battle of the Crater. Capturing the sheer chaos and madness of that battle!!

[@mattmusselman5055]

Great job..I always look forward for the next one

[@beefbonger420]

I know this film gets a bad reputation for being a "Lost Cause" propaganda film... but I disagree. Sure that argument makes a valid point but what we tend to forget today is that even though the war itself would never have occured, had it NOT been for the issue of slavery, the individuals who fought did so for many reasons. 'Why the war happened', is a very different thing than 'why did he fight'?

[@savanahmclary4465]

How can you tell the difference between a Northern American and a Southern American? YOU CAN'T .... Without a Uniform.. Neither could Abraham Lincoln. But ONE THING FOR CERTAIN . We are ALL Americans. Expect the Unexpected at anytime.

[@Worthrhetime]

Another quality presentation

[@moderndaywyattearp5792]

3:55-4:27 Goad to see you read my comment. Yes I am taking credit for this opinion, just like I took the last popsicle then pitted my children against one another in a highly contested argument of “who ate the last popsicle?” Both sides presented their cases, tear were shed, tempers flared, and the lesson I thought them was I’m the biggest in the house and... Well that’s about it. Excellent video, and I agree it was nice to see the softer side of Jackson, but I’m 5 mins into the video and praying you knock down the 5:37 of porch sitting and lemonade drinking later in this film.

[@tworivers71]

Historian, I have a question: Let's say Jackson survived....his wounds from Chanclersville, survived pneumonia with only one arm. Do you think he still would have been able to lead and would still been a great service to Lee at Gettysburg? Perhaps he would have been in better contact with Stewart? Possibly turning the war? Thoughts?

[@HistoryGoneWilder]

That's a very big question. I might have to make a video entirely about if Jackson had survived, but ultimately, I do not believe the war would have ended with a Confederate victory just because Jackson survived. Good question.

[@warringtonfaust1088]

@@HistoryGoneWilder But might have ended differently. Armistice? Simply cessation?

[@LorolinAstori]

I found the bias of character development interesting. It's good for soldiers but not for generals. The title is Gos and Generals. The military aspect needed more work. The pell mell advances to a position prior to a charge was more an exception than the rule.

[@ethanbwagnerthe]

Love this channel! Keep it up!

[@raymondevans2565]

Absolute best film of the Civil War I've ever seen. Duvall is from the South and is the very best Lee. Amazing film

[@toddtouchberry]

Glad I found this channel a while back

[@ashleighelizabeth5916]

There are a couple of things I wish you had touched on in the scenes you showed. You mentioned Stuart's flower, but neglected to mention that Lee was wearing the coat of a colonel and not a general as was his practice, additionally Jackson is wearing a brand new uniform which was not normally his custom but his wife had recently purchased it for him and even prevailed upon him to wear it in the last picture ever taken of the general. Another instance of this is when AP Hill is shown wearing his red battle shirt in the scene at Chancellorsville. The slavish amount of devotion to small details in this movie is very impressive at times. I think the desertion scenes are quite humanizing and what is not shown here is a preceding scene between Jackson and his adjutant Sandie Pendleton about why Jackson insist on court martial and firing squad for all deserters. He speaks of how the United States will continue on as a nation even if they lose the war but that if the Confederacy loses they will lose everything, including their way of life and their culture. Whether you agree with his point of view in the scene or not it's important to understand that his views and the views of many others who fought for the Confederacy are depicted accurately. Neither Jackson, nor Lee, nor AP Hill or Stuart were fighting to keep slavery. They truly did believe they were fighting for their homes and their families and their independence. What they are trying to show in these scenes and the scenes of Chamberlain and his brother are the concept that the war and the people who fought it were not so one dimensional and monolithic as slavery good vs slavery bad. A lot of crap is given to this movie about it's whitewashing of slavery and while I agree that it is a problem, I also believe that we have swung too far towards the argument that all Northerners were Abolitionist fighting to free slaves, and all Southerners were slaveholders fighting to keep slaves. I think that this movie went overboard in attempting to correct that misconception but I think the effort is worth making. There is a brilliant scene you failed to mention or show where the Irish Brigade in the Confederate army is fighting the Irish brigade in the Union army. One incredulous Confederate Irish ask his friend, "don't they know we're fighting for our freedom????" Of course Joshua Chamberlain expertly points out the moral dilemma of fighting for freedom for yourself while enslaving others, not that it stopped the colonist from doing the same thing during the Revolution. The Bonnie Blue Flag scene is meant to convey some of this concept as well. Of course that scene is also a vehicle for Ted Turner to insert himself into the movie in one of the most ridiculous cameos in history. I'm surprised you didn't mention why the scene with Jackson Stuart and Lee at Chancellorsville is so famous, since it is the last time these three men would ever be together, and the last battle conference between Lee and Jackson. It is not as is sometimes said the last time they would ever meet, since they also meet briefly the next day on horseback as Jackson was beginning his march around the flank of Hooker's army. Hooker's lack of presence in this movie is galling to me since he played such a large part in the battle of Chancellorsville. Burnside and Hancock got scenes but Hooker and Dan Sickles didn't and that is inexplicable to me. The last conference is another scene that is done extremely well as it very accurately shows that event based on the first hand accounts we have of it. In fact it looks like a Mort Kunstler painting that came to life. God and Generals is deeply flawed as a movie and a history lesson, however it is not without merit. In fact if I were teaching American history I'd probably use it as special assignment project, where I asked my students to point out the mistakes or whitewashing, and also point out the details and the concepts the movie depicted accurately. History is more than just dates and battles and casualty lists and statistics. At its core is the people who created it. This movie really does do an excellent job at bringing many of these generals to life in a way that few movies ever have.

[@williamaustin1]

Very well stated!

[@ashleighelizabeth5916]

@@williamaustin1 Thank you for saying so.

[@vintagebrew1057]

I second that, well said!

[@actorstuntman]

Very first scene. A Sgt. Would know to be charging at Right Shoulder Shift.( I was further in the background, had I noticed it I would have pointed it out to him myself, besides being the wrong position, it's also dangerous to those in front of him with a bayonet. But I'm of course looking forward and not to what he's doing far to my left.) I worked in this film in scenes with the late Kevin Conway, C. Thomas Howell, Jeff Daniels and all the rest. And Kevin Conway was great in person and very funny. I can't believe he wasn't shown the right position for this scene. I was the soldier pinned down with the 3 actors, although dead from charging with the Irish Brigade and also the soldier Thomas finds first looking for his brother the first night. The Very Worst scene is a S.A.G. stuntman as a Confederate behind the Wall at Marye's Heights. Who instead of constantly loading and firing ,is aiming for a full ten minutes in range of fire, until he takes a very weak hit. In editing despite the cost, he should have been removed from the movie altogether.

[@suzannelebizarre5705]

Somehow I missed this movie...loved Gettysburg though...

[@davidllewis4075]

I think I can give a more precise review: I have watched Gettysburg at least 5 times. I only watch this movie once and had no interest in watching it again.

[@UncleSasquatchOutdoors]

Very good video sir!

[@johnmckee6483]

Now Jackson used to call around on the floor for the niece and nephew I believe that is part of the history that everybody needs to know that he loved children

[@ardshielcomplex8917]

Is there a complete Directors Cut version of Gods and Generals ?

[@SouthernGentleman]

“I have fought against the people of the North because I believed they were seeking to wrest from the South its dearest rights. But I have never cherished toward them bitter or vindictive feelings, and I have never seen the day when I did not pray for them.” - Robert E Lee 1865

[@USGrant-rr2by]

The dearest right for one human being to own another.

[@SouthernGentleman]

david u.s. grant “We're were not fighting for the perpetuation of slavery, but for the principles of states rights and free trade, and in defense of our homes which we were ruthlessly invaded.” -VMI Jewish Cadet Moses Jacob Ezekiel

[@SouthernGentleman]

david u.s. grant Wrong. 70% of the south didn’t have slavery. The right for each state to independently govern themselves without federal intervention. That’s why the south had been trying to leave since 1828

[@SouthernGentleman]

david u.s. grant kzbin.info/www/bejne/Zmm5pat8j9GLgcU

[@USGrant-rr2by]

@@SouthernGentleman Using random quotes from common CSA soldiers, after the fact and saying 70% of the South didn't own slaves DOES NOT prove the South didn't go to war over slavery. It just proves you don't know how to argue a point!

[@davidrasch3082]

Its a very, very small thing I noticed in both Gettysburg and Gods and Generals. ALL the flags look brand spankin' new. Jackson is far too pretty in appearance to match contemporary descriptions. I wonder how much 'fill' about general Jackson in particular is a nod to how little Americans know about these leaders.

[@mistervacation23]

I don't agree. The scene with Jackson and little Janie Corbin did take place. I think it adds to the movie rather than detracts from it. It wasnt all fighting.

[@jollyswashbuckler]

During the execution scene the rouges march is playwd, this is accurate and it originated during the napoleonic wars I believe

[@charlottesmith4850]

Gen. Jackson and the girl belongs in the movie.

[@USGrant-rr2by]

Oh, believe me...there's a movie! But it's one of those bad "flip" movies like a deck of cards. Matt Brady did the best he could. Took 3 months to get enough Metallic plate print photos! It actually won the very first AVN award! Although it got taken off the shelf due to one of the co-stars was under age...oh well?

[@JvP519]

Second half of this video feels a little rushed which is probably the part that WB was upset about. Besides that both are great reviews.

[@stephenmichalski2643]

Yeah.....this movie was way too overly dramatic. God I hate the wagon scene when their leaving Fredericksburg and she's bemoaning whatever. Agree.....should have focused more on the battles and tactical situation rather than make it a CW soap opera. Great review.

[@HistoryGoneWilder]

Thank you so much for watching and supporting the channel. Please consider subscribing if you have not done so already. Also, please check out my other videos. I think you will enjoy them.

[@haroldchase1881]

Glad you got this put up

[@IMAN7THRYLOS]

Was Stonewall Jackson such a God like figure as he was portrayed in the film? They represent him as if he is the best military Commander in the American continent.

[@USGrant-rr2by]

NO

[@alabamaal225]

It's complicated. If all you knew about Thomas Jackson was his performance during the Seven Days, when Confederate forces threw back, at great cost, the Union armies from Richmond, you wouldn't regard Jackson very highly. However, Jackson's performances at First Manassas, the Valley Campaign, and Chancellorsville cemented his reputation as a great tactical and strategic commander.

[@USGrant-rr2by]

@@alabamaal225 I'll give him tactical (begrudgingly). But ONLY because of his "Valley Camp." Lee was the one who formulated the flank march at Chancellorsville, Jackson just carried it out. The only thing First Bull Run proved was that most of the original Union generals were inept! And neither Lee nor Jackson showed much affinity, let alone competence on the strategic side! Both were far too Virginia centric. Longstreet was the one who showed his grasp of the conflict as a whole. He argued against both of Lee's invasions of the North (because it would cause undue casualties and drain resources) and was proven right on both. And it was his (Longstreet's) idea to reinforce Bragg at Chickamauga. Lee was against it!

[@danielshilling2058]

Alabama Al I’ve heard that Jackson’s ineffectiveness during the seven days campaign is due mostly to his physical and mental exhaustion thanks to his valley campaign. Although I do believe he was definitely one of the best generals of the war, he had several flaws. He refused to confide his plans and strategies with his officers and even his second in command. That led to several problems early on in his valley campaign. Had he actually shared his plans and strategy’s with at least his higher commanders, who knows how much more successful he could have been

[@jwhippet8313]

When I was in the military in the early 2000s, he was taught as one of the top 5 generals of the modern period.

[@model-man7802]

The troops coming out of the trees isnt that good because there just isn't enough of them.Just like Gettysburg when Pickets charge began.Looks good but not great for the same reason but unfortunately unlike Waterloo where You had and army to do it all you cant do it here.I was at Gettysburg in 88 and the Logistics for the Battle then the Park Service program was unreal in a nice but expensive and exhausting way.

[@yeller212wmj7]

4:23 Is that Bobby Horton?

[@vintagebrew1057]

Yes..

[@yeller212wmj7]

@@vintagebrew1057 It took 3 months for an answer but it was worth it. XD

[@randallmarsh406]

Awesome!

[@Nexus974]

4:15 I think the whole point of this scene is for Ted Turner to get his cameo

[@DonAbrams-hq7ln]

Why not,he funded the production.Bonny Blue is a great song,everyone plays Dixie

[@aloneranger3980]

Slavery wasn't totally abolished in NEW JERSEY until 1865.

[@danflannery54]

I disagree with the host on this film critique. The Christmas scenes play an important role in this film. First is shows the human toll that is silently express by these soldiers who are missing their families during this sacred time of the year. It also contrast nicely against the battle scenes. This was very appropriate for the film.

[@bjohnson515]

The uniforms were just too clean throughout the movie

[@rumble1052]

Can wun wun break the door down while hodor is blocking the door on the opposite side of the door?

[@ricardoaguirre6126]

I haven't bothered to watch this movie because of the bad reviews but I do want to check out the book. I don't have a problem with the humanizing of Confederates which might be saying a lot since I'm a liberal millennial. But there's a huge difference between humanizing and sugarcoating.

[@aewhatever]

I saw this in theater. Good thing they had an intermission in the middle. I about broke my butt.

[@rithvikmuthyalapati9754]

4:20 and David Kincaid too

[@MomentsInTrading]

I enjoyed this!

[@edwarddesoignie1396]

It is a matter of perspective in terms of how you view the movie. You have criticisms of it through the lens of a historian, whereas the movie is created by an artist who wants to present the stories through a different lens. In other words, the producer and director were interested in presenting certain personal aspects of the participants in the conflict to give us the viewer, a perhaps fuller understanding of the war effects on individuals and their decisions. I’m just saying...

[@USGrant-rr2by]

That is one of the LAMEST comments I've ever read. And that is going a ways!

[@scorpman300]

i loved this movie. i liked that they had the home parts in it as it showed a more complete day in the life kind of touch showing not just the battles but that there was more then just those fighting that were effected by the conflict going on. this movie was different then Gettysburg as this was about the generals themselves where Gettysburg was more about 1 battle so thats why gods and generals had to have these home parts in them because it was about the generals themselves and their parts would have both home and job. i just wish the 3rd movie would have been made to complete the series. both gods and generals and Gettysburg had a great cast and are both some of the best civil war movies made

[@dovidrotenberg4690]

Thank you.

[@HistoryGoneWilder]

Thank you for watching.

[@thomasjmitchell2306]

The battle scenes in both movies, Gettysburg & G&G are totally unrealistic, both being oververly romanticized and not presenting a true depiction of the horrors of one of America's most bloodiest war! Say what you want about Glory, but all of its battle scenes, in particular Antietam, were very gory being true to form and way more realistic in thier portrayals of civil war combat! Also, I believe that the movie, "Cold Mountain " did a phenomenal job of its depiction of the battle of the Crater. Capturing the sheer chaos and madness of that battle!!

[@JDoe-gf5oz]

G&G cost $100 million and would have bombed worse if it was rated R.

[@greek1237]

The little girl and Jackson's scene happen in real life though.

[@lornharding8324]

Aren't those scenes from the movie Gettysberg

[@HistoryGoneWilder]

Nope. They are from Gods and Generals

[@Savedcitytitan7118]

Can't find part one of this

[@robaustin4193]

I liked the movie most people hate on because Jackson and Lee were both strong Christian men. I’m surprised they didn’t show the angel who brought water to the dying union soldiers. His nickname was from union soldiers

[@USGrant-rr2by]

So, I surmise that you consider yourself a 'strong' Christian? And are you in agreement with BOTH Jackson and Lee that slavery was OK because the bible said so? You know....just asking.....you being a Christian and all...

[@robaustin4193]

david u.s. grant if you have a child enroll them in a Chicago or urban school u probably don’t so. Im guessing you can read Jackson taught Slaves to read Lee wanted to enlist them in the confederacy. Slavery was legal in the colonies they were not breaking laws they could have done what they did in the uk offered money for the monetary value of the slaves. If you have one scred of deceny you would admit you maybe you could hack it but children don’t understand why they are beat on . Go to Chicago the blacks should have been sent back because they were taking against there will. Some blacks are the greatest people I know but the bs political correctness ruined it for. You can’t tell me there isn’t slavery in China. Hypocrite

[@robaustin4193]

david u.s. grant right or wrong its as old as human history both lee and Jackson were true Christians. God wins praise Jesus, you surmised wrong i am nothing without him I want his will for our finite lives. I certainly would not call myself a strong Christian keep transitioning and burning buildings someday when your punk self is serving your overlord China you might or your children may clean there toliiets

[@USGrant-rr2by]

@@robaustin4193 I'm guessing you can barely speak English, because you sure as hell can't type it. Why did Jackson teach slaves to read the bible? So they could see what these Christian(?) men believed? That slavery was the will of God? And Lee didn't support enlisting slaves until it was too late(1865). Just because something is legal (persecuting Jews in Germany in 1930-40s) doesn't make it morally or ethically OK! I can't even understand the "Chicago, children" stuff? It's incoherent! How am I a hypocrite? Slavery is WRONG no matter where or what era! And trying to justify it by saying it's as "old as human history" is a cop out. And..you might want to seek therapy for your obsession with China! And lastly, I think you should maybe do a little math to figure out that compensating all slave-owners for their slaves in the US in 1860 was not economically feasible at that time!

[@robaustin4193]

david u.s. grant I wish I could type as good as you. You are so cool. Are you having second thoughts about transitioning.? Lee and Jackson were fighting for their states . I’ll fight for my state if antifa keeps their sissy antics up maybe I’ll see you on the battlefield. Keep worshipping China

[@The_Daily_Tomato]

Hi, new subscriber here. I was wondering if i could ask you a question? It may come off as rude so if it does i do apologize, i am merely curious. Are you an actual historian and if so what are your credentials?

[@HistoryGoneWilder]

That's not rude at all. There are numerous "historians" out there with no credentials so I understand the question. Being a Historian includes a few factors and I fit all of those. 1. Do original archival research 2. Add to the historiography of the field by doing research and publishing or presenting it at conferences. I have presented my research at conferences and international conferences. 3. (The third factor isn't mandatory because the biggest factor in being a historian is contributing to the historiography but it helps) having an advanced history degree. I have my masters in history and have completed my comprehensive exams for my PhD and am currently writing my dissertation.

[@The_Daily_Tomato]

@@HistoryGoneWilder Thank you for your reply. Your video are most excellent, keep it up :)

[@therabbi9848]

The military history is pretty on point with this movie, minus the bloodless action scenes. The social history is just all wrong though. It's particularly insulting that every black character in the movie is essentially a one-in-a-million loyal to the confederates kind of person. Gettysburg is a much better war history movie since it focuses pretty much entirely on the battle. Gods and Generals though spends a whole lot of time essentially propagandizing, in favor of the south. I get that Maxwell wanted to make a civil war movie from the southern perspective, but it is EXTRAORDINARILY manipulative and twists the truth of the southern cause. There are several movies which are great and tell a southern perspective much better and more honestly. My politics are center-right and I really hate how false revisionism like the 1619 project is having such a terrible influence on modern historical interpretation of the civil war. That being said, this movie very much promotes neo-confederate propaganda and is also a terrible influence on civil war historiography. Its also boring as fuck and way too long.

[@David-lu4gq]

1619 project? What is that if you don't mind me asking,?

[@redman0324]

Where are you from, sir?

[@rta36]

QWW

[@therabbi9848]

David The 1619 project is a work sponsored by the New York Times in which one of their journalists (not a historian) which is pushing a far-left narrative regarding slavery and the civil war, I.E. “capitalism is to blame for all this and race relations have barely changed since 1863” etc. It has been panned by basically every leading civil war historian, including one whose book I had to read in a recent historiography course in college. One can sort of see it as the political opposite of the Lost Cause myth.

[@therabbi9848]

redman0324 Connecticut, though I hope to leave soon. Cost of living here is way higher than it has any right to be.

[@tomd5010]

At least the fake beards were better than in the Gettysburg movie.