Was General Custer in this movie?
He played an important part in the victory.
shareNo he was not.
shareThat's a disgrace. His role in that battle was very important.
I wonder if it was because of "political correctness".
I don't think so. The movie is based on a book called Killer Angels, which focuses almost entirely on the Southern Generals.
That battle had a lot of moving parts and the movie is about the entire three days and events leading up to it. So the movie gave a lot of attention to round top and little round top and Pickets Charge.
As an adaptation of the book the vast majority of the movie was focused on the Southern Generals. It spend a lot of time on the interactions of Lee and his subordinates, particularly Longstreet and Pickett. Really the only Union leadership that got any substantial attention was Chamberlain as his unit defended Little Round Top.
Gettysburg is a pretty good movie. It is preachy at times but clearly relays the almost divine level of reverance the south had and still has for General Lee. It also did its best to show Longstreet in a favorable light as he is generally the most hated general of the civil war. Probably becasue he was the realist.
What ever you do, do not see the prequel "Gods and Generals" It is an utter steaming pile of dogshit and the most south will rise again bullshit. At one point a slave prays with Stonewall Jackson for the South to prevail....
Unfortunately, I did see "Gods And Generals".........
Getting back to Custer, he deserves to be glorified for his Civil War service. As for him killing Indians, Custer was carrying out the policies of the Presidents Andrew Johnson and Ulysses Grant. They should be criticized, not him.
What ever you do, do not see the prequel "Gods and Generals" It is an utter steaming pile of dogshit
Not only was General Custer at the Battle of Gettysburg, he was also present at the surrender of General Lee at Appomattox.
share