MovieChat Forums > Gods and Generals (2003) Discussion > Gods and Generals: Director's Cut = the...

Gods and Generals: Director's Cut = the superior film


Definitely an upgrade from the original theatrical cut. The only problem I had was the date of the Battle of Antietam. When the date and location came up on screen during the battle, it said September 19, 1862 instead of September 17, 1862. I have no idea how they got that wrong but they did.




"Oh, *beep*! I picked a cute one!" --Penguin, "Batman Returns"

reply

I don't have a copy yet, but it sounded better. I don't know how you get the date wrong either, unless the guy doing the captions just misread a 7 for a 9. At least they didn't skip the battle entirely this time.

reply

Hearing that the Virginia family scenes are even longer than in the original puts me off seeing it. I'm not sure how I feel about the idea of a John Wilkes Booth subplot either.

"That's what the elves call Justice of the Unicorn!"

reply

The Virginia family scenes shouldn't have even been in the film imo. Not to sound sexist but women and/or kids generally always bring a war movie to a screeching halt when they are characters. Think of the best war movies and how few female parts are in them. Gettysburg only has one line from a female: "I thought the war was in Virginia?". Saving Private Ryan has some French civilians in one short scene. The Thin Red Line only has females in flashback scenes or a few shots of Female natives. The only women in Platoon are Vietnamese villagers. I could go on and on with further examples.

What's also worse is the HORRIFIC southern accents employed by those actors playing the family.

The Booth stuff wasn't so bad.

reply

The film would have been SO much better had Ron Maxwell actually stayed true to the book like he did when he wrote the script for Gettysburg.




"Oh, *beep*! I picked a cute one!" --Penguin, "Batman Returns"

reply

Rebelcub, I can think of several war movies which utilized the role of women well;
Cross of Iron, Enemy at the Gates, and Major Dundee.

reply

Major Dundee? That has to be the worst example of a love interest gratuitously shoved into a film.

I can think of a few war movies with good use of women. For Whom the Bell Tolls, The Guns of Navarone, Where Eagles Dare and Black Book have women who take part in the action. They Were Expendable has a nice romance between John Wayne and Donna Reed that doesn't grate with the main story. Liv Ullman has a nice (if small) role in A Bridge Too Far. So it can be done. It's when women are shoehorned into a film with little purpose beyond drawing a female audience that it bothers me: Bridge on the River Kwai and The Horse Soldiers come to mind right away.

"That's what the elves call Justice of the Unicorn!"

reply

The extra scenes with the family aren't too bad. The Booth subplot adds A LOT to the movie I feel. especially with Harrison by his side through some of it.

reply