Conference smurf::civil_war

    RE .0:
    
    I'm sure I am just one of many, but if you have not seen "Glory", do
    so.  It is a fine piece of filmmaking with a solid historical base.
    
    MikeR
    

    I think there was a TV mini-series made about the life of Abraham
    Lincoln I remember watching several years ago.  I think Hal Holbrooke
    starred in the title role.

    One of my favorites is the classic "Red Badge of Courage," with
    Audie Murphy and Bill Mauldin.
    
    "North and South" has been much maligned by reenactors and historians
    as being a soap opera.  Indeed, when a series purporting to deal with
    the War devotes less than 1 minute to Gettysburg, it's tough to argue
    with them
    
    On the other hand, I thought the series did a fine job of presenting
    the sectional controversy leading up to the war.  Unlike "The Blue
    and The Gray," "North and South" gave a very clear idea of the agony
    this nation went through over secession.  I really think the war was
    decided more on the battlefield than in the bedrooms (or barns or
    carraiges, or....  Wasn't she a most creative little tart?).  The
    series certainly had its moments, though, and with some SERIOUS
    editing, I think it could be made into a very credible piece of
    historical fiction.  Unlike the Ken Burns series, at least "North and
    South" never pretended to be extremely accurate.
    
    
    Wess

    My favorite John Wayne movie is THE HORSE SOLDIERS.  Loosely based
    on an actual Union cavalry raid led by a Col. Grierson, HS tells
    the story of Col. Marlowe's raid on Newton Station, a railroad
    junction behind Condeferate lines.  Their mission is to destroy as 
    much rolling stock and material ("contraband") as possible for the
    maximum disruption of Rebel supply lines.  Although it has little to
    do with the realities of war, HS has all the glory GLORY lacked--a 
    rousing good tale.
    
    Speaking of GLORY, I'd say at this time it is my #1 favorite CW movie;
    best to watch it after viewing Ken Burn's Civil War and the American
    Experience episode on the 54th Massachusetts.  
    
    Conversely, I was very  disappointed the TV's miniseries "The Rose and
    the Jackel", a poor, semi-accurate, un-exciting telling of Mrs. Rose 
    O'Neal Greenhow and her Washington, D.C. spy ring and how a Union agent 
    broke it up.  The actual events are so much more exciting/intriguing/
    incredible than how it was portrayed ("H-wooded", I calls it) in the 
    miniseries; her story could be re-told and be different enough from TRatJ 
    to be of interest (almost a separate story), especially now that the 
    American (and etc.) public has shown it *can* be interested in "dry" Civil
    War history--Ken Burns proved that.  [FWI--TRatJ got torn up (reviewed) in 
    either the TV or MOVIES notesfiles, maybe both.]
    
    							Don
      

    
    "SHENANDOAH"  starring Jimmy Stewart. A story about a family caught up
    		  in the turmoil of the war. Kinda funny compared to
                  today's movies, but, not to bad overall in parts.
    
    "IRONCLADS"   Another production on TNT Network. A pretty good story
    		  about the infamous battle of the Monitor and Merrimack
    		  Realistic battle scene between the two Ironclads for
    		  ya'll metal ship lover's.
    
    
    					The Alabama Slammer  

    Journey to Shiloh: A group of young Texans heads east to join Lee's 
    		       Army of Northern Virginia.  Along the way they are
    		       whittled down one by one due to various reasons.
    		       Emotional and entertaining stuff, with a brand new
    		       version of "Yellow Rose of Texas" as a theme song.
    
    Ziff			

    There's another one which I can't remember the title of.  It has some-
    thing to do with a tiny confederate cavalry detachment which is in the
    union southwest territory for some reason or other.  It ends up getting
    besieged on a very defensible butte by a much larger union cavalry
    detachment.  Turns out that the two commanders are old West Point
    buddies, and the yank's girlfriend is a hostage of the reb's.  The
    viewer gets to know all the rebs intimately, and they are all a bunch
    of lovable stereotypes (of course!): the gruff-but-lovable old
    sargeant, the 18 year old kid, the country bumpkin who gives up his
    own meager rations to feed his incredibly loyal and loving dog, etc.
    Well, the local huge horde of indians gets involved and draws off most
    of the yankee cavalry into a trap.  The rebs get word of this and make
    a run for it, trying to draw off the indians in order to save their
    new-found yankee buddies.  Naturally, every indian in the world chases
    after them and traps them in a box canyon.  The yanks now come to try
    and rescue their rebel buddies, but this time the cavalry is too late.
    At the back end of the canyon, realizing they can't escape, the rebs
    form column and charge; bugles blowing and Stars-an-Bars fluttering.
    They all die gallantly, taking a million indians with them.  The yanks
    arrive in time to chase the indians off.  I sound sarcastic because the
    movie sounds so dumb, but I really loved it!  The cliches were perfect,
    and the final seen was a tear jerker.  It bugs me that I don't remember
    the name, but I really recommend it to anyone who likes that kind of
    thing.
    
    Ziff

    
    	What about "Major Dundee"  starring Charlton Heston and I can't
    think of the other stars name (third shift foggies?). The classic tale
    of a Union officer (Heston) in charge of prison full of good ole' boys,
    collect's a few volunteers from the prisoners and guards and goes down
    into Mexico after a maurading Apache and his followers, etc., etc.
    	Final scene, both Rebs and Yanks charge across the Rio Grande,
    fighting both Mexican troopers and Apache's. Flag's a'waving, both
    Star's and Bar's and Star's and Stripe's besides each other. A heart
    tugging, tear jerking moment. 
    	Predictable, but with Heston making it worth the watching, not
    to bad of a flick.
    
    					The Alabama Slammer
    

    I love "Major Dundee."  This may be telling you more than you
    want to know, but it was the very first movie I ever took a
    girl to see.  (That has nothing to do with why I like the movie!)
    
    Dundee is available on video cassette, but be careful of it if
    you have small children.  It is a long, long way from the sterile
    Roy Rogers genre.  My favorite character was the preacher who
    carried a shotgun.  He'd mutter scripture while blowing people 
    away.
    
    At least "Dundee" was based on some historical premise.  A number of
    Rebs galvanized and were sent west to help keep the Indians at bay
    during the war.  I don't think any of them made it to Mexico, but
    what are a few nits in a rip-roaring tale?  ;-)
    
    
    Wess

    Re: .8
    
    Major Dundee is one of my favorites, too. Regarding the other star,
    it was Richard Harris (third shift??:^) I think he puts old 
    Charleton to shame as an actor, at least in that movie.
    
    Small point.  The troops blocking the Rio Grande on their return
    were Emperor Maximilian's elite French lancers. Added a bit to the
    romance of the charge.  For my part, I would have high-tailed it
    to a more "fordable" location. Wasn't the brightest way to end 
    an excursion (but then again it would have been a much duller
    movie.)
    
    TD

    re: .10
    
    I would have set that howitzer up on a high bank and settled with
    the lancers at about 400 yards!  Actually, that movie was my first
    concious realization that the French were in conflict in Mexico at
    that time.
    
    Richard Harris was perfect, if a bit steriotyped, as the classic
    Southern gentry who would not be defeated, even in death.
    
    
    Wess

    
    	Thanks! I couldn't remember his name, Richard Harris, to save my
    soul. Maybe he was steriotyped, but, didn't he carry himself well for
    a Southern gentlemen? At least not bad for that time frame in
    Hollywood!
    	I do love the preacher man myself, but, another good part in the
    movie was when Heston tossed the cigar into the prisoner pen, they
    went for it, but, when they noticed who threw it, ground it into
    the dirt. Ah, such Southern defiance. :^)
    
    						The Alabama Slammer

     One that I like is "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly." Where 
    the hunt is on for hidden confrederate gold.
     The charge for the bridge by the Union and Gray, plus the 
    prison scenes were realistic. Also "The Undefeated" starring
    the Duke and Rock Hudson.
    
                            Manuel

    Would "Gone With The Wind" be considered a Civil War movie?  I've never
    seen this movie all the way through.  I only caught bits and pieces of
    it on TV so I don't totally know what the plot is exactly.  I do know
    that it takes place around the same time period as the Civil WAr. 

    Re: .14
    
    Yes, it is a Civil War film.  There is a particularly depressing scene
    of thousands upon thousands of Confederate wounded at the train
    station, and the climactic scene is the burning of Atlanta.  But IMHO
    it's also not really a Civil War film in that it's not centrally
    concerned with the war or even with military people.
    
    -dick

    GWTW is set during and immediately after the war.  It is not
    all that great as a reference on the war, but it is very
    good as a reference on social customs, manners, and such as
    that .  Mrs. Mitchell interviewed a large number of veterans
    and civilians who had endured the war.  The novel can give one
    a pretty good look into a particular segment of Southern society.
    
    The thing one must remember is that the novel deals with only
    that one segment of society.  Many people have made the mistake
    of thinking the entire South was like the characters and settings
    in GWTW.  This has given rise to what we in reenacting call the 
    "Moonlight and Magnolias" syndrome, wherein every female is 
    Scarlet and every male is Rhett, or at least Ashley.
    
    Has anyone read the sequel?
    
    "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly," is a pretty good western, but
    it is NOT at all accurate in its treatment of the New Mexico
    campaign.  Remember the reference to  "Old Sibley," the drunken
    general?  Sibley commanded the Confederate Army of New Mexico,
    and the use of his name was the only tribute to fact in the film.
    
    I might have to take that back upon reflection.  The portrayal of
    the Confederate hospital was horrifyingly well done.  Those poor
    fellows suffered unspeakable torment, and most of them died.  The
    Confederates had to abandon all their hospitals to the Federals, and
    a number of men died at Ft. Riley, Kansas, and Camp Douglas.
    
    
    Wess

I've read parts of Scarlett, more than enough to tell me that I will
never, ever, ever sully my love for GWTW by reading all of the sequel.

The sequel is the lowest kind of bodice-ripper romantic fiction.  The
only relationship it bears to GWTW is that the Mitchell heirs were fools
enough to license the use of Margaret's characters.  To give you an
idea, can you imagine a woman in GWTW saying things about having the
throbbing warmth of a man inside her...?

One syndicated columnist remarked that she hoped Margaret was buried on
a spit -- it'd be easier to turn over that way.

-dick

    re: .17
    
    Gag....
    
    
    Thanks for the tip.
    
    
    Wess

    
        ATLANTA JOURNAL 
    	by Phil Kloer, Staff Writer
    
    
    	The Atlanta Area will be the filming site for much of the 
    miniseries version of "Scarlett," the best-selling sequel to
    "Gone With the Wind," the producer said Tuesday.
    	Robert Halmi, who heads the group that purchased the the rights 
    to Alexandra Ripley's book Sunday for a record $8 million, said
    "a major chunk" of the filming would be done here, probablt starting 
    next summer.
    	Other possible locations include Ireland and Charleston, S.C.
    	If the miniseries gets good ratings, Mr. Halmi said he would like
    to make "Scarlett," into a regular series, also to be shot in and
    around Atlanta.
    	Blah... Blah... Blah...  
    
    The rest is mostly items of local interest.  
    
     2
    R

> Other possible locations...Ireland...

I should think so, since Ripley calmly extracted the story from Georgia
about 2/3 of the way through and moved the setting to Ireland.  I can't
feature shooting scenes of the Connemara on a backlot outside Atlanta.
But I won't see the minsieries anyway, so it's moot.  <snarl>

-dick

    
    In defence of Margaret Mitchell, the authors of the book "War so
    Terrible", a history of the Atlanta campaign (McDonough and Jones)
    praise GWTW very highly for its account of that event (o.k. that's
    not the whole book), but its description of the city under siege,
    and the gradually enveloping threat of Sherman's army is rivetting
    and accurate.
    
    They also state that she was a mite unfair to General Hood - Johnston
    was generally liked, but it is not true that the army rose up and
    shouted "Give us back Old Joe!" when he was replaced - there was a
    faction (identified with the former commander, Bragg) which welcomed
    the change.
    
    I've always looked on GWTH as the South's "War and Peace" - I know
    this may be inflating the author's reputation but no other work 
    comes close, only Mrs. Chesnut's diary
    
    Maybe the true equivalent of "War and Peace" is a collection of
    the great war diaries - Mary Chesnut's, "Coy Aitch" ..etc.
    
    Toby 

    
    I have seen most of the movies mentioned above, but "Glory" beats
    them all for narrative power and historical accuracy.
    
    There was a film on Lincoln, also released on video. It was based
    on Gore Vidal's novel, and had Sam Waterson as Lincoln and Mary
    Tyler Moore as Mary Todd Lincoln. It only covered the Civil War
    years, and presented Lincoln as the main author of the war,
    which could have been avoided (so the plot runs) if he had
    let the errant sisters depart in peace etc. etc. I don't accept
    this, but it is a good movie.
    
    I have a dream of a movie on the parallel careers of Grant and
    Lee .... it opens at the White House with Grant as President
    when Lee visited him there, then flashes back to Mexico when
    they were both young officers, gradually moving forward to 
    the war and Appomattox. I can see Robert de Niro as Lee, and
    Jack Nicholson as Sherman, can anyone come up with a suitable
    actor for Grant? 
    
    Toby

    RE: .22
    
    How about Brian Dennehy to play Grant?
    
    
    	About "Gone With The Wind", the movie:  I am often frustrated
    by how the symbolism in the movie escapes so many people.  For
    example, it seems that Rhet represents the "New South".  He is
    aggressive, arrogant, ambitious, but at his core, he is charitable.
    Scarlett, the "Old South", is coy, aloof, opportunistic, charming,
    provincial and deceptive; at her core she is selfish.
    	Mitchell used the two characters to show the love/hate conflict
    that exists in the progressive South.  The two were never met to
    blend.  This is what makes a GWTW sequel seem absurd.  
    	Interestingly, I always thought that the movie's depiction of
    one of the deaths of Scarlett's husbands (the vigilante scene),
    was Margaret Mitchell's idea of what the Ku Klux Klan was about.
    I've never had anybody agree with me, but being from Atlanta,
    Mitchell has pretty much been canonized here.
    
    Just Some Stray Thoughts,
    
     2
    R   
    

I believe they had some actual CSA veterans at the premier of GWTW in 
'39 or whenever.  When they saw the scene referenced earlier that 
showed thousands of men lying wounded and dying at the railroad, one 
of the veterans said something like "Shoot, if we'd had that many men 
for the battle of Atlanta we couldv'e whipped Sherman's butt!" Maybe 
it something I read in hear already, but I think I've seen that 
somewhere...

Scott    

    The really clever thing about that scene is that it showed about 1500
    wounded, of whom only about half were real extras.  The rest were
    dummies, who were moved occasionally by the real men lying next to
    them.
    
    -dick

    My wife gave me a copy of "Glory" for my birthday and it only
    took me a month to get time to watch it.  (-(
    
    I was surprised to find the scene with the stilletto bayonets
    had been edited.  If you know exactly what to look for you can
    still catch the error, but it is MUCH less obvious than when I
    saw the movie at a theater.
    
    It is still a fine piece of historical film making.
    
    I was holding hands with my wife as we watched the film, and after
    the 54th's first battle she said, "Honey, you can let go now."
    
    I was squeezing her hand so hard her fingers were numb.  Guess it got
    to me a bit.
    
    
    Wess

    
    	Is this a recent copy of "Glory" ?  I purchased a copy when it
    first came out. Did they edit it since it first came out?
    
    	I know what you mean by the intense feelings you got when the 54th
    fought it's first encounter with the Rebs. When the thin grey line came
    marching outta of the fog, my brother-in-law and myself starting
    cheering for the grey clad guys, in the middle of the theater! Talk 
    about being out numbered!?
    
    	The one thing about that battle scene that seems to stink in my
    mind is, that one Reb with the butternut shell jacket, pug hat,
    checkered pants, in the front file, advancing with his bayonet at the
    ready, just before they mix it up with the 54th.
    
    					The Alabama Slammer

    I don't know if the film was edited before or after its release on
    tape.  This is the only video tape of it I have seen.
    
    That bayonet fight was nowhere NEARLY as well-staged as the fire fight
    that preceded it.  I think only one Confederate was victorious in his
    battle with a Yank, which was pretty unlikely.  As a matter of fact,
    this scene led to some unfortunate, steriotypical jokes about Black 
    people and edged weapons.
    
    My lads and I lost our reserve in the theater in the last scene, when
    the Stainless Banner was run up over Battery Wagner.  There were about
    10 Rebel Yells in the theater.  Outnumbered?  Yup.  I know the feeling!
    (Of course, we had our Enfields with us, and hardly anyone else in the
    theater was armed!  ;-)  )
    
    
    Wess

    
    Does anyone agree with me that at its core "Glory" is an anti-war
    film as well as anti-slavery?
    
    It is about a bunch of men whose only means of expressing their
    humanity and transcending their limits is to take other people's lives. I 
    too felt strong emotion
    at the end, but at the pity and (yes) the glory of it all.
    
    The Trip character (Denzil Washington) and Shaw (Matthew Broderick)
    summed it up a a conversation:
    
    Trip (accusingly): If we win this war, you'll go back to your rich
    			family, but we'll still have nothing.
    
    Shaw: But if we lose, you'll have even less.
    
    Trip: Sure stinks, doesn't it?
    
    Shaw: Yes, it stinks.
    
    Its the absence of choice for the black man that is the tragedy:
    he has to abandon his humanity and become a slave, or fight for 
    an uncertain destiny. The question is not: "Was it worth it?" but
    the film is stating how tragic that the world was invented in such 
    a way that it HAD to happen.
    
    Toby
    
    

Re: .29

I don't see Glory as an anti-war film.  It tried to depict accurately
what things were like, and it succeeded.  The situation was very
specific -- the slavery v. free-black question -- and the film addressed
it without sentiment.

-dick

    I agree with Dick that Glory was not an anti-war film, except in the
    sense that any well-done war film will strike the intelligent viewer as
    being a horror story.
    
    I thought Glory was something of a romance, actually.  It portrayed the
    soldiers in the 54th as heroes, if only slightly larger than life.  It
    focused on certain characteristics of certain men, rather than on the
    very broad, or general aspects of many men.  It was a story of brave
    men in a terrible situation, and of how they reacted to it.
    
    It came dangerously near ["dangerously" being my deliberate choice of
    word]  parroting the old government line about the war being a crusade
    against slavery, but the very even-handed and accurate treatment of
    racism and fanaticism on both sides saved the film.
    
    
    Wess

    
    I am closer to .30 than .31 .... "Glory" was not romance, and it
    faced the reality of the black men's plight very well (see the
    conversation Trip/ Shaw quoted above). It may have been a larger
    than life portrayal, but who could not react with horror to the 
    spectacle of mass killing?
    
    If the film was saying "This is how it was...." who could not
    but answer "How terrible""
    
    Toby

    re: .32
    
    I think we agree, Toby.  A romance need not be pretty, at least not as
    I understand and use the term.  A romance is something that shows only
    a particular aspect of a character, and that aspect might be
    highlighted or emphasized.  The protrayal of the conflict was certainly
    not romantic, but that of the men was.  Romanticism takes a bum rap
    because of the genre of novels that has usurped the term.
    
    I think your last sentence says very well what I was trying to express.
    
    
    Wess

    Wess,
    
    The problem with calling Glory a romantic portrayal of the black man is
    that it also made a good case for blacks' being as rapaciously wicked
    as whites -- think about the black "regiment" that Shaw's troops
    accompanied to forage in the small town...and incidentally to fire it.
    
    Admittedly, there weren't as many minutes of that aspect of character,
    but it was there.  Overall, the film was remarkably evenhanded in its
    treatment of both blacks and whites.  Characteristics of all kinds were
    drawn a little largeer than life -- but subtlety is so very difficult
    if you've a fast-moving story to tell.
    
    -dick

    re: .34
    
    I would not call "Glory" a romantic portrayal of any racial group.
    I've never identified myself with a racial group (except in
    self-defense, but that's another story!)  because race has always
    seemed something of a non-essential in people's charcters.  Glory was
    about a specific group of Humans who happened to be Black males, and
    their conflict with another group of Humans who happened to be White
    males.  The romanticisation was of the particular people in the story.
    
    Of course, not all Black males are capable of doing all the things the 
    men of the  54th did.  Nor are all White males capable of doing all the 
    things the men who stopped the 54th did.  When I see a character in a
    film I do not see that character as standing for a racial group.  In
    fact, race has always been one of the last categories with which I
    associate people.
    
    I think "Glory" made a statement to the effect that these *HUMANS*
    overcame some terrible problems in pursuit of their dreams.  One of
    those problems was the attitudes of some of their peers toward their
    race.
    
    I agree strongly with you in the film's evenhanded presentation of the
    good and bad on both sides.  To be perfectly honest - and I'm going to
    date myself here - I expected the film to be something like, "Shaft
    Joins the Army and Kicks White Butt."   How wrong I was!
    
    
    Wess

                          Keaton's "The General"
    

    
    Re: .35 and previous.
    
    "Romantic" means "idealized and sentimental" - I do not believe that
    the presentation of the black soldiers in "Glory" was of that nature.
    A good example of romantic presentation is the presentation of 
    plantation life at Tara in the film "Gone with the Wind". 
    
    The film actually went out of its way to be even handed i.e. showing
    black troops looting and burning, and more examples of Yankee racism
    were shown than of Southern.
    
    Toby

    Re: .37
    
    See .34.  We are not at odds, you and I.  :-)
    
    -dick

    It seems to me that there are few CW movies that show both sides well.
    
    
                                      Marshall

    The Great Locomotive Chase 
    

    
    Heard on "Entertainment Tonight" the other night that a new flick
    about Gettysburg will soon begin production.  Supposed to have
    thousands of extras for the battle scenes with Tom Berenger (remember
    him from Platoon?) playing Longstreet.
    
    Scott

    
     If its the same thing I read its a move based on Kiler Angels a book 
    written by ??? Saraya. SP..  Any ways it won a Pulitzer Prize and is an 
    excelent acount of Gettysburg from both the North and the South side. 
    Longstreet plays a major role in the book as does Chamberlian.  I also
    Rember that they were trying to get Robert Duvall to play Robert E Lee..
    
    If done right this could become the Classic Civil War movie much as
    Platoon is for Vietnam....
    
      Dan 

    
    	The movie will be based on the book "Killer Angels" by Micheal
    Shaara. It is being produced by TNT. Please understand that it will be
    a dramatization of the novel, not an documentary. They say that the
    teleplay will be extremely faithful to the storyline of Shaara's book.
    They are shooting for a viewing date of 1993 to coincide with the 130th
    celebration of Gettysburg's battle.
    	From what I understand, the producers and the National Park Service
    have reached an agreement to film 29 days in Gettysburg National Park.
    They plan to include two days for filming the first part of Pickett's
    Charge on the site where it actually took place. The remainder of 
    Pickett's Charge, as well as ALL OPPOSED COMBAT, will be filmed on
    private land near the Park. Other approved sites include Devil's Den,
    portions of Seminary Ridge and Little Round Top.
    	It seems that the producers have been diligent in finding key crew
    members concerned with historic accuracy and experienced in the needs
    and contributions of reenactors during the filming. It seems that the
    First Assistant Director Skip Cosper, whose credits include
    "North-South", "Glory" and "Son of the Morning Star" comes highly
    recommended by the reenacting community.(Though I haven't heard of him)
    All the costume designers, propmasters and wranglers are reenactors. So
    it seems that all efforts are being made to accurately interpret the
    period, with special efforts being made to insure that every possible
    visual detail is correct.
    	Turner Network Television has announced that it will donate
    $100,000 toward battlefield preservation. $50.000 will be presented to
    the Association for the Preservation of Civil War Sites (APCWS) and an
    additional $50.000 will be donated for physical improvements
    specifically at the Gettysburg Battlefield.
    	Do I sound excited?? What do ya'll think??? I will be down at 
    Gettysburg on the dates of August 17th - 22nd for the filming of
    Pickett's Charge. My group the 5th Alabama Battalion has been accepted
    for the filming of the charge. The mighty little 5th Alabama actually
    participated in the charge. The 5th made the wall, but was repulsed
    with heavy loses. The 5th started the charge with 200 men, after the
    charge only 100 remained. We will also be heavily involved with the
    first days activities, as it was the 5th Ala., along with 13th Ala.
    that was credited with the opening shots fired at Gettysburg on the
    first day.
    	There has been different feelings concerning the filming of
    Shaara's book. A lot of groups are going to boycott the filming because
    they aren't going to payed for doing it. In my own opinion, that's
    their loss. I personally will not give up the opportunity to actually
    trend the hallowed ground of the people we portray that fought and died
    for what they believed in...
    
    					The Alabama Slammer
    				2nd Sgt. Noah Little  5th Ala. Batt.
    				      Archer's Brigade  ANV

    
    Wow.  
    
    Well, I can see I've got to get a copy of "Killer Angels."
    
    Actually going to redo the charge?
    
    Wow.
    
    I would love to be an onlooker, but I suppose they will keep the
    curious way back?  or maybe they might have some sort of visitors
    stand?  Do you know?  
    I would pay good money to be allowed to watch.
    
    Scott

    
    "Killer Angels" was required reqding for a course I took in college.
    Easy to read.  The thing that sticks out in my mind the most is the
    way Robert E. Lee was portrayed.  Most historical accounts of R.E.
    Lee seem to deify him.  You'll find that "Killer Angels", gives us
    a more flawed, human, R.E. Lee.
    
    
    R�

      Tell me if I'm wrong but, I was under the impression that they had a
    reenacment every year at Gettysburg??  This movie should be real good
    I just hope the don't "Dramatize it" to much from the original book.
    
     Dan

    
    	Re: 49.44  
    		Don't quote me on it, but, I'm not to sure if their going
    to allow spectators in for viewing. I know their allowing our families
    to come and camp out with their husbands, boyfriends, etc. (Yes, I'm
    fortunate, my whole family is into reenacting). That was one of the 
    problems that they had to iron out with the Park Service, was the lost
    park time to visitors. I heard there was going to be some "closed sets"
    but there again don't quote me on it. They are going to use 2,500 
    Confederate reenactors to portray Pickett's Charge. I'm not sure on how
    many Federals there will be.  They are also saying that they may use
    reenactors in some of the minor stunt sequences, i.e. bullet shots,
    explosions, etc. Talk about WOW!!!  Come on August 17th!!!!
    	I believe that the renactors camp will out of the Park about 2 -3
    miles. So if ya'll are able to sneak in, look up the 5th Alabama Batt.,
    Archer's Brigade and ask for 2nd Sgt. Noah Little. If I'm able I'll
    give ya'll a tour around the camp.
    
    	Re: 49.45
    		I agree with your statement about the book putting Lee
    into a more human perspective. Up unto that time just about every book
    idolized him. They also did a good job with Longstreet, Pickett and
    Chamberlain...
    
    	Re: 49.46
    
    		Yes, they do have an reenactment every year at Gettysburg.
    But, not on the National Park. We will be doing some filming on the
    actual field, but most of the fighting sequences using the powder will
    be done on private land bordering the Park. It's to hard to hide the
    monuments!!!....  :^)
    	The biggest Reenactment was in 1988, on the 125th Anniversary of
    the Battle of Gettysburg. They had 13,000 reenactors there. Now that 
    was something to a part of!!!!
    	I hope they don't "dramatize it" either. But it seems that their 
    going to great lengths not too. As stated earlier, their using 
    reenactors for most of the filming and back props. I'm sure that it
    will stay away from the "Hollywood" setting. Or they will have a bunch
    of mad reenactors with black powder.... :^) I believe that's why so
    many have signed on. To make sure that they do by the book, so to
    speak.
    
    					The Alabama Slammer

    
    	CAST:
    	Robert E. Lee - Martin Sheen      Joshua Chamberlain - Jeff Daniels
    	James Longstreet - Tom Berenger   John Buford - Sam Elliott
    	Lewis Armistead - Richard Jordan  Buster Kilrain - Kevin Conway
    	George Pickett - Stephen Lang     Tom Chamberlain - C.Thomas Howell
    
    	GETTYSBURG NATIONAL PARK:
    		A permit is being issued to the production to film at
    	several locations on National Park property. Approved locations
    	that we will utilize include the Pickett's Charge field west of
    	Emmitsburg Pike and south of the Lee Momument; Devil's Den and the
    	adjoining Triangular Field; Little Round Top, including the west
    	summit and the 20th Maine/15th Alabama area; the Granite Farm; the
    	Bushman House area; and portions of Seminary Ridge in the southern
    	quadrant of the Park.
    		These areas are relatively free of monuments or the
    	monuments are easily blocked out of shots. There will be no opposed
    	combat on the park, but other elements of combat will be allowed
    	within the confines of each permitted area, including carrying of
    	weapons, firing on small arms and some cannons, simulated
    	casualities and explosive special effects. In short, participating
    	re-enactors will be allowed a once-in-a-lifetime experience.
    
    	OTHER BATTLEFIELD LOCATIONS:
    		Besides locations on the National Park, many other
    	landmarks of the battlefield will be utilized by the production: the
        Evergreen Cemetery gate; the Lutheran Seminary cupola; the Cashtown
    	Inn; and the Marsh Creek covered bridge; as well as the familiar
    	vistas of South Mountain and the Round Tops. Most of the filming,
    	and all of the opposed combat, will occur primarily on two private
    	farms also utilized by Southern forces during the campaign, one of
    	about 300 acres two miles southwest of the Park, and another of 
    	about 200 acres near Cashtown.
    
    	DONATION TO BATTLEFIELD PRESERVATIONS:
    		As you should have read in the previous update, TNT will be
    	donating $100,000 to battlefield preservation on behalf of the 
    	participating re-enactors. Half will go to APCWS for the purchase
    	of both eastern and western threatened battlefields. The other half
    	will go to the Friends of the Park at Gettysburg. The check
    	presentation will occur during a ceremony on Sunday, August 23, at
    	11 am. The more than $5000 raised through re-encator registration
    	will also be ceremonially presented to APCWS at this time.
    
    	PICKETT'S CHARGE REGISTRATION:
    		More than 205 units have registered for Pickett's Charge,
    	filling our limit of 3000 participants
    
    	CAMPING:
    		Participants chosing to camp on location, will do so on
    	private land about two miles southwest of the battlefield.
    	The "Re-enactor Village" will have segregated modern and
    	"authentic" camping areas typical to most re-enactments. There will
    	also be a "camp set" for filming and those who express interest in
    	camping in this totally authentic and "primitive" area full time 
    	will have that option.
    
    		    Do we get to win this time!!???  :^)
    
    					The Alabama Slammer  

    _The Perfect Tribute_  stars Jason Robards as Abraham Lincoln from the 
   days during and after Gettysburg.  It is a fictional account centered 
   around a Confederate soldier's brother, who, after learning that his 
   brother was listed as missing (really wounded and captured/hospitalized by
   the Federals) in the Battle of Gettysburg, travels north to find him
   and bring him home. 

    Action sequences attempt to recreate Pickett's Charge and a small skirmish
   in Virginia.  Probably due to budget limitations, there weren't enough
   extras to do Pickett's Charge justice but the action scenes take a back
   seat to the story itself.

    The 'Perfect Tribute' refers to Lincoln's Gettysburg address and the 
   events leading up to and including the delivery of the address.  How this
   ties into the confederate soldier and his younger brother is pretty amazing
   and far-fetched but still entertaining.

    All in all, not a bad film. I believe it was a made for TV job, so finding
   it at the local video store might be difficult. 

 -rick    
    

    I saw Glory, an excellent movie, historically accurate except that it
    failed to mention the medal of honor winner, Sergeant William Carney. 
    Sergeant Carney won the medal for his actions of defending the flag
    at Fort Wagner.  He received the medal in the 1880's.
    
    Doug Gray

    RE .50:
    
    Well, to be _technical_, none of the characters in _Glory_, except for
    Shaw, were historical.  They were probably correct "types", but the
    actual names and ranks don't match the regimental history.  As .50
    says, the movie did not include Sgt. Carney, the first black Medal of
    Honor winner, who carried the regimental colors.  The character "Major
    Forbes" in the movie had no real-life existence; the lieutenant colonel
    of the regiment was named Halowell (sp?); another interesting item, to
    me, was that the sergeant-major of the regiment was in his early
    twenties, unlike the character protrayed by Morgan Freeman!
    
    A reprint of "A Brave Black Regiment" is now out, and is worth reading. 
    (I also found an old book containing the official state muster rolls of
    the 54th Mass., listing names, ranks, ages, and service dates for all
    the members... quite fascinating.)
    
    As an interesting bit of trivia, Matthew Broderick was made up to look
    almost exactly like Robert G. Shaw, except that Shaw was blond.
    
    MikeR
    

    
    
          Could you tell me the name of the author of the book
    Brave Black Regiment??????? I'd really like to get a copy
    but it's easier if you have the author also.....
    
    
                             Thanx in advance
    
    
                      ***** Deadhead Lefty *****
    
    
    
    

    RE .52:
    
    "Brave Black Regiment" was written by Luis Emilio, one of the original
    officers of the 54th Mass.  There is currently a paperback edition out,
    published by Ballantine (I think... might have been Bantam); my local
    Barnes & Noble carries it.  The paperback edition does not have the
    regimental roster that was included in the original 18?? edition, but
    does have all the text. 
    
    However, a hardback edition from a different publisher which _does_ have 
    the roster seems still to be available (for about $35) from 1991.  I got 
    one from them about five months ago, so if you're interested in ordering 
    _that_ one, send me mail and I'll send you the address.
    
    If you're interested in Shaw and the 54th, there are three other books
    you might look for.  One is a series of letters written by a corporal
    in the 54th, currently out in paperback (I'll look up the title &
    author).  A second is "One Gallant Rush", on which "Glory" was based. 
    I just found, in hardback, a book of Shaw's letters called "Blue-eyed
    Child of Fortune".  Try the Civil War section of a good bookstore.
    
    
    MikeR

    
     Not really a movie but,  Tonight on the Discovery channel @ 9 p.m. EST
     There is a show on touring Civil War Battlefields...
    
         Dan

    The "Killer Angels" film has been re-titled "Gettysburg" for release
    this fall. 
    
    -- Bill

       from Monday's Atlanta Constitution and Journal
    
     Ted Turner's   GETTYSBURG  will have a world-premier screening 
     4 Oct at Washington's National Theater,,,
     5 Oct in Atlanta at the Woodruff Arts Center
     then be released "in about 75 theaters nationwide on Oct 8th"
    
    
     It's a fairly lengthy article,,and I'm a lousy data entry device so
    a short summary:
    
     the stars ( Martin Sheen as LEE, Tom Berenger as Longstreet, Jeff
    Daniels as Union Col. Joshua Chamberlain and Sam Elliott as gen.
    Bufford) all reported being impressed with  the cast of 5,000
    reenactors.
     Daniels said he could "feel the ghosts" there at Gettysburg.
     Sheen is quoted as saying "The ghosts that inhabit that ground are
    pretty special stuff."
     One of the most moving scenes wasn't even in the script,,,the Reb
    rennactors mobbed "Gen. Lee" as he rode by enroute to a location shot,
    calling his name and reaching out to touch him. It so moved the
    producer,,they had 'em do it again on camera.
    
    
     sounds like a must-see to me (and I'm a Revolutionary War nut,,don't
    generally get into the ACW much)
    
    Doug
    
    PS,, the article will be mailed up to Reilley soon

    
The SHAW's market near the HLO plant has the GETTYSBURG movie for rent. 
Strange to see it on the TV in LETTERBOX format
....but I missed it at the movies.....
However, I'm not sure I would have lasted at the movie without 
a 'pause' button....8^).....
    
    ray
    

    Happy to say I saw "Gettysburg" at a single screen theater - twice! It
    was a quick four hours believe me. Phenomenal to see on the big screen.
    Anyone out there who gets a chance to see it in a theater should hurry 
    to the theater to see it. Being a Mainer, I was really impressed with
    the scene at Little Round Top with Joshua Chamberlain who is, to the
    best of my knowledge, the most impressive person in Maine state
    history. On our high school class trip to D.C. we toured Gettysburg and
    you can bet we all got to see Little Round Top and hear the story of
    the 20th Maine. I shall always feel indebted to our teacher, Ivan
    Sherman, who organized that trip and made certain we  got to see it.