This is the movie that led to my becoming a history buff, especially of the Civil War. Gettysburg was a film over a decade in the making. It’s source material was Michael Shaara’s historical novel Killer Angels, which attempted to dive into the heads of several real-life Union and Confederate figures in America’s greatest battle. Maxwell was unable to get the backing to actually make the movie because of some notable failed epic films, but finally Ted Turner, who also saw the idea of a Civil War mini-series as a passion project, finally got things going.
Gettysburg was originally
made to be a mini-series for TNT, but Turner was so impressed with the final
product that, with a few scenes cut, it was given a limited theatrical release
first. Thanks to its four hour length, the longest for any theatrical release
in American history, it didn’t make back its budget, but it got lots of praise
and positive buzz. Thus it was a smash hit on TV and home video. I remember my
family having the two-tape set. It’s size always impressed me and it was
watched a lot in the house. After seeing a few other images in my family’s book
collection and getting the BMC toy soldier set for my birthday, I one day
decided to check out a couple books from the library and I turned into a Civil
War nerd for the rest of my life.
For
those who don’t know, Gettysburg is considered the greatest battle of the Civil
War. It didn’t have the most men involved (that honor goes to the Battle of
Fredericksburg), but it saw the heaviest casualties in killed and wounded.
General Robert E. Lee, commander of the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia,
wanted to take the war north and score a decisive victory that would end the
war in his favor. Nearly by accident, the Confederate and Union Armies collided
at Gettysburg on July 1, 1863. After three days of fighting, Lee’s army
suffered its first massive defeat. Along with the loss of the last strongholds
on the Mississippi River and the major Tennessee railroad junction of Chattanooga, this battle was a major turning point and is argued to have signaled
the eventual defeat of the Confederacy.
 |
| Ted Turner (left) cameos as Colonel Waller T. Patton, World War II general George Patton's great-uncle. Ron Maxwell stands to the right. (https://davethecaveman.blogspot.com/2018/11/my-favorite-films-gettysburg-1993.html) |
By the way, if you’re wondering why the movie didn’t retain the title Killer Angels, marketing warned that people would think of biker gangs instead of the Civil War. Now into the movie’s content and historicity. I also already did a list of some historical inaccuracies, a few which I’ll touch on in this review, but others I won’t, so check it out.
Two Things to
Consider
Despite
its popularity, Gettysburg has been subjected
to considerable criticism from Civil War aficionados. There are two major
arguments that have some merit, but need to be defended against. One is that
the movie leaves out most of the battle in favor of a few characters and
events. It should be remembered that this is a faithful adaptation of Killer Angels. Shaara’s book zeroed in
on four particular characters divided between the two sides: Generals Robert E.
Lee and James Longstreet for the Confederates and General John Buford and
Colonel Joshua Chamberlain for the Union. General Lewis Armistead gets a
chapter as well. Shaara believed these characters were at the center of the
pivotal moments: the initial defense of McPherson’s Ridge north of Gettysburg
that bought time for the Union Army of the Potomac to gain the high ground
south of town, the critical defense of the Union left flank at Little Round
Top, and finally the disastrous charge on Cemetery Ridge that failed to end the
war, but did cripple Lee’s offensive capabilities.
 |
| Union commander General George Meade (Richard Anderson) makes a late entrance. |
Most long war films have a semi-documentary feel that covers most of a particular battle. Think World War II flicks like The Longest Day and A Bridge Too Far. However, Gettysburg, being based on the novel, is much more interested in the actual thoughts and motivations of the people, so that’s why Maxwell spends so much time on dialogue and speeches. I do have to admit, however, that it would be neat to have a movie that gets more of the battle in. The one thing that would have been great to have was the Sickles controversy. General Daniel Sickles, an unscrupulous political general on the Union side, moved his III Corps forward to higher ground in front of where he was supposed to be. Meade tried to get him to move back, but then the Confederates attacked. Depending on which historian you ask, Sickles’ move either almost lost the battle for the Union or actually derailed the Confederate attack plan by shifting the front line westward.
On
to the other major criticism, a lot of people complain about the near-bloodless
action scenes and the abundance of aged or overweight extras. To stay within
budget (Civil War films with battles cost a lot to make with risky box office
prospects), Turner and other producers relied on the voluntary services of
Civil War reenactors. It’s true that a few are way too fat to have been members
of the always half-starved Confederate army, but these men know their stuff and
it becomes a delight to watch the background on rewatches. You’ll see men
accurately replicating camp life and non-combat duties while the
main characters talk in the foreground. Also, during the Battle of Little Round
Top you can actually see one soldier bang the butt of his musket against the
ground. This was an alternate way of getting ammunition down a barrel when a
ramrod was too clumsy or missing.
As
for the lack of blood, the reenactors were saving on money by bringing their
own clothing and gear. Wrecking their clothes in order to show the gory effects
of being perforated by bullets or torn apart by artillery would have required
more money to replace them. Of course, this question is a bit academic because
back in the 90s one did not show such scenes on television. This was originally
intended to be a mini-series, not a theatrical war film where gore would have
been allowed. You can see amputated limbs in the hospital scene, but not very clearly.
Not a Lost Cause
Film
Some
critics accused the movie of having a pro-Confederate bias. The reason is tied
to Shaara’s novel. Because the main Union characters are lower in the chain of
command, we don’t really get a good look at the Army of the Potomac’s larger
strategy. General George Meade, the commander, only shows up for one scene,
though the actor Richard Anderson manages to infuse him with some gravitas.
Aside from John Reynolds and Winfield Scott Hancock, the Corps commanders are
silent extras in the background of a couple scenes.
By
contrast nearly every Confederate general from the divisional level up shows
up, and most even get one or two lines. This has tied into a misperception of
history where the Confederates made most of the major decisions of the battle
and defeated themselves with a few major mistakes.
It
is true that Maxwell doesn’t dwell too long on the issues of slavery and
racism. The only black person in the film is a runaway from the Confederate
army who says nothing and he literally says nothing. It’s actually strange how
absent blacks people are in this movie, since slavery and racism played a
defining role in the Civil War. Both armies had plenty of black support (slaves
for the Confederates, hired laborers for the Federals), but I guess there
weren’t any black reenactors itching to perform menial tasks in the background.
What’s really egregious is one scene where Longstreet muses that the southern
states should have freed the slaves and then fired on Fort Sumter. I believe
this was supposed to tie into Longstreet’s characterization as a
forward-thinking modern man, but it’s hard to believe a native born and raised
Southerner would misunderstand the essential link between slavery and the start
of the war.
 |
| The only scene with a black man |
Many use the absence of references to slavery as evidence of the Lost Cause narrative. More accurately, however, Gettysburg follows the Reconciliation narrative. This is where the bravery of Confederate and Union figures are celebrated together in a tragic, yet ultimately triumphant narrative. The end of this version of the Civil War shows America reuniting and healing to become even greater than it ever was (hence the torn but functional US flag in the last shot). However, in emphasizing the bonds between the two sides, the Reconciliation narrative does provide an impetus to downplay slavery as well as other ugly aspects of the war.
Lee and
Longstreet
 |
| James Longstreet (Tom Berenger) and Robert E. Lee (Martin Sheen) |
Robert Duvall was a long-time choice to play Lee. Not only was he descended from the general on his mother’s side, but he was known for bringing a quiet, yet strong presence to his roles. Unfortunately Duvall instead to chose to play Josef Stalin of all people in a TV movie. Martin Sheen was cast instead, a clear case of ability over appearance as he’s a bit short and stout to be Lee. Some find his Lee to be too feeble, but I should point out that the historical figure was sick at the time of the battle.
Furthermore,
this is a Lee who’s used to victory, yet frustrated by his inability to actually
win the war. At some points he looks visibly worn, and at one point expresses
his war-weariness to Longstreet. Throughout the movie Lee slowly grows more
desperate and reckless. At first he’s upset that some of his subordinates have
gotten themselves into an unplanned battle. Then, despite the fact that the
Federals hold the high ground and obviously want him to attack, he tries to
continue the battle with the belief the Confederacy needs a crushing victory
soon. When the second day of battle doesn’t go as planned, he somehow convinces
himself that his army, which has pulled off several incredible victories, can
somehow still win with a massive frontal assault across a wide field.
This
puts him into conflict with Longstreet (Tom Berenger). When the novel came out,
Longstreet was still vilified by the Lost Cause as the man who ruined Lee’s
plans and lost the Battle of Gettysburg. Some historians even suggested he did
this on purpose. Michael Shaara assisted new historical arguments that showed
that Lee made his own bad decisions and that in some cases Longstreet’s
criticisms of his superior’s plans were correct. Berenger’s Longstreet is a
forward-thinking general who understands the modern changes to war, the voice
of reason who reluctantly sends his men into guaranteed failure on the third
day. Further research has shown that Longstreet did indeed make some major
mistakes of his own at the battle, but for drama’s sake it’s still intriguing
to watch the movie’s Lee-Longstreet interactions.
Pickett’s
Division
Outside
the main duo, General George Picket and the three brigade commanders of his
division get the most attention on the Confederate side. Stephen Lang plays
Pickett as a good-natured dandy, quick to make a joke and prone to, in the
words of another character, “trivializing” serious intellectual discussions.
However, his division has failed to see action for a while, so he’s eager to
get a chance for glory, and gets more than he bargained for.
On
Pickett’s brigade commanders, veteran western actor Andrew Prine portrays
Richard Garnett, while Royce D. Applegate makes a memorable impression as
political general James Kemper. Most important is Richard Jordan as General
Lewis Armistead. Armistead is a good friend of General Hancock, and longs to
meet him again despite being on opposing sides. Armistead and Hancock were
indeed good friends, getting to know each other during pre-war duty in
California. However, their relationship was heavily dramatized by Shaara. First
of all, they only interacted in the last years before the war. In fact,
Hancock’s biggest Confederate friend was probably Henry Heth (who shows up in
the movie as the hapless guy who suddenly finds himself starting a major
battle). Also, historians have found barely any indication that they
particularly suffered from being separated from each other. The real Armistead
never even mentioned Hancock in any of his surviving letters, while the
Shaara/movie version definitely would.
 |
| Armistead (right) has one of his private conversations with Longstreet. |
Fans of the movie know that Richard Jordan was in the early stages of a brain tumor when filming, which makes his character’s arc all the more emotional. It’s a credit to Jordan that he tumor doesn’t interfere with his acting, though it might have something to do with his somewhat slow charging at the movie’s action climax. Eerily, the editors learned of Jordan’s death while working on his last scene. That being said, this is a great role to go out on for a well-respected actor. I don’t want to spend too long on the numerous other Confederate characters. I’ll add that Lee and Longstreet’s staff officers are neat small characters that allow the main characters to expound more on their feelings.
Buford and
Hancock
Sam Elliott lends his awesome voice and presence to the role of cavalry general John Buford. Buford is one of those historical figures that suddenly was thrust into the limelight for one great moment, only to not much later (he succumbed to typhoid in December 1863). Elliott’s Buford is given an anti-authoritarian streak that is not evidenced in the real-life figure, but it sure is entertaining to watch him make cynical remarks about the top brass and politicians. Buford is also much older than he was in real life, but it’s Sam Elliott, so who cares. I have to say I like his two brigade commanders. David Carpenter’s Colonel Thomas Devin doesn’t actually have much to his character, but bolsters Buford’s competence. Buck Taylor is more entertaining as Colonel William Gamble. He has an awkward habit of making pessimistic statements, sometimes cheerfully.
 |
| Sam Elliott as General John Buford |
I don’t know much about Brian Mallon, the man who plays Hancock. For the purposes of the Armistead-Hancock subplot he does a good job. For those who want the more historical Hancock, they will be disappointed, as Mallon is much shorter than the reportedly physically impressive general. Also, since this was originally made for TV, he doesn’t have Hancock’s propensity for heavy profanity during battle. John Rothman makes a decent impression as General John Reynolds, the First Corps commander who makes it in time to Gettysburg to delay the Confederates further. The director’s cut makes him a more cheery and dashing figure, and we can buy that this man was seriously considered for command of the Army of the Potomac.
The 20th
Maine
I’ve been pretty positive so far, but the best part of the cast has got to be the 20th Maine. This regiment played a significant role in the real battle, but has gained a perhaps outsized reputation thanks to the book and film. It held the absolute left flank of the Union line on the Second Day, and by stopping the Confederates was credited with preventing the Union Army from being rolled up and devastated. This view was widely held for a while, but some historians have ruined things by arguing that the Confederates who faced them had already lost much of their momentum in the Devil’s Den fighting and worse had no reserves to exploit any success into a battle-winning scenario. These and some others also like to say that the July 2 evening fighting on Culp’s Hill on the far right was actually far more dicey as the line there had been stripped of men to deal with emergencies in other parts of the line.
This
doesn’t take anything away from the movie’s presentation of the unit. Because
it’s more ground level, it’s easier to get invested in the characters as they
get into the thick of the action. Jeff Daniels delivers one of his greatest
performances as Colonel Joshua Chamberlain. Chamberlain was a professor of
rhetoric and natural philosophy at Bowdoin College, Maine, who was enthusiastic
about the Union war effort. Because of opposition from the rest of the faculty,
he actually enlisted in secret in 1862, and would rise to become the colonel of
the 20th Maine.
Daniels’
Chamberlain is presented as a moral figure, a volunteer officer distinct from
all the West Point graduates. He is the one who expresses the meaning of he war
for the Union in a speech to the men of the 2nd Maine. These men had
signed up for three years’ service, but claimed that as the regiment had
disbanded they were entitled to leave with the other Mainers. In real life
Chamberlain personally talked with and convinced each one of them. The movie
has to get things going, so instead Daniels delivers a big speech on how
they’re fighting for the vision of a freer America, and by extension each other
as Americans.
In
another scene, Chamberlain tells Sergeant Buster Kilrain (Kevin Conway) that
blacks are obviously human. I read one book claiming that he was conservative
on racial views, but he had some association with Harriet Beecher Stowe and
other prominent anti-slavery figures, and definitely saw slavery as a violation
of man’s natural right to independence.
C.
Thomas Howell plays Joshua’s younger brother Thomas. He’s not as wise as
Joshua, but his friendly personality leads to the only cordial
Union-Confederate meet-ups in the film. There’s one scene that delightfully
brings Winslow Homer’s Prisoners from the Front to life, down to some of the costuming. Thomas asks the prisoners
what they’re fighting for, leading to the only dialogue from regular
rank-and-file Rebels. More importantly, talks to a wounded Armistead after
Pickett’s Charge,
Kevin
Conway’s Sergeant Kilrain is the sole major fictional character. He’s yet
another Irish sergeant (I’ve gotten quite a few of those on this watchlist)
who’s wise in his own way. Despite his much lower rank, he gets to hob-knob
with Colonel Chamberlain and they even have the film’s most important
philosophical exchange. The rest of the 20th Maine is made up of bit
parts, but some manage to leave an impression. The one historical example is
Captain Ellis Spear (Donal Logue), who was one of the more well-known and
prominent officers under Chamberlain.
These guys really make the audience invested in the Battle of Little
Round Top, making it in my opinion the best sequence of the movie.
I'll finish up next post with a note on Fremantle and then do a rundown of the major actions.
No comments:
Post a Comment