historynut Reviews

Kansas: Device-Voice-Drum (2002 Video)

Simply the Best!

[18 June 2004]

Perhaps no band in the history of rock has worked as hard, toured as much as Kansas. Device-Voice-Drum is "exibit A" of this! A flawless effort by America's most prolific classic rock band. They are respected by the music industry and fans alike. Their music isn't for everyone, that's for sure. But this band shines in a live venue (I've seen them many times and in all their incarnations over 25 years) and they ALWAYS satisfy in concert. "DVD" is a must see for music lovers! Good job guys!

If there is a "complaint," it is that I wish Kansas had done more recordings for video format over the years. I really don't believe that they fully understand how great they are in a live situation. Studio music does not do this band justice (although I love their studio work as well).

Return to Mayberry (1986 TV Movie)

Bad Script/ Good Memories

[18 March 2004]

The awful script notwithstanding, it is great to see the cast get back together in this trip down memory lane. Those of us who grew up with the Andy Griffith Show like it. When Barney asks Andy to answer the telephone in the Sheriff's Office, and hearing Andy simply say "Sheriff's Office," well, talk about your nostalgia! What's amazing is that in 2004, almost all of these people are still alive and many still working (Don Knotts for one).

This is just a nice movie for the "fans" of the show. No stunning acting, no over the top in your face "shock" humor we are all too sick of now.

They just don't make them like this anymore (the origional show, that is). These new so-called comedy sitcoms don't even come close....

Gods and Generals (2003)

Stick to TV, Ted!

[9 March 2004]

Gods and Generals, which should have been called "Gods and Rebels," is proof positive that Ted Turner's people should stick to TV movies (see "The Day Lincoln Was Shot" and "Andersonville" by TNT - VERY good, even great movies).

Gettysburg was OK, but the more I watch Gods and Generals, the more I have to agree with the critics that it was a disaster (sorry my fellow Civil War reenacting brethern - WE ARE NOT ACTORS as much as we like to think otherwise).

What disappoints the most is that this had the potential to be a good film what with such talented people involved in the main roles. The script was simply awful.

I would say that the whole endevor would have been better served by making the movie about Stonewall Jackson's career as opposed to being loyal to Jeff Shaara's fine novel. Trust me, as a former Civil War reenactor, I seen for years first-hand the public's love affair with all things Rebel, and it certainly came shining through in Gods and Generals.

But as a Jackson fan, sticking to his story only might have saved the film. Ted, the epics are an admirable attempt to revive the spirit of "Gone With The Wind," but please, put it in the hands of more competent people!

I did like using Harpers Ferry as a filming location for the town shots, and there were some convincing performances here and there. But the whole thing just comes across as a jumbled, disjointed cut and paste story that, if you stay awake, make no sense.

Finally, I think the battle scenes were tolerable and somewhat of an improvement over Gettysburg.

The Day Lincoln Was Shot (1998 TV Movie)

Interesting Effort

[9 March 2004]

I like this movie a lot. Proof that Ted Turner's people are better off sticking with "made for TV" movies as opposed to trying to go "big screen" (see: "Gods and Generals" for one such disaster).

I did not particularly care for some of the "MTV-like" camera angles and going from color to black and white (hopefully this "fad" will die a quick death).

Lance Henrickson is a fine actor and did a great job as Lincoln. Unlike Henrickson, Lincoln was a "western" country hick with a higher pitched voice and did not have the graceful mannerisms Henrickson protrayed in this film (I blame the casting, not Henrickson, for this), but it's no big deal, unless you are a nit-picker who liked to show off your deft knowledge of history.

Rob Morrow kicked ass as Booth. Another very underrated actor.

Here again, as in the TNT effort "Andersonville" which in my view is the most unique and my absolute favorite Civil War movie to date, I believe that the using of mostly "role actors" pays off.

Bizarre as it may sound, I really believe that background, incidental music can make or break a movie, especially a period piece such as this. And with this movie, it's excellent!

I doubt Hollywierd will ever treat Lincoln on the "big screen" again (as has been done before many many years ago). So I guess we will have to settle for TV efforts like this. And if they are all this good, that could be a good thing!

Andersonville (1996)

Best Civil War Film Ever!

[18 February 2004]

My opinion is that Andersonville is the best Civil War movie ever made, period. As a former Civil War reenactor, I'm not going to sit here and nitpick at all the "mistakes." Were there mistakes? Sure. The timeline was a little fuzzy for one. But that does not detract from the power of this movie. The guards were not well fed regulars either, but so what? You don't have to take a test after watching this movie!

I think the REAL factor in Andersonville being such a great production was the fact that you had no real "name" people involved. Fredric Forrest may have been the biggest name in the film and is a career role actor - but WHAT an actor! These guys busted their balls for this film and it really shows. I heard one reenactor complain that the characters seemed "cartoonish," and I don't buy it. I bet he was refering to Jan Triska who played Wirz. Well, read up on Wirz. I think they got it pretty close.

Forgive me, my reenacting brethern, but alhough Gettysburg was a tolerable film (I got to be an extra in that) and Gods and Generals was a disaster, the problem with these productions was the fact that they relied way too heavily on reenactors. Reenactors are NOT actors! They were used most effectively in Glory, not so well in Gettysburg, and Gods and Generals? Don't want to even go there. Andersonville followed Glory's success formula in using reenactors as background with small parts filled in by them (my buddy Martin Leibschner playing the banjo in the Raider camp was a good use of the talent reenactors can bring to film).

Frankenheimer must be given a lot of credit, as should the writer. The script did get a little cheesy here and there, but not enough again to trash the overall production. Jarrod Emick (sp?) as Josiah Day did a nice job, but until that point he had been a stage actor mostly, and his voice inflections projected that. Still, he did a great job. Peter Murnik as Limber Jim added that "mystery character" to the film well (as the real Limber Jim who was at Andersonville is a mystery to history). Again, I can't think of one lame performance by any of the key actors here. They put 110% into the job and I commend them for it. And whoever was involved in the set design was on the ball too. To try and recreate that place was no small task.

I remember a reenactor bitching because for the "filling" of the stockade for the wide shots, they had to use women and even cardboard figures. Big frekin deal! When they are dots on the screen, did it REALLY matter?

I can't see this movie being topped in terms of a Civil War period piece. Hollywierd is always bent on turning just about every period piece into some type of romance for the younger target audience. Andersonville is certainly a refreshing change of pace to that drill.

Gods and Generals (2003)

VERY Bad!!!!

[20 September 2003]

As one who is in contact with Jeff Shaara (real nice guy and I love his books), a holder of a masters degree in American History and former Civil War reenactor (and I also was an extra in the movie "Gettysburg"), I have to say that "Gods and Generals" is a truly terrible movie.

What is disappointing to is is that it didn't have to be so awful! It had the potential to be good what with the great actors, nice background settings, and the battle scenes went beyond LOOKING like Civil War reenactments (a flaw of "Gettysburg.")

One problem is that the script was simply awful. Trite, to put it bluntly, very predictable.

Now I'm a Stonewall Jackson fan. But this movie did little to honor this man who was an absolute phenom in military history. Aside from protraying HOW he got his name during the First Battle of Manassas, it did absolutely NOTHING in terms of telling the viewer how he earned his FAME! He won his fame and struck fear into the Union Army and political Washington D.C. with the amazing "Valley Campaign," which if I wasn't put to sleep by the dullness of this tiresome movie, I never heard ONE reference to in the movie! Not to mention The Seven Days Battle (where he DIDN'T shine) and the taking of Harpers Ferry with Antietam just days later.

The whole project might have been better called "Stonewall," and simply focused on him. Nothing wrong with a bio-movie and perhaps that way the viewer might have gotten at least a better sense of who he really was.

In relation to that, the Jackson of history was NOT as animated and social as the Jackson portrayed in "GAG."

Ron Maxwell is certainly no screen writer and should stick to directing. What's really sad is that now the "Part III" will not be attempted because of this disaster.

Equally sad is that Shaara just put out an excellent two-part novel about the Revolutionary War which would make for GREAT screen adaption, but I'm afraid that after this disaster, the "suits" may not want to risk it.

Carrie (2002 TV Movie)

Good Remake

[9 February 2003]

Lots of negative comments here about this remake that I've read. However, in short, I think it was good. I really don't know why, but it just seems that the emotions of hatred toward the "Ultras" this version generates is more powerful. Then again, I'm a teacher, and I get to see the "Carries" of the world every day and it makes you sick. Nice to root for the Underdog, even though it's just a silly movie.

Gettysburg (1993)

Yawnnnnnnn......................

[26 January 2003]

Although I was moved by this film when I first saw it on the big screen, I've come to see over the years how bad of a film this really was.

As a Civil War reenactor, I was an "extra" in this film.

Sure, there were some good performances. And there were some moving sceens. Still, I can hardly watch it anymore because it is so dull! I think trying to stay too close to the novel that inspired the film was a mistake. Shots were held too long for dramatic return, and the speeches that turned into senseless pontification was just a bad idea.

At least we know that reenactors of the Civil War are well fed!