"Hooray for hollywood .....Maybe?????" Topic

Hollywood is getting ready to fight the nation's bloodiest conflict all over again with a passel of new sesquicentennial-ready film and TV projects from some of the biggest names in the entertainment industry, including directors Steven Spielberg, Ridley Scott and Robert Redford. There's even a pilot for a TV series set against the backdrop of the war, from one of the executive producers of ABC's hit drama "Lost."

Should we be getting excited????? (remember Gods and generals) I for one live in hope, Daniel Day Lewis playing lincoln in the film LINCOLN……..good sign already.

Nice to see there will be new products, can only hope they will be decent…

I don't know about this, Redford's "The Conspirator" already came out, Ridley Scott's take on Gettysburg as well (it was IMO pretty horrible, certainly not what I expected from a big name guy, obviously not shot anywhere near the battlefield and with a very small number of "actors". Not to mention all sorts of bizarre stuff like men on Culps Hill watching the attack in the Wheatfield.)

Redford's take BTW, Stanton evil, Mary Suratt good, was panned by Lincoln Historians. I hope I'm wrong, but color me pessimistic. The enormous miniseries entitled "To Appomattox" at least has some stars attached but I've never seen Kix Brooks or Dwight Yoakum act. Could be great, could be a disaster.

link

I was talking with a friend yesterday who is a "consultant/coordinator" on comercial historical films, usually ACW. He has been busy of late and spoke of a 4 hour TV movie on Antietam for next year. There could be good news.

Dwight Yoakum is awesome.

YouTube link

Executive Producer Michael Beckner wrote this about the "To Apptomattox" mini-series, to be shown on HBO:

"The series will be something similar to BAND OF BROS meets JOHN ADAMS. What I mean by that is each episode will by primarily character drama (a la ADAMS) with about 15-20 mins battle (BoB). The reason is that full accuracy will be dramatized in the battle sequences and by virtue of the carnage even 15 mins will be difficult to watch.

The dramatic "spine" if you will is Grant's memoir--the 8 episodes begin with his entry to West Point and proceed through his funeral. That, however, makes up a "half" of the portrayed action. The other half is the war in the East before Grant arrives.

My bonafides--if you will… From the beginning of this undertaking (13 Episodes before I discovered there was no network appetite), I was mentored by John Simon (founder of the Ulysses Grant Association and original editor of the Grant Papers). After John's death, and after the series reduced to 8 episodes, Dr. John Marszalek (biographer of Sherman and Halleck) vetted every line of every script for accuracy. I am indebted to both these mighty scholars.

The director I have hired, Mikael Salomon won the Director Emmy for BAND OF BROTHERS, did ROME and beyond his other Emmy noms, is an Academy Award nominated cinematographer for Cameron, Spielberg, and Ron Howard. He will shoot this perfectly.

West Point has come on board with our sound department. All weapons and loads--minie balls, solid and cased shot, cannister--will be fired and recorded "live."

We will film interiors in Canada, but all exteriors--troop movements, battles, encampments--will be shot in PA and NC.

My intention in posting here comes from my understanding that I have taken upon my shoulders a task much greater than one man can accomplish. This series will be made. If it is great, it will not be done again… If I fail it also will not be done again. It is upon my shoulders not only to have the drama, the dialogue of every scene correct, but EVERYTHING the audience sees.

West Point and the Gettysburg Foundation have come forward in a big way to make sure uniforms, flags, Corps patches on caps, etc. will be historically accurate. I worry, however, when I recreat Pickett's Charge--how do I get the "left oblique" correct? How, at Spotslyvania will Lee's breastworks be accurate?

The Cornfield at Antietam? The Bloody Lane?

I hold so much responsibilty and if I don't do it right… I fail every one of us.

GETTYSBURG and GODS AND GENERALS are wonderful--because they do it--but they're so flawed.
We have a chance with TO APPOMATTOX and it must be PERFECT. We owe it to our ancestors; we owe it to our country…

In the coming weeks and months, I ardently hope, I can rely on the expertise that I know runs to the depth of truth on this site for advice and guidance. I'm sorry that I am bound by my network to keep my scripts confidential. I'm confident, though, that here if I have a specific question one of my scripts confronts me with…well, you'll know what I'm talking about when I outline the situation.

Best regards and God bless you all for being here,
Michael Beckner"

I would've liked to have heard something about script and acting in the above. We'd all be much happier I think if Hollywood stayed away from the ACW. I've watched high school students get seriously turned off to the ACW by terrible movie-making.

For the love of God, STOP TRYING, PLEASE !

It would help if they'd stop trying to please "both sides."

Dwight Yoakum as George Meade? I remain skeptical until I actually see this thing. Again I hope that I am wrong, but this is what Maxwell said about G&G, this is what Scott said about his effort and what Redford said about his. Intentions are great, but its where the rubber meets the road that matters. Remember all the research that Michael Bey put into "Pearl Harbor"? "Accuracy is a selling point for people like us, whether its about the Civil War or Napoleon or whatever. Its easier to market if the filmmakers have the historical community on board. But we have been burned so many times before.

8 hours sounds like a lot but when you consider how much ground you are covering it really isn't all that much. After all Ken Burns; "The Civil War" is ten, and he didn't have to develop characters

Personally I am leery of some things (also I have been following for a while and posted on the subject last year, and some of these points were made by others, upon consideration I feel that they were right.) There is this tie in with NASCAR. Hopefully the casting of drivers in roles will be more about talent than marketing. Stephen Lang as Lincoln? Hopefully CGI can make him look 6'4''. And the simple fact that the story they are trying to cover is just so big. Also quite frankly they are still casting when they were supposedly going to begin production back in the spring. Admittedly very few projects go off on schedule, but with this many actors attached folks are liable to have conflicts. The good news as I see it is that they have attracted the attention of Ed Bearss, who has forgotten more about the ACW than the rest of us will know.

Just my two cents.

I'll probably watch it with absolutely no expectations, that way I'll only be surprised if it's any good.

I still haven't seen "The Conspirator", mainly because Robert Redford directed it. That guy could screw up a cup of coffee.

Conspirators isn't a great movie, but it is worth seeing.

I thought Band of Brothers and John Adams were a total snooze. The characters were so boring. I had no viewer empathy for them, no feeling for their trials. Just more post-modern American lifeless characters with zero personality going through scripted motions Felt the same way about Saving Private Ryan really. Completely boring,lifeless, post-modern drool. All the canned "pc" emotions to show that grown men can cry too. Blah, blah, blah… Hanks/Spielberg may as well have had Oprah's fat a-- storming the beaches… maybe interviewing the troops on the way in like asking them "can you tell us how you are feeling right now? Can you go through your emtions for us?". That would've been more fun. Needless to say, I won't make it a point to watch Hollywood's next helping of cr-p.

Well, we know DDL won't be phoning it in.

All those whiny prima donna pussy actors and actresses could take a page outa his book.

I feel better now, however, ACCURATE I may have been.

You bet, Bottom Dollar.

How can a movie be accurate if viewers expect "exciting" action heroes? And lest we forget, "Glory" seemed to get it right on most levels.

> "Glory" seemed to get it right on most levels.

Other then Denzel Washington's character it was pretty good, a black man with that kind of attitude problem would not have made it very far, even the abolitionists did not consider black's equal to whites. (OK, maybe one or two)

This accurately sums it up.

bayonnelra.com/honor1.htm

For the love of God, STOP TRYING, PLEASE !
>>
I agree!!

We don't need anymore fat reenactors,or whiny, soapbox-type speeches,or badly done battle scenes!

They will NEVER do the CW justice in todays PC driven world.

Bob

Deleted my message as this thread has become rapidly political, C YA

Is it because I called Hollyweirdos pussies? Lets see if the plural gets bleeped.

Nope, guess not.

For those who regard just about every recent "war movie" as too PC, please elaborate as to what you would do differently besides never filming a ACW based film ever again. What past films do it "right"?

God's and Generals, for all it's flaws as a movie did a decent job of showing the southern side of things. Indeed, all the reviews I read lambasted it for not being PC enough (along with the bad pacing, bad hairpieces, etc…).

Going outside the ACW.
Band of Brothers did seem to get the history right (or close enough), same for "The Pacific". Are there problems here and there – certainly, but they tried and for the most part succeeded.

Not a war movie, but "Appaloosa" was a very well done period piece. I especially the sounds used for gunfire, at first I thought something was wrong with the sound on the DVD when I heard them, then I realized they were going for a more realistic sound.

Finally there is the latest "True Grit", also not a war movie. The people in that film seem real – and that they would actually fit the mindset of the people at the time. (original True Grit is still great too, for different reasons)

Well, they're never going to get it right if they don't try. I'd rather have a few bad movies and then a really good gem like "Glory".

I'm with Cleburne.

Glory was good ! Gettysburg better ! Gods and generals seemed abit to long drawn out and preachy ! But I'm a brit looking from the outside in ! So my take on things may be slightly different its not my nations history that in some cases may be getting very messed with ! But on the entertainment stakes any civil war programe holds some interest for me ! Ridley scotts gettysburg is being shown on history this week end so good or bad I will still be watching it !

Don't get me wrong, I really like Gettysburg too. :) G&G I just skip to the battle scenes.

> I really like Gettysburg too. :)

So do I, only thing really off-putting about it is the fat rebels (both side really, but the first Reb we see is a BBBBIIIGGG guy…).

And lest I forget, they should have told the re-enactors to wipe the D*MN smiles off their faces when doing Picket's Charge. I can pratically hear each of them thinking to themselves "Hot Dog! I'm in a movie about Gettysburg!"

For me – and, I suspect, many posters on TMP – one of the great pleasures of historical movies is the opportunity they offer to enjoy mistake-spotting and bask in the self-righteous glow of the pedant…

The reenactors in Gettysburg AND Gods and Generals were too clean! The Federal Army, and to a lesser extent the Rebels,(they were resupplied with new uniforms in June),were very dirty and ragged. I've read numerous accounts where Union commanders complain that thier men are without shoes,or blankets,and their clothing are near in shreds.
In those movies it looks like they all got a new issue right before the battles! Add to the fact the Grandfathers with white beards,and roly poly guys just don't portray CW soldiers very well at all!
If anyone has the chance to see a REALLY well done battle film,go to Antietam and watch the film they have. Skinny, filthy reenactors,and VERY well done battle scenes. Was supposed to be made inot a much longer production, but the producers allegedly ran out of funds..

Bob

Wow Bottom Dollar, you are one tough customer to please; BOB was a total snooze?

SPR too?

The dreaded "lack of character development" strikes again, my suggestion is if these were not up to snuff for you, you won't like anything Hollywood churns out regarding the ACW or any other war for that matter, so don't waste you time watching.

Good God.

I read they wanted to up the action quota for LINCOLN and planned to cast Samuel Jackson at Lincoln.

I think half the problem with getting a good movie out of hollywood is getting the head office to buy off on a 3 hour showtime. There's only so much you can do with 100 minutes.

The other half is that too much of hollywood has forgotten how to tell a story. Movies aren't fireworks displays, they need a story to go with the spectacle.

95th Regt. I heartily second your opinion on the Antietam film! The absolute best NPS film out there. I didn't know that it was supposed to be longer. I wish they could have done that.

Billy Yank

I agree about the new Antietam film. The living history people had to audition for the roles. I had the privilege of working with the production. It was done right, a model for other documentaries to follow.

I liked the battle scenes in Gods and Generals.

Mr. Beckner has written an excellent script filled with very believable, realistic characters. If they survive the politics of Hollywood and he is allowed to follow the advice of his historical advisors, To Appomattox could be one best Civil War era films yet produced.

Only time will tell.

YouTube link

This one had so many great scenes, so close to being great… but not quite there.

Double G, the last Hollywood war movie I liked was Hurt Locker. I am really fed up with the fact that Hollywood has forgotten to include a story along with the spectacle in most movies.

And what is spectacle without story? Yes, you guessed it, BULL :) It's gotten to the point that anytime I hear even the slightest "drumming " for advanced interest to anything Hollywood does which is historically related, I immediately identify that someone is getting ready to serve up a heaping portion of certified cow manure… which explains my initial reaction to this thread. In my experience, when something is good or is gonna be good, you don't get advanced warning.

BoB was a was "a total snooze?"

Holy Mother! At least you could identify with the characters!

The same was true of "Rome".

If you want HBO rubbish, try "The Pacific"! After the first two episodes I couldn't have cared if the Japs had won!

My message to Michael Beckner, is – Go For It!