| Tango01 | 28 Aug 2013 9:57 p.m. PST |
"For a whole generation of TV viewers, ABC's "North and South" remains a pinnacle of the miniseries format. With the miniseries coming back into vogue, it's no surprise that a network is bringing back the Civil War saga.
Discovery Channel announced on Thursday (August 22) that it will partner with Lionsgate on "North and South," which will once again be based on the trio of novels by John Jakes.
Jakes will serve as an executive producer on the project, which is only in development currently, meaning that the Discovery release doesn't include information on writers, directors or cast…"
From here
link Do you enjoy the last one miniserie? Amicalement
Armand |
| jowady | 28 Aug 2013 11:19 p.m. PST |
I bailed out on it about halfway through the second episode. It was just a soap opera. |
| Son of Liberty | 28 Aug 2013 11:21 p.m. PST |
I was one of the hundreds of re-enactors used for the Civil War battle scenes in the second half (Book 2.) Very long days of filming and there were quite a few injuries none of which were fatal. It was an incredible week of hard work for only 2 meals and $50.00 USD a day, but I wouldn't have missed it for the world. Regarding the finished product, well, there were some things that I liked and other things that made me cringe. The thing I liked most about it was trying to spot myself and my comrades in the various battle scenes. (I actually ended up having a few seconds "face time" during the episode that came after the first battle of Bull Run.) When friends would ask me about the series and wanted to know what scenes I was in, I would just tell them that I was easy to spot and just look for the guy in the blue uniform wearing a beard. (There were a LOT of us in blue uniforms and beards!) Personally, I would like to see the series remade. It's been almost 30 years since the original was filmed and I'm sure they could do some amazing things now with CGI to make the battle scenes and other historical bits look better. |
| Dynaman8789 | 29 Aug 2013 4:04 a.m. PST |
North and South is great! Till I watched that I never knew there was a helicopter at the first battle of Bull Run. It flew right over the house… |
| FireZouave | 29 Aug 2013 4:25 a.m. PST |
Soap opera as it was, I still enjoyed it for some reason. I would look forward to seeing them do a better job the 2nd time around, historically and dramatically. |
| darthfozzywig | 29 Aug 2013 8:42 a.m. PST |
I would just tell them that I was easy to spot and just look for the guy in the blue uniform wearing a beard. Well played. :) |
 John the OFM   | 29 Aug 2013 9:03 a.m. PST |
I liked the dance numbers. |
| Cleburne1863 | 29 Aug 2013 9:04 a.m. PST |
Yeah, it was a soap opera. I thought it wasn't that bad. I thought they did a good job trying to contrast two friends from two different worlds. All the other stuff was just fluff. They really didn't have the resources to do large battle reenactments, so I don't hold the battle scenes against them. Sure, they could have been better. A remake has potential. Either way, could be bad, but it could be good. |
| general btsherman | 29 Aug 2013 9:12 a.m. PST |
The first two books were ok. I never got into the TV series. |
| Tango01 | 29 Aug 2013 10:14 a.m. PST |
Many thanks for your comments boys!. Amicalement
Armand |
| Shagnasty | 29 Aug 2013 10:58 a.m. PST |
Ditto P H Lewis' comments. My "face time" was in the Appomatox sequence, leaning on a fence and puffing my pipe. It was a great experience on the whole. Met some of the stars, got invited to the wrap party by a cool/hot assistant director and got paid for the time! Almost broke even. I hope they do it again with skinnier extras. |
| Pan Marek | 29 Aug 2013 8:35 p.m. PST |
The entire problem is that they are using John Jakes novels as the basis for it. There is some great historical fiction out there about the Civil War. Why remake
"North and South"? |
| John the OFM | 30 Aug 2013 8:41 a.m. PST |
Why remake "North and South"? Simple. The company already owns the rights. Horrywood DOES NOT CARE about "historical accuracy" or irrelevant nonsense like that. It is totally secondary to the main mission, which is to make money.
"History" is a tool. If the history, as is, can be made into a usable script, well, that is nice. But not necessary. You have to have a script that THE NORMAL MOVIEGOER will want to see.
ACW fans, including reenactors and wargamers, are VERY LOW on the list of those who have to be pleased. Just off the top of my head, here is a partial list of movies whose producers touted their "historical accuracy":
The Patriot
Braveheart (Mel is either a liar or delusional)
The Heath Ledger "Four Feathers"
I leave enlarging this list as an exercise for the student. |
| Trajanus | 03 Sep 2013 6:37 a.m. PST |
Three good places to start though John! I'm sure there are many more although I'm holding off as I can't vouch for the movies whose producers touted their "historical accuracy" unless we take it as read that mostly all of them do! :o) |
| John Michael Priest | 05 Sep 2013 5:07 a.m. PST |
Check out "To Appomattox" miniseries. If it is done the way the historical consultants want it done, it should be good. We and the writer want to make it as accurate as possible while keeping the human interest side of it alive. I know that it should not be another "Gods and Generals." waiting to hear more from the writer. |
| Joes Shop | 08 Sep 2013 7:52 a.m. PST |
I think a remake at this point is a good idea. |
completes his initial Union force in 1:72nd scale.
