Gettysburg | Gods and Generals | "Must Attack" Clip | Warner Bros. Entertainment
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 чер 2011
- Available on Blu-ray Combo Pack and DVD 7/4! bit.ly/iZUxu4
Like us on Facebook on. kK900K
Follow us on Twitter / wb_home_ent
Connect with Warner Bros. Entertainment Online:
Follow Warner Bros. Entertainment INSTAGRAM: / warnerbrosentertainment
Like Warner Bros. Entertainment on FACEBOOK: / warnerbrosent
Follow Warner Bros. Entertainment TWITTER: / wbhomeent
At Warner Bros. Entertainment, we believe in the power of story. From classics to contemporary masterpieces, explore and watch a library full of extraordinary, stirring, and provocative entertainment that goes beyond the big screen. Subscribe to discover new favorites from the studio that brought you Friends, JOKER, the Conjuring Universe, and The Wizarding World of Harry Potter™.
Gettysburg | Gods and Generals | "Must Attack" Clip | Warner Bros. Entertainment
• Gettysburg | Gods and ...
Warner Bros. Entertainment
/ warnerbrosonline - Розваги
Martin Sheen did an outstanding performance as Lee. Many actors cannot act, but only be the same over and over again. Sheen is one who can act.
I loved the intensity he brought to the General.
Longstreet was right. A tactical redeployment to a stronger position would have been better than fighting an entrenched enemy with the high ground.
Lee was all but out of time, and there was all but no chance that Longstreet's maneuver would gain the results that Lee needed. That said, I personally would have attempted it regardless- but that's based on hindsight, which is 20/20...
@@manilajohn0182
Actually 2021. 😁
General Mead already had a fall back position for the last high ground just a North of Washington DC.
@Brad Johnson
Kind of slow on the uptake here, aren't we?
It would have been a logistical nightmares, too, to redeploy so sudden.
A very important detail about Lee was totally omitted in the movie. According to the late Shelby Foote, Lee was very ill at the time just prior to and throughout the battle. He was with fever and was not able to sleep for more than 2 hour a day. It is believed that Lee suffered a mild heart attack at the time of the battle. Moreover, according to Shely Foote, "Lee's blood was up." JEB Stuart's absence denied Lee knowledge of the ground and disposition of union forces. Lacking this critical information Lee went into battle impulsively and gave up his strategic objective which was the capture of Harrisburg, the capitol of PA, . The rest is history.
Well.. you heard the very same report that I did, concerning Gen. Lee. If these reports are right, then he was in no physical shape for a Military Campaign.. especially one of this particular magnitude. He had no way, though, of "Opting out" of his duties. If I would have been his Personal Physician, I would have taken him off-line immediately, and had President Jefferson Davis find another suitable replacement.. at least, until Gen. Lee could have safely resumed his duties. However, I don't suppose that would have been possible. Gen. Lee was, so to speak, stuck between a rock, and a hard place.
An important note is that Stuart did leave Lee with some cavalry he would be able to use for reconnaissance, but Lee did not
Theories range from heart attack to yellow fever but yes, reports do say he was taken very ill at the time.
Well, Shelby Foote is one the foremost scholars on the Civil War. So if he said it, then it's probably true.
Or he had diarrhea
I love that in these scene, little does General Longstreet know, but Lee is completely considering his suggestion. But he has to weigh against the thoughts of the other commanders. In from their responses attack is the only option.
Longstreet isnt making a recommendation, at this point in the converversation....it's just information.
It's Lee's decision to make.
(the way I see it)
It’s over Lee. I have the high ground.
Lee: You underestimate my power!
The actor playing General Ewell, the man on the far left of the Generals speaking to General Lee who says "And vacate this position? (1:38) is Timothy Scott. He was also in Lonesome Dove as Pea Eye Parker. Another little tidbit, Robert Duvall, who played General Lee in Gods and Generals was also in Lonesome Dove alongside Timothy Scott. Unfortunately Mr. Scott died in 1995 aged 57 of lung cancer.
This scene was much needed
It's a great scene. It would have explained a lot of other scenes: fortified, a more realistic concecept, on what was about to occur.
@@savanahmclary4465 IT's a great scene, but it really is repetitive of what he says to longstreet later that he spoke some excellent officers and they dont like moving around to the right. the later scene conveys the same information but in a more brief format, so this scene was most likely cut for time.
@@firefalcon9368 Who is complaining about the film? We are just tickled pink that the "Cancel Culture" let Maxwell make it at all. They got the 3rd part of the series canceled. I just Love Re enacting with my history buff friends.
You should have been with us at the premiere... In a Northern Movie theater .... full of Southerners...
This scene is great because it demonstrates that the army had already made a strategic mistake. They captured a town of no military importance, were faced with an entrenched enemy, and were faced with three scenarios. Retreat, redeploy, and attack. They couldn't just sit where they were. Morale and pride deprived this army of the first two options; the Confederate army survived on its own reputation for invincibility. But everyone knew an attack would be costly if not suicidal.
The only real way to have achieved victory would have been not to engage at all, but that die was cast the moment Heath and Buford engaged. Since Lee and all these generals agreed that they could not retreat (honestly, while we with the benefit of centuries of hindsight would call that damnable foolishness, the very fact that these generals knew their armies, were aware of what laid before them, and still thought retreat or maneuver was not an option gives weight to the idea that they had some serious concerns about losing morale), the moment they were fully engaged, they had already lost.
Lee understood that a retreat here would only lead to the inevitable conclusion that occurred at Appomattox. He knew, they all knew that the vice was tightening around Vicksburg and that it would likely surrender soon. Lee knew the army he commanded was at its physical peak (if not it's command peak, that died with Jackson) and would only get weaker with time while the enemy would likely only grow stronger. He understood that this would likely be the last major offensive his army would be able to sustain and that while an army that defends can win a battle it is offensive victories that win wars. He was failed badly by all of his corp commanders at Gettysburg and he himself was not at his best but it was not pride or morale that pushed Lee to seek a victory on the second and third day but necessity.
Had Jackson lived their would have been no second day at Gettysburg nor third but likely a pursuit of the defeated and dispirited Army of the Potomac. Had Lee sent troops west as many have suggested he should have done and remained purely on the defense in Virginia they would have been indifferently lead by generals he did not know and that he had no confidence in and would likely would have changed little or nothing in that theater when they arrived. Indeed that is exactly what did happen when Longstreet and two divisions were feed into the meat grinder at Chickamauga. They delivered the only victory of the Army of the Tennessee and the fruits of that victory were promptly squandered. Had Lee gone with troops to the West it might have changed the course of events but then who would he trust to leave behind to defend Virginia? With Jackson dead there was nobody left to fill that role. Longstreet was fine a Corp commander as the Confederates ever produced but he was not fit for independent command as he proved very well at Knoxville TN after Chickamauga.
The seeds of defeat at Gettysburg were sowed the in the death of Jackson after Chancellorsville. They were sown in the glory seeking of Stuart before the campaign for Gettysburg even began. And they were sown in the failure of Hill and Heth to prevent a general engagement on the first day and when events provided them with the chance of victory, of Ewell to seize that chance when it came.
Lee's after action report and Longstreet's memoirs make clear that Lee's plan of campaign had been to maneuver the AotP into attacking the AoNV. The unexpected meeting engagement on 1 July effectively ruined that possibility by throwing the AotP onto the defensive and casting the tactical initiative onto the AoNV.
The strategic objective of the campaign had been to do something to remove pressure from the Confederate defenders at Vicksburg, and Vicksburg had been placed under siege even before Lee's campaign began- so the clock was ticking. Withdrawing to another location in the area was not an option- primarily because the AoNV was living off of the land, and Confederate foraging parties could not operate in such proximity to the AotP, and because of the time factor at Vicksburg. From the point that the AoNV made contact with the AotP, Lee had to take action within the time frame set by the supplies collected in the army's trains thus far in the campaign- which gave him 4-5 days. He tried within that time frame and failed.
While Longstreet's flanking maneuver (one almost certainly tactical in nature) was viable on the surface, it was likely clear to Lee that after having spent two days on the defensive, the AotP was unlikely to assume the offensive simply because the AoNV was in motion- particularly when they could still remain between the AoNV and Washington D.C.
Responsibility for the defeat has often been placed on Lee's lieutenants, but that is largely untrue. Ewell's decision on 1 July was correct at the time, and has only come to be seen as a mistake with the benefit of information made available after the war- which Ewell did not have at decision time. Stuart's episode was Lee's mistake. Lee sanctioned Stuart's ride, and Lee issued Stuart contradictory orders which coincided in time and were all but impossible to carry out. Stuart tried to carry them out and predictably failed. Longstreet was never issued a sunrise attack order, and the delay in his attack on 2 July was largely due to an incorrect choice of road which was set by other officers.
Lee himself made the most significant error, in ordering Stuart to gather supplies for the use of the army, and in not making use of the cavalry left behind after Stuart marched. That said, Lee's errors are ultimately due to the pressure laid on him by the progress of the war to date, the additional pressure of time, and the necessity of attempting too much with far too little.
oh, if the south only had the wisdom of demontrond!
Realistically speaking we're talking about a time of warfare where making head on charges into fortified positions held by well trained men and artillery was considered not only a valid tactical move but also one to show the army commander was 'not afraid of making tough choices'.
The battle at Gettysburg was a mistake all the way around. Lee never intended to fight there, and if Stuart had been out in front of the army doing his job instead of galavanting around the countryside showing off this wouldn't have happened. The purpose of cavalry is to scout ahead of the army and then act as a quick strike force; if Stuart had been where he should have been he would have seen the Federal troops ahead of the main Confederate force and could have warned Lee, thereby avoiding the battle and the loss. Lee intended to bring Stuart up on charges and court-martial him, but he didn't.
A flanking movement without the bulk of your cavalry is utter insanity
Actually bulk of the cavalry was still with the ANV, Lee sent Stuart on his missions with a small force to complete it so that is why Stuart couldn't do a thing.
@@mr.tobacco1708 Stuart had the larger part of the cavalry, 3 Brigades. 2 kept with Lee and Lee thought them to be of inferior quality and didn't utilize them fully.
This clip is from "Gettysburg", the sequel.
Gods and Generals is a prequel, Gettysburg was made first
They cut out alot of scenes that would have made the movie make more sense.
it's 4 hours long...
It was cable Tv series....it would have been a 6 hour movie
It made sense, but yeah, scenes like this would have made it make even MORE sense.
@@SantomPh Yeah, but Gettysburg was not originally a film. It was a mini-series for TNT. It later showed up on TNT in just that form.
Just to set the record straight, this clip is from Gettysburg- not God’s and Generals-
I know, because I was in Gods and Generals, General Lee was portrayed by none other than the great Robert Duvall , a direct descendant of Robert E Lee!
I have not seen this scene in Gettysburg. And I have watched it a few times. Maybe it was cut?
Neat, I did not know Duvall was a descendant of Lee!
@@honeybadger6313 it was cut but is found in the extended-play version of Gettysburg.
Why was this great scene!
All Lee needed to do was keep his army as intact as possible until the presidential election of 1864, which was only 16 months after Gettysburg. A Southern victory was not needed here but what was desperately needed was avoiding a Northern victory. Outnumbered armies should NEVER attack stronger armies in a fortified position. That's just 19th century military training 101. You make the enemy attack you at a place of YOUR choosing. Imagine if the South Haden't been cut to pieces here and Lee was able to send Longstreet's corp South a 2nd time to defend Sherman's march on Atalanta. It was due to the fall of Atlanta that the North took renewed hope and voted Lincoln in for a 2nd term. Had Lincoln lost re-election, McClellan would have sued for peace with the Confederacy.
In a war that lasted 4 years, 16 months is a very long time...a lot happened in the first 16 months. Trying to wait it out while 100,000+ strong Union armies continue to invade was not an option. Through Brilliance, and pure luck they stopped the Feds at Chancellorsville, That wasn’t likely to happen again....
All the meanwhile in the opposite theater, at the very same moment you had the siege of Vicksburg. The Union was going to get victories regardless so long as the war continued to played out.
Vicksburg and the resulting campaign in the deep south would likely be more than enough to sway the war opinion in Lincoln's favor.
@@SantomPh No...if Atlanta had been able to hold out in 1864 as Lee continued to dig in in Virginia, it is much more likely that McClellan would have won the presidential election. He would have negotiated a settlement with the Confederacy. The key to the South losing the war was the loss of Atlanta.
I agree. Atlanta was always the key. It was the Central Railhead and supply depot of the entire Confederacy. New Orleans and Nashville were both occupied early in the War. Making the Rail Connection between Atlanta and Richmond the lifeline of the South. Had Lee and Longstreet working together with the Army of Tennessee devised a strategy to protect Atlanta and its rail connections with Richmond. Then the South could have outlasted all Union efforts to end the war by military force and Lincoln would not have been reelected. But all Lee saw was direct confrontation after direct confrontation. And that doomed the Confederacy.
@@mikesuggs1642 a defense of Atlanta would never have happened because of the Conferencey refusal to form a proper central command to fight the war. The south may have been united in their hatred of the North and Federal government but that's really all they were united in.
00:53 If I were Lee, "That is NOT what I asked you, Gen'l!"
Nice Video 👍
Is there no other option then to attack .....? yeah there’s a bunch of them actually. That’s why Caesar’s name will live on for another 2000 years and we won’t remember Lee will be a jeopardy answer
Extremely few people are remembered for 2,000 years. And Caesar has the advantage of the casino and the salad.
Say whatever else you want about Lee. But his people loved him.
@@ribonucleic He wrote the current calander we use today, hence July and August as months. That's gonna last awhile until the Chinese take over, then it's the year of the Rat time.
I wish they would have took those books and made an HBO series. And really made it right with how brutal the warfare was and even the political environment. I've read the Shaara novels and they really flowed well as far as story.
After “Saving Private Ryan”, the kind of sanitized battlefield scenes you see in this movie are almost obscene in their untruthfulness. Even if network standards forbade blood, there should have been a soundtrack full of anguished screaming.
@@ribonucleic I think when you take away the blood it turns it all into this glorious dream. It was a throw back to the John Wayne Westerns where people got shot, grabbed thier chest and spun around...and died. So the mindset just wove this epic thing. There was a shot in Gettysburg where they ran face first into a firing cannon to the epic music. You saw men fall back in a cloud of smoke. The actors were all plump and fairly clean. You did not see the burden of war.
That would be amazing especially if they adapted the books he wrote about the Western Theater like Blaze of Glory.
@@rc59191 I just wish he'd taken more time with World War I and World War II...he condensed WWI into a single book, then only spent one book on the Pacific War. He could've done way more with both.
WWI Book One - War in Europe Part I (before U.S. joins)
WWI Book Two - War in Mediterranean (Dardanelles/Turkey)
WWI Book Three - War at Sea (U-Boats and Jutland; mention Lusitania and Britannic)
WWI Book Four - War in the East (Russian Revolution)
WWI Book Five - War in Europe Part II (U.S. joins and Onward)
WWII Europe Book One - Preliminaries (Rhineland, Anschluss, Sudetenland, Czechoslovakia, and Poland)
WWII Europe Book Two - North by West (Scandinavia, Benelux, & France)
WWII Europe Book Three - Rise of the Fox (War in Africa)
WWII Europe Book Four - Poking the Bear (Barbarossa)
WWII Europe Book Five - Taking Mare Nostrum (African & Italian Campaigns)
WWII Europe Book Six - Overlord (Landings in France and the march East)
WWII Europe Book Seven - The Wrath of the Bear (Russia's March West)
WWII Europe Book Eight - Into the Abyss (January-May 1945)
WWII Pacific Book One - Preliminaries (War in China & Pearl Harbor Attack)
WWII Pacific Book Two - Onslaught (Malaya, Philippines, Dutch East Indies, & Indian Ocean)
WWII Pacific Book Three - Incredible Victory (Doolittle Raid, Coral Sea, & Midway
WWII Pacific Book Four - Watchtower (Solomons & New Guinea Campaigns)
WWII Pacific Book Five - The March West (Micronesia & the Attack on Truk)
WWII Pacific Book Six - Setting Sun (Philippine Sea, Marianas, Pelelieu, Angaur)
WWII Pacific Book Seven - The Return (Philippines Campaign & Battle of Leyte Gulf)
WWII Pacific Book Eight - (Iwo Jima, Okinawa, & the End)
This scene ended up on the cutting room floor. Was not in the movie that was released.
I gotta side with General AP Hill on this one. Man is a longwinded soul I tell you.
Until you have actually visited Gettysburg battlefield, and walked and driven the different parts of the entire area, can one really get a feel for what each Army had to go through. The South took such a beating at the total loss of life, and marching North, you knew that it was going to be met with a large contingent of Northern troops somewhere, it did not matter. The Army of Northern Virginia was not going to be allowed to get to Harrisburg, Pa. which is where Lee wanted to go. I find it hard to believe, that he thought he could win and sue for peace in 1963. The wife and I drove there in August 2019. I will never ever forget my time there, and highly tell everybody to visit the area. You will not forget or regret going there. Money well spent on a vacation. Believe me.
It should have a master of this movie and apply all the cuts
This is the most important scene to get into Lee´s strategy and why he was acting so on the 2nd and 3rd day of the battle. And they cut it out of the theatrical version,...
Could you add the deleted scene of 'Gods and Generals' with Jackson recieving his Christmas gift from Stuart?
It seems to me that Lee was interested in ending the war as soon as possible. This led him to what I believe was some overly aggressive moves.
the rebs were losing vicksburg.. lee didnt want to invade penna at all but was forced to try something... vicksburg fell the same day gettysburg ends..
Had Stonewall been alive for that fight they would have taken that hill and won the battle!!!!!!!!!!
ya never know. i've heard some historians say that little round top was a useful position, especially on day 3. but not vital.
it's Stonewall's men attacking that hill, but the order was direct from Lee to Ewell to take the hill "if practicable". it still would have unfolded as it did. Jackson would be mighty angry that the order went past him, but the failure to take the heights rendered that flank useless for the rest of the battle as far as Lee was concerned. If anything Jackson would probably be killed at some point here , given the ferocity of the fighting on the first 2 days.
@@JoefromNJ1 The Union had some artillery up on Little Round Top on day 3, but it was of little use. The round, uneven surface of the summit hindered the aiming of the guns. Only a few spots were usable.
All these deleted scenes should've been the entire film shown in theaters when it 1st came out in October of 1993. Altogether, they only added about an additional 16 minutes to the movie?? Something in that range
Actually, the original movie was 4 hours long, and they edited it down to a little more than 3 for theatrical release. It was so long it was released with an intermission, the last major motion picture to do so.
@@traveller4790 Not only that, but the movie probably would have done better if they had it out in more theatres, because of it's length, many theatres didn't want it, so it's release was so limited to a small amount of theatres at that time.
It could have been 5hours long and still not include everything it should.
I'm hoping for a full length version in all its glory.
@@CS-zn6pp When I saw Gods & Generals in the theater back in '03, the Battle of Antietam wasn't in the film when initially released. The full length feature, inclusive of that wartime event, is on DVD and Blu-ray. I didn't know it until I saw it as such 10 years ago at a pal's crib
@@brianschumacher5914 It was in limited release, Mr. Schumacher. That's correct. It was originally supposed to be titled The Killer Angels like the late Michael Sharra's novel of the same name. Ted Turner wanted it as Gettysburg bc he felt more ppl knew it better as name recognition. He probably was right
what he wouldve given to have stonewall...however i dont think even stonewall could've moved the union army that week
Wrong movie clip for the title clip. This is from the movie "Gettysburg."
The best civil war movie by far. The only movie telling the truth.
Lee was in an almost impossible situation by the evening of 1 July. That unexpected meeting engagement had been a disaster for Lee by ruining his plan of campaign. From both a strategic and operational viewpoint, he was effectively out of time and had little choice but to either attack or abandon the campaign in failure. That said, He was in this position because of errors which he made before the battle even began. It's just simply wrong to say that Longstreet failed Lee, that Ewell failed Lee, or that Stuart failed him. Lee erred- either due to overconfidence or due to the existing overall war situation (the Confederacy was losing by mid- 1863).
Lack of intel.
Somebody turned Lee....
It seems to me, that even if the more effective decisions were made by the south in the civil war, eventually, the resources of the north would have prevailed, unless the victories by the south were overwhelmingly successful. It can be argued that Grant threw his men and material at the south with blind abandon, and that ultimately, is what won the war. It also cannot be presumed that Lee's "legendary" strategy and tactics would overcome every single union military mind.
Possible. The South knew going in that they would have to win a war like their fathers and grandfathers did in the American Revolution, which was simply where the North out of wanting to fight and gain political recognition by other powerful countries. 1. The Northern states were getting weary of fighting, especially when Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation(not very popular no matter what some might say up North). BUT, the biggest difference between the Civil War and the American Revolution was that the union wasn't thousands of miles away and Lincoln had arrested or displaced anyone who opposed the war that had any power. Another key was the battle of Vicksburg, which in my opinion was bigger than Gettysburg was a union victory 1 day after Gettysburg. If Lee had done what Longstreet suggested after Chancellorsville, which was use the returning surplus of soldiers to help Hood in Tennessee and possibly relieve Pemberton at Vicksburg, would have had a bigger success than Gettysburg could have on the morale of the North and forced a peace. 2. No country worth anything would help the South after Antietam and the Emancipation Proclamation, but the South didn't know that at the time.
As was the rule of US officers of the period, Lee was an adherent of Baron Jomini, who argued that the decisive victory was the key to winning a war. Jomini offered as examples of decisive battles Cannae, Ulm, Jena, Austerlitz, etc. (Unfortunately for his thesis, neither Hannibal nor Napoleon actually won their wars.). And so generals on both sides kept trying for the decisive battle and failing to achieve it. Lee kept at it even though he did not have the resources to do so, and it cost him. He would have done better to have followed the path of another Virginian, a fellow by the name of Washington, who finally learned he needed to maintain a force in being and seek battle only when circumstances were decidedly in his favor.
Grant hardly threw in men and materiel with blind abandon. He was forced into an campaign of attrition by the failure of Butler to advance on Richmond from the south. Grant's plan had no fewer than five simultaneous advances, but only he and Sherman were up to the job. Because McClellan was opposing Lincoln in November, Grant had to try to win a major victory over Lee to boost Lincoln's electibility. As it turned out Sherman and Farragut won the crucial victories. Beating Lee in front of Richmond was the war's toughest assignment for a Union commander, but Grant never took a backward step.
@@neilpemberton5523 Hi Neil, I think your comments are spot on. Grant did not act "with blind abandon," but rather with relentless pressure on Lee's army. Even before their first encounter with each other Longstreet informed Lee that Grant would not let the Army of Northern Virginia breathe let alone rest and refit. Longstreet and Grant were very close since their days at West Point decades earlier. Longstreet introduced Grant to his cousin Julia Dent and was the best man at their wedding. Lee had every reason to trust Longstreet's assessment of Grant.
0:10 TIMOTHY SCOTT!!! Better known as Pea Eye Parker!!! Nice to see his scene ✊🏻✊🏻✊🏻
I thought I’d be the only person to recognize him from Lonesome Dove lol
After 8:00pm on July 1st 1863 the Confederate Army was never going to win that fight.
Had they occupied either Cemetery Hill or Culp's Hill there was a possibility, but with the way the Army was strung out, the communication issues, lack of reconnaissance, and the newness of at least two corps commanders. The opportunity was gone with the wind.
I have the directors cut of both Gettysburg and Gods and Generals and why these scenes were deleted from the originals cuts out major parts that were very important. Although I e read the books, and knew what had happened, this scene is key. Longstreet was very much right and should have moved, if not the entire army, at the very least his Corps and force the Union army to dislodge themselves from their virtually impregnable position and attack the confederates with the confederate army on ground of their choosing
Um wrong movie 🎥. Robert Duvall played Robert E. Lee in Gods and Generals not Martin Sheen
I thought Robert Duvall played Lee in G+G? Sheen played him in Gettysburg. Am I wrong?
As if Gen Meade was going to let that happen. Backed yourself into a corner eh?!
Why was this great scene removed??
Probably for pacing and time
It also makes them look exceedingly stupid. No one presented a compelling reason to reject Longstreet's plan.
Hmm...or it makes them look like they're quietly and submissively passing the buck to try to get out of Ewell's mess for not taking the hill.
Because the movie was 4 hours long and they needed to trim it down. Even after some severe editing, the moving still came out to more than 3 hours and was released with an intermission.
@@Tiger74147 Incorrect! Their are many arguments to Longstreet's plans of fighting a strategic defensive battle at this point. It is the fact that the south lost this battle that makes any alternative seem better. But alternatives could have resulted in worse scenarios.... The south did not have unlimited means to wage war, travel, feed their men & horses, repair their equipment, care for their wounded, and maintain supply routes. Even if the south won this battle. The north would ALWAYS have unlimited resources by comparison to the south.
General Ewell disobeyed Lee’s orders earlier that day to take that hill and that led to their defeat
Well, it's partly Lee's fault. He didn't say, "Take that hill." He said, "Take that hill if practical." Ewell didn't think it practical.
Ewell was foolish, but Lee had a hand in that mistake.
Ewell was the commanding officer at the point of contact, it was his decision to make
@@thodan467 Lee also said to take that hill in an order.
@@SouthernGentleman
If practicable without initiating a major engagement.
He was not there, Hill was it was his decision not Lees.
@@thodan467 Except it was practical and other Generals pointed it out to Ewell
Why does Jubal Early have a Prussian accent?
What’s interesting is how warfare has evolved over the centuries! In medieval times and earlier, soldiers wore metal armor and had shields to protect themselves from the enemy! Had Lee’s army used shields, would these tools have helped them win the war? 🧐
Shields would have been no help against the artillery and rifle muskets of that time
And so what if the AOV had taken Culps and Cemetary Hills evening of July 1st?? These 2 hills aren't the keys to the Union! Meade would have fallen back to the Round tops or the Pipe Creek line, forcing the always to aggressive Lee to pursue and further extend his lines of supply. And befuddled with Stuart gone (at Lee's orders) he'd bungled ahead attacking and loosing more men. The south could've had a chance if Longstreet had been given command of the AOV. He knew when to fight a defensive vs offensive action. Lee was: attack, attack, attack, attack....worked ok until he had bled his army weak and had half his top commanders killed or put out of action, and finally faced a competent leading general (Meade and then Grant). Doomed to fail. Period.
Hancock was in charge up on the hills that afternoon. He had several fresh brigades already up there, with more not too far away. He was from Pennsylvania. He would have fought to the last man to hold that ground.
One historical element that comes through, and I'm glad we are moving past this social wall, is that of being "honorable". I put honorable in quotes because the honor that was pursued then wasn't truly honor! Back then, it was honorable to not admit an error and correct it, but push forward even if it meant defeat. Imagine history if Lee said "this battle ended up not being one which I wanted, lets retreat during the quiet of night and continue on the road"
Lee regretted his waste of Pickett's Division on the last day but he was following classical Napoleonic tactics. He'd hit both Union flanks to no avail so he attacked the center in the hope that Meade had weakened his center to strengthen his flanks.
This is not from gods an generals....its from gettysburg
Check the title more closely and observe the picture that zooms in at the end. It's from the set that includes both movies.
Had Jackson been there in command of the 2nd Corps, he would have taken that high ground and Gettysburg would have ended very differently. The luckiest shot for the North in all the war was the friendly fire that killed Jackson at Chancellorsville.
Would have, could have ...
Nothing is certain in retrospective because it didn't happen.
@@NardoVogt In most cases, I would agree with you, but with the history of Jackson, if the same scenario played out he would have pushed his men until the flanks of the union had vacated all defensible terrain.
Jackson is my all time favorite. I still don't think it would've happened even if he was there. I think the best idea was Longstreets. Tactical withdraw to force the Union off the high ground March toward Washington and dig in on high ground of their choosing and force the Union to charge their positions.
@@royfairchild6895 I can completely see your point and agree that Longstreet's plan would have been the better plan as the situation played out. What ifs don't count for anything, what happened happened. BUT, I still disagree with you that Jackson wouldn't have pushed his men to take the main heights beyond Gettysburg. Jackson was notorious for gaining knowledge of the ground, no matter where he was. Would he have done so before the battle of Gettysburg? Who knows, but again, his history would prove he would do so(he loved making maps). If Jackson had his scouts map out the landscape of Gettysburg and he knew about Culps Hill forming a natural defense/flanking movement, Jackson would have lusted after that position and driven his men forward no matter what. Even if he didn't, being an artillery man, he would have seen the danger of Culps Hill and Cemetery Ridge and advanced hard anyway. That's just my opinion of course, but I think there is justification based on what he normally would do before and during battles.
@@KingofDiamonds85 We can't even be sure if he would have been in the same position to make that choice IF he was alive.
There are so, so many variables in this that cannot be counted in. Heck, the bullet that killed him was a freak accident in itself!
For all its worth, I think we can see that the way things played out are the things that have played out - and for the better in my personal opinion in this specific case.
Lee wanted to go. His other Generals i think had a better idea what to do....keep flanking Lee just wanted to just attack. .......not very smart.
Sheen? Mmmmmmmmmmmm ..... no
“Gods and Generals” is misleading.
I agree. I don't think these scenes were accurately portrayed.
@@garneroutlaw1 I mean, this scene is from the movie “Gettysburg,” not “Gods and Generals.”
Wrong movie
Read the description.
Robert Duvall played a better Robert E lee 👏
No way!
Providence took stonewall Jackson The only commander who could've changed Gettysburg.
No he couldn’t, he would have not been at Gettysburg. He would have been on the West Bank of the Susquehanna river opposite of Harrisburg probing defenses with his whole Corp and if he got the order to go West he would have taken his time to do it hoping he can make an attack at Harrisburg.
Kind of a moot point though. If Jackson had been commander there wouldn't have been a Gettysburg. Something else, possibly an invasion, but not a Gettysburg. Too much has to line up for exact situation to reshape.
@@refugeeca Never mind that Jackson outside of the Valley was pretty useless. And Ewell's men had come down from Harrisburg on a forced march to get to Gettysburg. They were completely exhausted in the first place, and by the time they got to Culp's Hill, it was already being fortified. It was bad enough that Lee forgot that he who holds the high ground will usually come out on top (if they aren't pulled off the high ground like the Regulars at Chancellorsville), it only gets more complicated if works have been thrown up.
What would Jackson had said if he were there? "My left arm hurts."
@@MrSirAngrist Riiight, like he was at Chancellorsville. Too bad he was killed there.
@@johncarpenter3502 too bad you're wrong. He WAS at Chancellorsville. Ever hear of Jackson's flank march on the Orange Plank Road? He was shot on the second night after he managed to get his corps around the federals. He died days later of the pneumonia he contracted that night while waiting to get evacuated.
They. never bothered to film Lee giving his soldiers permission to take free blacks in the North as slaves
Fortunately, Lee was exactly the wrong general for his masters
and they did not see it
give me the name of the person who would have won that war for the south? they were grossly outnumbered in men and supplies. the only reason the north won was due to having a surplus of men and supplies. grant was no genius - he just sent men to slaughter and overwhelmed the south. clearly, you don't see very much, either.
@@beavis4play A careful comparison of the two generals' forces and the casualties which they suffered in all of their battles will reveal that Lee's forces actually suffered greater casualties than Grant's did.
While Grant was technically no genius, his 1864 campaign has no parallel on either side during the civil war, because of his coordination of five Union armies toward a common objective. This stands in stark contrast to Lee, who almost never looked outside of Virginia.
@@manilajohn0182 -i wasn't talking about this one battel. and a CAREFUL COMPARISON will show what i'm saying to be true. btw - while grant was running the army at the time - he was no where near gettysburg ........your comparisons need to be a little less sloppy.
@@beavis4play Thomas J (Stonewall) Jackson
Lee was not free to conduct his own strategy. Jeff Davis and the Richmond crew required that Lee always be in a position to cover Richmond.
Lee was the biggest loser in military history. So beloved by people who saw him as a gentleman etc. but his blunder into the north was a grand mistake. He has no purpose for this action and no grand vision. All of his actions were without vision. He never capitalized on his tactical victories.
Gettysburg was a blunder. Soon as he learnt about the picket forces fighting he should have withdrawn. The union high point was Gettysburg and the subordinate generals saved the day. Buford was the rockstar that saved the union forces and of course the rising star was Custer amongst others.
The more important battle strategically was happening basically at the same time with grant and Vicksburg. The union victory rhere split the confederacy in two and Lincoln finally found a capable general to lead an army. Grant is polar opposite to Lee.
He was a pit fighter who saw the grand vision how to end the war where Lee was a pompous cream puff. Who only saw his hubris at the cost of treasure.
Once Lee is studied. It’s easy to see he was a tactical master but he was not a war winner
Robert Duvall was a much better Lee.
He looked like him but Martin Sheen has that intensity when he speaks and charisma that made his portrayal something special.
nope
Martin Sheen's most wooden performance... fortunately, Jeff Daniels makes up for it...
At least he was better at Spawn. Nah, he's even worse at that one..
@Gary Daniel Exactly. I read Killer Angels years ago and the movie is faithful to the book. What the real participants said or how they acted is largely speculation.
Lee was known earlier on as The Marble Man. Maybe that's what Sheen captured.
Martin Sheen is a great actor, but this terrible accent he was doing ruins every scene.
This movie is hot garbage.
Hardly.
@@joshuadesautels so you like long winded, dull, confederate propaganda? Different strokes I guess