Civil War – 18 Cinema Lane

Out of the movies from Robert Duvall’s filmography, I’ve written about To Kill a Mockingbird (which I liked), The Terry Fox Story (which I also liked), and Network (which I wasn’t a fan of). While looking through his filmography for Taking Up Room’s Robert Duvall Tribute Blogathon, I discovered he starred in the 2003 movie, Gods and Generals. I hadn’t seen this film prior to the event. But because of its association with the Movieguide Awards, I had heard of it before. At the 2004 Movieguide Awards, Stephen Lang won an acting award called the ‘Grace Award for Movies’ for his portrayal of General Stonewall Jackson. Gods and Generals also won the ‘Faith & Freedom Award for Movies’ at the 2004 Movieguide Awards. I wasn’t able to find any information about the other nominees for those aforementioned categories. Therefore, I cannot comment on who should or should not have won. But, through my review, I want to determine if, in my opinion, Gods and Generals deserved to be nominated. Selecting the 2003 film also gave me an excuse to review another title of Robert’s.

*Gods and Generals* poster created by Ted Turner Pictures, Antietam Filmworks, Esparza / Katz Productions, Rehme Productions, Mace Neufeld Productions, and Warner Bros.

Things I liked about the film:

The acting: Since Robert Duvall is the reason why I’m reviewing Gods and Generals, I’ll talk about his acting performance first. In the 2003 movie, Robert portrays General Robert E. Lee. Throughout the movie, I noticed the consistent calmness he brought to his performance. At the beginning of Gods and Generals, General Robert E. Lee turns down an invitation. The tone of voice he adopts is very articulate and matter of fact. There’s a gentleness in his eyes that shows he holds no ill-feelings or disrespect toward receiving the invitation in the first place. Robert’s approach to portraying General Robert E. Lee appeared to have genuine thought and effort put into it. Meanwhile, I liked Jeff Daniels’ portrayal of Lieutenant Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain! Jeff brought a tenderness that made Lieutenant Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain interesting to watch. One of the most captivating scenes in Gods and Generals is when Lieutenant Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain and his wife, Fanny, discuss his upcoming departure to the United States Army. Their interaction is very bittersweet, yet tender. Their gentle tone of voice holds the love they share for each other. Both Fanny (portrayed by Mira Sorvino) and Lieutenant Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain carry sadness on their faces, especially in their eyes, unsure what their future will hold. Jeff’s and Mira’s acting abilities effectively sold the believability of Lieutenant Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain and Fanny’s relationship!

I brought up in this review’s introduction how, at the 2004 Movieguide Awards, Stephen Lang won an acting award called the ‘Grace Award for Movies’ for his portrayal of General Stonewall Jackson. Now that I’ve seen his performance for myself, I can, honestly, say his nomination was well deserved! Stephen brought versatility to his portrayal of General Stonewall Jackson, allowing his performance to be well-rounded. Because of Stephen’s acting talents, scenes he (as General Stonewall Jackson) appeared in were emotionally effective. A great example is when General Stonewall Jackson and his wife, Anna, read the Bible together before he leaves for the Battle of Manassas. The gentle, yet loving tone of voice from both General Stonewall Jackson and Anna (portrayed by Kali Rocha) showed how seriously they took their relationship. The look in their eyes was that of longing, longing for more time together as well as longing to be loved by each other. Anna and General Stonewall Jackson’s interaction in that scene showcased a moment of tenderness, reflection, and true love. This was achieved because of the strength of Stephen’s and Kali’s acting abilities!

Historical accuracy: What can ultimately make or break a historical movie is its historical accuracy. If the creative team behind a historical film effectively executes that production’s historical accuracy, the film in question can present the illusion of immersion. This illusion was achieved in Gods and Generals! From the set design to the costume design and even the finest of details, everything looked and felt like the Civil War era. I was impressed how simple items, like a doll or a piano, appeared to have come straight out of that time-period. Other elements, like the dialect, helped bring authenticity to the production. Looking back on Gods and Generals, the creative team’s research into the Civil War era is very evident!

How long shots were utilized: Long shots can be incorporated into a film for a variety of reasons. In “sword & sandal” films, long shots capture the scope of larger set designs. Films featuring armies, teams, or crowds will showcase the size of those groups through long shots. In Gods and Generals, however, long shots were utilized to present establishing shots (shots that establish a story’s location). One example is when Fredericksburg, Virginia is introduced in the story. The long shot used captured an aerial view of the town. Through this perspective, hues of black, white, green, blue, brown, and even purple appeared to nicely blend together. How the town was shown on screen looked like a watercolor painting! Presenting places like Fredericksburg, Virginia with a long shot helped add visually appealing images to Gods and Generals.

The Robert Duvall Tribute Blogathon banner created by Rebecca from Taking Up Room

What I didn’t like about the film:

The run-time: IMDB lists Gods and Generals’s run-time as a little over three-and-a-half-hours. After seeing the movie, however, I felt like I spent three and a half years watching it. I recognize depicting a historical event through film takes time, whether it be battles or certain individuals interacting with one another. For a historical story like Gods and Generals, there are a lot of moving parts involved. But some scenes in the 2003 film were either drawn out too long or seemed unnecessary. One example is a scene where a soldier (who also happened to be a background character) explained to his fellow soldiers what they should do with his belongings if he dies on the battlefield. Personally, I think Gods and Generals should have been presented as a mini-series. Therefore, the story’s key individuals and events would have received their due diligence.

A dialogue-heavy film: In any movie, including historical pictures, dialogue plays an important role in storytelling. Through dialogue, ideas are expressed, emotions are shared, and characters give pieces of their heart to each other and the audience. But if a movie is dialogue-heavy, it forces the audience to actively pay attention to what they’re watching or else they’ll miss important context. Gods and Generals is a dialogue-heavy film, featuring long stretches of time where characters engage in conversations with one another. What also works against Gods and Generals is its little over three-and-a-half-hour run-time I already brought up in this review. While there were battles and action-heavy scenes throughout the movie, they were far and few between compared to the dialogue-heavy scenes. Having an ebb and flow of action and dialogue-heavy scenes would have maintained a steadier pace.

Underutilizing Robert Duvall and Jeff Daniels: Robert Duvall’s involvement in Gods and Generals is the reason why I wanted to review the film. As I mentioned earlier in this review, I liked Jeff Daniels’ portrayal of Lieutenant Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain. But compared to Stephen Lang and his portrayal of General Stonewall Jackson, it seemed like the acting talents of Jeff and Robert were utilized sparingly. In fact, it got to the point where the movie became ‘The General Stonewall Jackson Show’, with everyone else simply participating in it. Listing Robert, Stephen, and Jeff as Gods and Generals’s top-billed actors feels a bit misleading because of Jeff’s and Robert’s underutilization. This decision also does Robert’s and Jeff’s acting talents a disservice.

Horse with saddle photo created by Topntp26 at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-photo/stallion-black-equine-race-sky_1104246.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a>. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/background”>Background image created by Topntp26 – Freepik.com</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

My overall impression:

The way I feel about Gods and Generals is similar to how I feel about the 1994 film, Scarlett. Both projects were competently made, each respective creative team clearly knowing what they were doing. The acting and historical accuracy were the strengths of each movie. But the screenwriting causes Scarlett and Gods and Generals to be a mixed bag. The 2003 film having a run-time of a little over three-and-a-half-hours is, in my opinion, excessive. Not only is Gods and Generals a dialogue-heavy movie, I also felt Robert Duvall’s and Jeff Daniels’ acting talents were underutilized. But what I will say is, for me, Stephen Lang stole the show! His performance was so solid, his Movieguide Awards nomination was well deserved. I’d honestly recommend just watching his scenes because the versatility Stephen brought to his portrayal of General Stonewall Jackson made his performance worth watching the film.

Overall score: 6 out of 10

Have you seen Gods and Generals? Which movie from Robert Duvall’s filmography would you like to see me review next? Let me know in the comment section below!

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

I’m not going to lie; I love a good blog party! So, when I discovered Heidi, from Along the Brandywine, was hosting the Valentine’s Day Period Drama Blog Party, I couldn’t wait to sign up! Period dramas are not regularly covered on 18 Cinema Lane. While I do have a re-cap series for When Calls the Heart, I choose what films to watch based on how interesting their stories sound. There have been period dramas I loved, such as Swept from the Sea. But, for this blogathon, I wanted to review a film I hadn’t seen before. For about a year, I’ve had the Hallmark Hall of Fame movie, The Love Letter, on my DVR. Because parts of the movie take place in the 19^th century, I felt it fit Heidi’s time period requirement of the 1600’s to World War II. I try to watch as many Hallmark Hall of Fame titles as I realistically can. Prior to reviewing The Love Letter, the only Hallmark Hall of Fame movie from 1998 I’ve seen is Grace & Glorie, which was one of the best movies I saw last year! While not all movies from this collection are created equally, I do watch these movies with an open mind.

Since an image of *The Love Letter*‘s poster was featured on my television, I took a screenshot of it with my phone. Screenshot taken by me, Sally Silverscreen.

Things I liked about the film:

The acting: Because The Love Letter heavily relies on the performances of its lead actor and actress, this part of the review will focus on Campbell Scott’s and Jennifer Jason Leigh’s portrayal of Scott Corrigan and Elizabeth Whitcomb. With Campbell’s performance, there was always a sense of focus in his character. This focus could be seen in Scott’s eyes. When he was inspecting the desk at the antique store or restoring that same desk, Scott’s focus showed how much he cared. This was a consistent part of the character and helped whenever he wrote to Elizabeth. In historical fiction/period films, it would be easy for the screenwriter to give their lead female character one distinct type of personality. Elizabeth Whitcomb, on the other hand, held a balance of two that brought something unique to the character. She had a youthful radiance about her, being a “romantic dreamer” at heart. However, Elizabeth carried herself with a graceful maturity that prevented her from becoming childish or immature. Jennifer brought both aspects to Elizabeth equally and beautifully, allowing her character to be multi-dimensional.

The historical accuracy: I am not an expert on the 1860s and its historical significance. But based on what I do know about this particular period in time, Elizabeth’s part of the story looked and felt historically accurate! The Whitcomb family home was furnished with pieces that appeared antique, from the couch in the sitting room to the desk Elizabeth and Scott share. Dark wood held these structures together, with green cushions and intricate carvings finishing the couch and desk. The costumes were very detailed and also reflective of the 1860s. Embroidery on Elizabeth’s jacket and the overall design of her lacy parasol serve as two examples. Even the dialogue spoken by the characters sounded like it came directly from an era gone by. Pieces of the story like the ones I mentioned tell me, as an audience member, the creative team behind this film cared about the presentation of this part of their project!

A fantastical element: Most of the stories from the Hallmark Hall of Fame collection are grounded in reality, which means that fantastical elements are rarely found in these scripts. With The Love Letter, the story revolves around two people from different time periods who communicate to each other through letter writing. The idea of time manipulation is a concept that would likely be found in either a fantasy or science fiction film. While stories like Somewhere in Time and Portrait of Jennie have been dramas paired with this specific concept, I don’t recall Hallmark Hall of Fame creating their own film like that before or after 1998. Because The Love Letter’s creative team chose to include a fantastical element into their overall project, it gave the movie an opportunity to stand out from other titles. This was a creative risk that worked in the film’s favor!

The Valentine’s Day Period Drama Blog Party banner created by Heidi from Along the Brandywine.

What I didn’t like about the film:

Scott being engaged: A trope that has appeared in several Hallmark films is the male or female protagonist being engaged at the beginning of the story, only to fall in love with someone else by the end of that story. This trope has found its way into The Love Letter. For most of the movie, Scott is engaged to a woman named Debra. As he finds himself falling in love with Elizabeth, he strings Debra along and keeps the letter writing a secret. Scott does tell Debra the truth about his feelings, but this doesn’t happen until the movie is almost over. Personally, I think this trope is pointless, as the audience is spending time with a relationship that will end up leading nowhere. Scott should have remained single so the script could give its undivided attention to his and Elizabeth’s exchanges.

A rushed explanation: When fantastical or science fiction elements are included in a script, it helps to provide clear explanations to the audience so they can understand what is happening on screen. In The Love Letter, Scott’s mother tells Scott that an imbalance in the time-space continuum is the reason why he and Elizabeth are able to write to one another. However, this explanation was rushed, with Scott’s mother briefly bringing it up on only two occasions throughout the whole movie. She gives Scott stamps from the 1860s and had a special kind of writing ink made for him. Scott’s mother even found a post office that has existed since the Civil War era. These objects and the post office felt more like they conveniently benefited the plot instead of serving as ‘macguffins’ to move the story forward. As I already mentioned, this kind of story is rarely found in the Hallmark Hall of Fame collection. Despite this, a little more time should have been devoted to providing a clearer explanation.

Lack of physical interactions between Scott and Elizabeth: Because Scott and Elizabeth are from different time periods, it is not possible for them to physically interact with one another. Even though this is the nature of the story, it prevented the audience from seeing the on-screen chemistry between Campbell Scott and Jennifer Jason Leigh. One of the staples of a romance film is the on-screen chemistry between the lead actor and actress. Since that element was missing from The Love Letter, I was only invested in Scott and Elizabeth’s relationship to a certain extent. While their words were romantic, verbal communication only plays a part among any given couple.

Hand-written letter image created by Veraholera at freepik.com. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/background”>Background vector created by Veraholera – Freepik.com</a>. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/love-letter-pattern_1292902.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

My overall impression:

As I said in my review, most Hallmark Hall of Fame stories are grounded in reality. These stories are also on the simple side, with messages and themes that audience members can relate to. Even though The Love Letter has a fantastical element that is rarely found in films from this collection, it has a simpler story that works! Romance through words and thoughts is what carries the overall story, with important advice woven into the script. Forming a relationship with someone you truly love and never giving up on yourself are nice sentiments that can make audience members feel good about what they are watching. The movie also has the ingredients of a good Hallmark Hall of Fame title, like the level of detail when it comes to the film’s historical accuracy. It is true the movie has its flaws. However, the execution of a creative risk like this makes up for The Love Letter’s weaknesses. Films such as this one make me wish Hallmark would be more creative with their stories and think outside the box more. With the ball in their court, I don’t know what their next creative step will be.

Overall score: 8 out of 10

Have you seen The Love Letter? What Hallmark Hall of Fame movies would you like to see me review? Let me know in the comment section!

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen