Amazing how God damn foolish this charge was on behalf of general Lee! God damn it! This is the kind of strategy that is great if you want to slaughter HELL OF A LOT of soldiers in shortest possible time...General Lee should have been court-martialed for this!
Shouldn't the song lux aeterna clint mansell be played and extended through out the clip? would that be an appropriate song to be played during this sacrifice and senseless murder of fine Confederate men!??!?
one thing that couldn't be helped in this film -- the enlisted men are mostly middle-aged, whereas the real armies of the time were filled with slim young men in their 20's - but I'm sure the director was glad to get so many extras for filming, all with their own costumes :)
i watched this movie on TNT when i was only 6 years old. i went on to own the movie and it gave me the passion to pursue my degree in history. all thanks to this one movie.
“Foot to foot, body to body, and man to man they struggled, pushed and strived and killed. The mass of wounded and heaps of dead entangled the feet of the contestants, and, underneath the trampling mass, wounded men who could no longer stand, struggled, fought, shouted and killed. Hatless, coatless, drowned in sweat, black with powder, red with blood, with fiendish yells and strange oaths they blindly plied the work of slaughter.”
Those Confederate troops were brave men, charging those Union lines took an awful lot of courage. I salute them and only wish I could have fought beside them. God Speed. And to my favorite general of all time Lewis Armistead; "Thats the style Lo, thats the style!!!!!!"
Richard Jordan's loss was just as sad and heroic as the spirit of this charge. What a marverlous man and American Armistead was, and selecting Jordan to portray him was just so as well......
@MrSunlander Jordan committed to play Armistead almost as soon as Maxwell bought the rights, back in the 1970s, and Maxwell wrote the part for Jordan to pla y it. Jordan was the only actor in the film to stick with it all the way thru, even though he was really busy when they filmed this (Jordan made 7 or 8 films in the last 3-4 years of his life and was working on another - The Fugitive - when he got too sick).
I am hoping a new Gettysburg movie will come out -and this time with better acting and more realistic scenes, such that if the spirits of those who actually fought there were watching these actors on the battlefield, it would look familiar to them.
@1101millie97 But I bet they would just make it with all CGI but there is going to be a new HBO series called To Appomattox and is going to be about the whole story of the Civil War and the life of the generals aswell as many other battles that took place. I hope they really show the battles after Gettysburg that were some of the bloodiest fought in the war like the Wilderness, Sposylvania, and Petersburg.
My uncle is a reenactor and he is in this movie. You could be a Confederate for free but had to pay $5 to be a Northern solider. The only battle where the south outnumbered the north.
The union collapse was a trap, after the union front line pulled back the confederates instead of turning the cannons round pushing the union troops back and digging in, they kept going right into the musket fire of the second line, they were sitting ducks. No wonder the charge ended in a slaughter.
And you all talk like this was the ONLY action of that day, due to this movie alot of people forget there was a second part to this attack and that was Jeb Stuarts Calvary attack on the rear of the same place that was stalled and turned back by the union calvary lead by Gen, Custer, not to mention the Confederates mis judging of cannon shot that over shot the unionposition, so really the attack failed for more than just Lees over confidence.
@MWM1978 There was also a 7-hour battle at Culp's Hill in the morning that people forget, but it's not the movie's fault. Pickett's Charge has dominated attention since the day it happened. People always remember grand finales.
@MWM1978 I saw a piece some time ago that explained the cannon overshooting. It seems there were two places where the fuses for the bursting shots were made for the Confederacy, and that part of the army was used to using one of them. However, they had to use the ones from the other for this battle and they were a little different. But a little difference at long range can make a big difference, and it did.
It was not about returning fire but about routing the Union's center in close combat.
Only 1200 confederates (less than 9%) were killed in the charge after all, although overall casualties (including captured and injured) were much higher.
They didn't take half casualties while crossing the filed because some casualties (including all captured) were suffered in close-combat AFTER they already crossed the field under enemy fire.
There were initially only 5,000 Union soldiers in the center against 12,500 charging confederates. Lee probably hoped that the charge would succeed before Union managed to bring in reinforcements.
Unfortunately for Lee, Union swiftly brought in reinforcements during the charge. As the result it failed.
@Tomenable And what sources do you have to back that up ? I do think they lost quiet a sizable number of they forces in the charge. At least enough to make it break and fail even when reaching union lines. Because 12,500 should of crushed the union even with reinforcements
It was Lee's only major blunder of the entire war, he was an outstanding tactician and leader, who in the first two years of the war presented a real chance of victory, its just the north had more men, more factories, and more infrastructure to move them. If the south was a s advanced, in these terms, boy, Civil War would've been longer, bloodier, and the south may have come on top. But, like Hannibal and Napoleon, all military geniuses can fall with one mistake.,
The scene w/Armistead talking about Hancock just gets to me everytime and its a reason why the Civil War is the most tragic event in the history of our country. Yes the two sides might have believed in different things at the time....but we WERE THE SAME. All of us Americans, all of us brothers. No matter the result, its something I can never feel good about.
Lee should have known better than to launch such a hopeless attack, Even if the confederates had taken half the casualties they did crossing the field it was unlikely that they'd have enough men to route the union center.
@KrazyKommieKiller I think Lee really did expect the Union troops to run away as soon as his men got close, and he fervently believed his men were invincible. He was just wrong on both counts.
@rob9641 I think from a certain standpoint the strategy was sound because logically the union center would be the least defended since the bulk of the action was taking place on the flanks. Although Lee should've realized the terrain and how much area his troops had to cover before they could even get close enough to return fire.
@TOCR815 Lee's decision is especially baffling if you've ever been to Malvern Hill. The terrain and the way the forces were set up were almost exactly the same as at Gettysburg Day 3, except that the Union forces did NOT have a wall, and Lee directed a similar charge that also failed badly.
one thing that makes this battle cool is that now union soldiers have same uniforms so its easier to see who are the confederate and who are the union soldiers
@Wildcat425B C'mon now... think about it. Smooth bore, muzzle-loaded muskets firing "somewhat" round balls of lead using questionable powder are not accurate weapons. The only way to use them effectively was massed volley fire at close range. And the effectiveness of cannon of the era against advancing troops in the open is entirely dependent on how quickly the gun crews can fire, reload, and fire again. They were sound tactics given the era.
General Pickett said, "whats happening to my boys" Frankly sir, if you were with them where you belong, like any other good infantry commander, you wouldn't be wondering.
@lionel21000 I've been in the infantry for years and never, in Iraq or Afghanistan, did I ever see a general officer on the ground fighting with us. The highest officer I've ever been in a fight with was a captain, now that I think about it. Pickett was exactly where a division commander should have been, given the tactics of the day.
@The11BJoe During the Civil War, the Brigade commander (usually a Brig Gen) was expected to lead his troops into battle, as Armistead did. The division commander would be back somewhat overseeing his division, as Pickett was on 7-3-1863. The Corps commander would be back overseeing all his involved divisions.
@rob9641 Exactly, Pickett was right where he should have been, as I said. I know about Civil War era tactics, I was just trying to inform lionel that you could no more expect a division commander to be in the rank and file back then anymore than you could now.
@The11BJoe I was in both Iraq and Afghanistan too. The Generals had the technology to control the fighting from miles away. A commander needs to be in a place where he can influnce and control the battle. Pickett obviously could do neither. A good commander should share the risks. I am an officer and I went where my soldiers went. I shared the hazards and risks that they did and I'd never ask them to do something I wouldn't do myself.
Your an officer and actually think generals control the fighting? They manage the larger A/O. Lower level officers are responsible for controlling the fighting and really it's the NCO's that control it. General Pickett was exactly where a division commander, for the period, should have been. He was watching his brigades and ensuring the tactical orders were being followed. Should they not have been, he would have sent one of the aides that were around him, to correct the brigade commander.
@The11BJoe You still aren't getting it. It doesn't matter if its a general, a captain or a sergeant. You must be in a position to control your unit. As you can see, he had no idea what was happening. He'd lost control of his force. Its one thing to give your subordinates freedom of manuver. Its another thing to have no control.
You still aren't getting it. Pickett could not have seen the maneuver or had total control of anything if he had been down in the rank and file. He knew exactly what was happening until he got knocked off his horse. Take also into account the fact that his men were at the Union line in hand to hand combat, at that point, it's a matter of will the enemy break or not. Pickett was right where a Division commander should have been given the tactics of the day. Or are military historians full of shit
@The11BJoe I'm not talking about being right in the rank and file, but he was too far back. How can he know if the enemy is going to break? He didn't have a clue what was going on. Consider D-Day. General Cota was the ADC for the 29th and he was on the ground in the 3rd wave. He was changed division orders ON the front line 300 yards from the water. Otherwise, the battalion commanders would have continued dying trying to move up the draws.
@The11BJoe Another example is General Roosevelt. He was ADC for the 4th ID and landed on Utah in the first wave. He was the only one authorized to adjusted the place where they assaulted and saved countless lives. My point is that doctrine is only a guide. As a commander, you need to be in a place to take action and make decisions. Read your post again - its pretty much saying that he issued the orders and either they succeed or fail. Thats not the way to do business.
I fully understand what you are trying to say and I know full well that generals can and have been with there men. I challenge you, however, to tell me what Pickett could have accomplished being in the ranks. Could he, from that vantage point, have controlled a line roughly half a mile across. Also, there were two other divisions involved in this charge, not just Picketts and those commanders did not make the charge either. Nor did Lee, whose plan it was, nor did Longstreet or AP Hill.
@The11BJoe Excellent point. My suggestion is that if Pickett were further forward, he would have realized that Amistead's brigade was actually making progress. Perhaps he could have reinforced that success. Perhaps he could have realized failure faster and withdrew to save more men for the next fight. All three of his brigade commanders and all 13 of his regimental commanders were either killed or wounded. Also, both other division commanders in his corps were wounded. That doesn't look good.
I see now where you are coming from, though I do not doubt Pickett's courage and even if he had seen Armisteads full progress or realized the futility I doubt there was much he could have done. Union artillery was at it's absolute finest on this day. It is very true things could have been managed better, but that is true for all levels of leadership. Many commanders, Lee and Longstreet included(especially), were not acting their usual selves during this battle.
@The11BJoe It is true, the CSA leadership was at its worst and the US artillery were at its best. I think a key point you brought was that his higher level leaders weren't playing their best game either. A historian wrote that as a brigade commander, Pickett was the best, but as a division commander he was in over his head. This was indeed his first battle as a division commander so I guess its a bit harsh of me to critize. But he never really improved after this battle and was later relieved.
True indeed. That happened with many officers actually. Dick Ewell and AP Hill, both good, effective division commanders under Stonewall Jackson, as corps commanders had many problems, especially Ewell. Even with all the mistakes, the numerical/tactical disadvantage and the best men being out of character, the south still nearly pulled this one off. Problem was, they lost many of their best and most promising at Gettysburg, with no way to replace them. The war truly was lost here.
@The11BJoe You hit the nail on the head there. The south lost the best of their infantry in that fight and a lot of their good leaders too. Another name I'd add to that list is JB Hood. After the first serious wound, he was never quite the same. Also, like the others you mentioned, he didn't handle being a Corps and Army Commander well either. Both armies struggled with that. I blame it on the rapid expansion. Jeb Stuart, Hood, these guys were just Captains and a couple years later, generals.
@rob9641 Oh don't get me wrong, what I mean is I'm jealous of the tradition and history of Virginia, as you well know I'm sure it's far older than Illinois. I take no pride in sending men to their deaths.
@ReptileRanger719 Actually, it was the most glorified charge in history. One of the reasons grass won't grow on the spot where Armistead fell - too many visitors, a couple million each year.
@rob9641 What? The most glorified charge in history? That's a pretty narrow view of history. Balaclava; charge of the Light Brigade. Waterloo; charge of the Scots Greys. For sure Pickett's Charge is a famous one, but "the most glorified?" Nuh-uh.
@lutonmoore I know..i get the same feeling when i watch Glory, the moment is so grand that i feel that the 54th and other regiments (who get like 0.5 seconds of screen time at the fort xD) are finally going to take it..
a few years ago I actually had a military general from Argentina stay at my home for about a week. My brother and I watched this movie with him, and seeing through his eyes I gained yet another level of respect for the military decisions/ideas during this battle, all 3 days of it
a few years ago I actually had a military general from Argentina stay at my home for about a week. My brother and I watched this movie with him, and seeing through his eyes I gained yet another level of respect for the military decisions/ideas during this battle.
It is amazing to think that of all the places in the world, of all the land on this sphere we call the Earth, that such a small piece of land would be the spot that the Union almost became undone.
It's such peaceful ground now. I cannot imagine what it was like July 3rd 1863
If you believe what if's are a waste of time, you don't have to discuss them. Military historians such as Stephen E. Ambrose, James M. McPherson, John Keegan and many others don't seem to think so, hence why they came together and wrote the book "What If?" Grant may very well have destroyed Lee's army were he in McClellan's place. I don't intend to take anything away from the courage of either side, let alone at Gettysburg. I was simply stating a theory that some historians agree with.
@wildirish998 I agree with you. That's why I get annoyed when people try to label one side as good and one as evil. Both sides were fighting for what they thought was best for their state and country.
MG. Rodes took at least 2,000 casualties, Iverson, O'Neal and Daniel's brigades were hit hard. Ramseur had a small brigade from the start and Dole's brigade fought hard as well. So if any attack on Cemetery Hill, it would have had to been on MG. Early's division. Gordon's brigade took the most losses, Hays and Avery/Hoke minor. No, I just don't see Ewell or Early taking Cemetery Hill, I believe it was a wise choice.
If Cemetery Hill was to have been captured, the Confederates would have to have run behind the retreating 1st and 11th Corps soldiers. BG. Smith claimed he saw Union cavalry on the York Pike. Thus Smith and Gordon's brigades were detailed to watch the extreme left of the 2nd Corps, if not all of the ANV on the field at the time. With thousands of Union soldiers running around in Gettysburg, all formations were broken up for both sides. So no, I do not believe Ewell or Jackson could have taken it
"Hey guys, you wanna know about this great plan I have that's bound to succeed? So we have 15,000 tired, sick, poorly trained troops right? Well you see the Yankees up on that hill, with their superior training, and big-ass cannons, protected by a fence that might take a minute to get over and would make us easy targets for their riflemen? Well, I was thinking we should charge them head-on with little regard for our own safety! It's foolproof!"-Typical dumb redneck war strategy.
@saiyanprince09 it was the strategy for the whole war or at least a good portion of it until Petersburg. Cold Harbor and Fredericksburg had the typical dumb northern strategy of doing the exact same thing. They were far from poorly trained. While not a great plan the fault of that is squarely not RE Lee's feet not the soldiers.
@saiyanprince09 It was Robert E Lee's strategies that allowed the outnumbered Army of Northern Virginia to badly and often beat the Union Army of the Potomac for the first two years of the war. Granted Lee had some outstanding commanders under him as well, namely Jackson and Longstreet. Had General Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson not been killed at Chancellorsville and been present at Gettysburg, the battle would have had a very different result.
@The11BJoe It's a stretch to make an argument like that. Given the Confederate predicament I think it's quite logical to say the outcome would not have been much better considering many aspects...such as the basic ideas that were even possible in their position. Stonewall Jackson couldn't have made a plan much better than Lee's. There could not have been a bettter way. Had his calvary not failed, and his assaults of the high ground not failed, the battle could've been won
@matters9319 Exactly and had Jackson been present, the high ground on the Union left at the round tops would have been secured the first day of the battle and the failed assaults on the second day would not have been necessary. General Ewell, who commanded Jackson's old Second Corps and was ordered by Lee to secure the high ground if practical, failed to secure the high grounds after his forces had driven the Union completely off. The more aggressive Jackson would have seized the initiative.
My mistake. Ewell failed to take Cemetery Hill on the Union right. Still, Ewell failed to seize what would have been a tactically advantageous position against the Union right flank, something most historians agree Jackson would have done and could almost certainly have changed the ultimate outcome of the battle.
@The11BJoe I don't think there's a lot of agreement among historians that Jackson would have taken either Cemetery or Culp's Hill on Day 1. There was an article a few months ago in one of the CW journals debating it. Union Gen. Howard had troops dug in up there long before the Union line nw of town collapsed. Even trying to take it would have cost Jackson big time, leaving Lee with a big hole in his forces. Days 2 and 3 would have played out differently.
@rob9641 I've read and talked with many historians who agree Jackson could have and would have taken Cemetery Hill. I did read in the Civil War journal arguments against it as well, however citing many division and brigade commanders under Ewell who all agreed the hill could have and should have been taken I would tend to side with them. It is somewhat difficult to say, given that Jackson's corps was divided after his death so he would have had a larger unified force to work with, were he there.
@The11BJoe I've seen plenty of debate on the subject. Jackson's command divided between Ewell and Hill, yes, but Hill was there with Ewell, and it's Hill's inability to support Ewell because his men were played out that was one of Ewell's reasons for not pressing forward. The men were there - they were just fought out, and Union forces were entrenched with more coming. Some say Jackson would have taken it, but some say no. It's really a sizeable debate from what I've seen.
@rob9641 A very sizeable debate, which can never truly be settled. There are countless what if's that could be taken into account. What if Jackson had lived after Chancellorsville? What if General Heth had obeyed orders and not engaged at Gettysburg? What if Lee moved to reinforce Vicksburg in the west instead of moving north? Endless possibilities that are fun to discuss but, after all is said and done, what actually happened cannot be changed.
@tychecks There was a particular style I've seen a couple times, where a man would let his beard grow all over his neck but shave his face down to the jawline. Made him look like he was wearing a fur collar all the time.
@Rostokouban - One of Hancock's aides said the real Armistead apologized because he was Hancock's friend from before the war and had sworn to Hancock that God should strike him dead if he ever left Virginia "should worse come to worse." The real Armstd also apologized to a Union sergeant he recognized from before the war. When you think you're dying, you do tend to things like that.
Yes in this movie there is an actual scene were Armistead is saying to Longstreet about his friendship with Hancock and the strike me down comment is there. I actually find that scene in Longstreet's tent rather moving.
@TheGriefmaker I posted that scene in Longstreet's tent as Armistead's Gethsemane, which is what it reminded me of. I also thought Richard Jordan did a great job with it, and I liked the way it was written, as a monologue with Longstreet just listening, never knowing what to say. It definitely got the point across - there were plenty of men from the old army who hated doing what they felt they had to do to their old friends.
To the person who was asking about the part in the movie where Lee says its his fault. Type in Gettysburg The Great Battle Part 4. You will find it there.
I am the Surgeon for the 11th Pa. co K . Every year we try and get out to the Gettysburg reenactment. Since most of us were in this movie. General Hood, Patrick Gorman . Has come back for alot of the reenactments. Its funny everytime I see him I ask him to say. Pete, YOU SHOULD HAVE LEFT ME GO AROUND TO THE RIGHT ! He is a great guy and always does it.
@Crymson1 Something that's struck me is how many of the men in the CW looked far older than they were at the time. JEB Stuart looked well over 40 when he wasn't 30. Lee was only 57 at Gettysburg, but he looked more like 70. Life was hard in those days. You got old looking in a hurry.
@civilwardoc1 I shall check it out at the Library of Congress. I work on captured Union flags and that has taken nearly 20 years of my spare time, but when I/We are done, you all will be very surprised at what flags we have found. I do have friends working on captured Confederate flags as well. Those are easy, Union flags are very rare, because Union regimental commanders rarely admitted to losing a flag. I like the challenge.
well and again it is proof that it truly takes guts and sacrifice and brave men to truly stand for what they fight for, may the souls of both rest in peace
I was in this movie at the wall at Picketts charge. I have been a reenactor for 15 yrs and have been studying the Civil War for about 30. I have been to Gettysburg at least a 100 times. I will tell you this Picketts charge did not happen the way history says it did. Ref: Check out Gettysburg Lee's Plan Unchanged
@civilwardoc1 You seem to be the person I am looking for, I too have nearly 30 years of experience and did reenacting for a long time. I have a group of friends here in Washington DC and we deep research at the Library of Congress and National Archives. I am just waiting to retire from the Army in about a year and ten months, get my thirty years done.
John Michael Priest in the North and South Magazine, (Lee's gallant 6,000) claims half the Confederates fell out of the attack!
@rebel2276 Priest has written a great book about Pickett's Charge called "Into the Fight." A ton of research, describing the charge in extreme detail, minute by minute.
@TheBlueCream - I am American. I thought I understood the "brother against brother" aspect of the Civil War, but Richard Jordan's Armistead made me FEEL it for the first time. May they both rest in peace.
Lewis Armistead = Badass!!!
MrJamesLongstreet 1 month ago
Amazing how God damn foolish this charge was on behalf of general Lee! God damn it! This is the kind of strategy that is great if you want to slaughter HELL OF A LOT of soldiers in shortest possible time...General Lee should have been court-martialed for this!
MrJamesLongstreet 1 month ago
i love how the union took care of injured confeterate troops
maroonranger42 3 months ago
@maroonranger42 Then get murdered for their trouble in this clip!
agrigoat 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is more like, "picketts leisurely jog towards death".
sman876 3 months ago
Comment removed
sman876 3 months ago
- goes to play Empire Total war -
NoobSnoopy 4 months ago 7
I'm a Yankee myself, but I certainly appreciate the bravery, whatever side the brave were on.
incinerator327 4 months ago
@ 1:48, ooo jesus.
ncole90 4 months ago
@ 1:24, Armistead and his men are getting FLANKED something fierce.
ncole90 4 months ago
Shouldn't the song lux aeterna clint mansell be played and extended through out the clip? would that be an appropriate song to be played during this sacrifice and senseless murder of fine Confederate men!??!?
lawnmowermanTX 4 months ago
I was there a couple years back and actually walked this field and retraced their footsteps and it was a very humbling experience. haunting even
cjazzman1 6 months ago
Sun Tzu said "invincibility lies in the defence; posibility of victory in the attack"
AUG351 6 months ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
CHECK OUT MY TRANCE MUSIC :)
- JOEL AVALO
- JOEL AVALO
joelavalo 6 months ago
0:51 go canister fire
novakmast21 7 months ago
one thing that couldn't be helped in this film -- the enlisted men are mostly middle-aged, whereas the real armies of the time were filled with slim young men in their 20's - but I'm sure the director was glad to get so many extras for filming, all with their own costumes :)
SupernalOne 7 months ago
@SupernalOne More than likely underfed. :)
Ponyboy8877 1 month ago
Armistead: "Come on, boy. Come on. What'll you think of yourself tomorrow? Boy: "I'm alive and in one piece. That's what".
Arbeedubya 7 months ago
music is epic xD
NoobSnoopy 7 months ago
i watched this movie on TNT when i was only 6 years old. i went on to own the movie and it gave me the passion to pursue my degree in history. all thanks to this one movie.
emorph 7 months ago 4
“Foot to foot, body to body, and man to man they struggled, pushed and strived and killed. The mass of wounded and heaps of dead entangled the feet of the contestants, and, underneath the trampling mass, wounded men who could no longer stand, struggled, fought, shouted and killed. Hatless, coatless, drowned in sweat, black with powder, red with blood, with fiendish yells and strange oaths they blindly plied the work of slaughter.”
- Union soldier, 19th Massachusetts, at the Angle
SupernalOne 7 months ago
“That old man [Lee] had my division slaughtered at Gettysburg.”
“...Well, it made you immortal.”
George Pickett and John Mosby, 1870
SupernalOne 7 months ago
Those Confederate troops were brave men, charging those Union lines took an awful lot of courage. I salute them and only wish I could have fought beside them. God Speed. And to my favorite general of all time Lewis Armistead; "Thats the style Lo, thats the style!!!!!!"
RevBillyRayCollins 7 months ago
Richard Jordan's loss was just as sad and heroic as the spirit of this charge. What a marverlous man and American Armistead was, and selecting Jordan to portray him was just so as well......
MrSunlander 8 months ago
@MrSunlander Jordan committed to play Armistead almost as soon as Maxwell bought the rights, back in the 1970s, and Maxwell wrote the part for Jordan to pla y it. Jordan was the only actor in the film to stick with it all the way thru, even though he was really busy when they filmed this (Jordan made 7 or 8 films in the last 3-4 years of his life and was working on another - The Fugitive - when he got too sick).
rob9641 8 months ago
I am hoping a new Gettysburg movie will come out -and this time with better acting and more realistic scenes, such that if the spirits of those who actually fought there were watching these actors on the battlefield, it would look familiar to them.
1101millie97 1 month ago
@1101millie97 But I bet they would just make it with all CGI but there is going to be a new HBO series called To Appomattox and is going to be about the whole story of the Civil War and the life of the generals aswell as many other battles that took place. I hope they really show the battles after Gettysburg that were some of the bloodiest fought in the war like the Wilderness, Sposylvania, and Petersburg.
AUG351 1 month ago
Jordan was mortally ill as he played these scenes - so poignant
robbiepat 8 months ago 2
My uncle is a reenactor and he is in this movie. You could be a Confederate for free but had to pay $5 to be a Northern solider. The only battle where the south outnumbered the north.
Spinax711 8 months ago
You have to admire Armistead's courage, and this scene is a beautiful piece of cinema. Rest in peace Richard Jordan.
RevBillyRayCollins 8 months ago
I wonder how many people actually were needed for this movie.
redsoul888 8 months ago
@redsoul888 I think they had 5000 or so in the Pickett's Charge panorama scenes.
rob9641 8 months ago
@redsoul888 Well, I would've been there in a heartbeat. I'm not even American but damn that be a cool scene to film.
SupaTROopa2 4 months ago
lol america sucks
PatientVlogs 8 months ago
@PatientVlogs Which one continent? North or South?
redsoul888 8 months ago
0:28: "Come on, boy! Come on! What will you think of yourself tomorrow?"
Ingemar1965 8 months ago
The union collapse was a trap, after the union front line pulled back the confederates instead of turning the cannons round pushing the union troops back and digging in, they kept going right into the musket fire of the second line, they were sitting ducks. No wonder the charge ended in a slaughter.
ephabouyed 8 months ago
WHRE IS THE BLOOD?
herulonna 8 months ago
059, I always do chuckle at little at that part. "That's the style Lou!! THAT'S THE STYLE!!!!"
The2004Alamo 8 months ago
To go back in time with a Bradley Fighting Vehicle...
LEOtheIsaurian 9 months ago
I love seeing rednecks get blown up.
BorisGodunov 9 months ago
@WhiteandNerdy44 Mine was too!!!
AcidicGamers2 9 months ago
my teacher was in this movie :D
WhiteandNerdy44 9 months ago
I'm proud of both my Union and Confederate ancestors. A stronger America was born from this terrible conflict.
TOCR815 9 months ago 14
So hopeless!
herulonna 9 months ago
Ahh social studies class
TheNationals24 9 months ago
the ending of this is so sad, Armistead and Hancock were literally best friends before the war
Nitrotech23 9 months ago
And you all talk like this was the ONLY action of that day, due to this movie alot of people forget there was a second part to this attack and that was Jeb Stuarts Calvary attack on the rear of the same place that was stalled and turned back by the union calvary lead by Gen, Custer, not to mention the Confederates mis judging of cannon shot that over shot the unionposition, so really the attack failed for more than just Lees over confidence.
MWM1978 9 months ago 6
@MWM1978 There was also a 7-hour battle at Culp's Hill in the morning that people forget, but it's not the movie's fault. Pickett's Charge has dominated attention since the day it happened. People always remember grand finales.
rob9641 9 months ago 5
@rob9641 Yep, and let's not forget Farnsworth's tragically disastrous charge on the southern end of the battlefield.
Demokingmsb 9 months ago
@rob9641 The Battle of Gettysburg was decided on day 1, not on day 2 or 3. That line was not going to be broken.
sargeanb 1 month ago
@sargeanb Not taking the high ground from the beginning may have cost the Confederacy the entire war.
wvu3 1 month ago
@MWM1978 and Kilpatrick's failed cavalry charge
RiflemanLaramie 7 months ago
@MWM1978 I saw a piece some time ago that explained the cannon overshooting. It seems there were two places where the fuses for the bursting shots were made for the Confederacy, and that part of the army was used to using one of them. However, they had to use the ones from the other for this battle and they were a little different. But a little difference at long range can make a big difference, and it did.
edlaprade 7 months ago
"That's the style Lou that's the style" favorite line of the whole movie
ozzman272 9 months ago
It was not about returning fire but about routing the Union's center in close combat.
Only 1200 confederates (less than 9%) were killed in the charge after all, although overall casualties (including captured and injured) were much higher.
Tomenable 9 months ago
They didn't take half casualties while crossing the filed because some casualties (including all captured) were suffered in close-combat AFTER they already crossed the field under enemy fire.
There were initially only 5,000 Union soldiers in the center against 12,500 charging confederates. Lee probably hoped that the charge would succeed before Union managed to bring in reinforcements.
Unfortunately for Lee, Union swiftly brought in reinforcements during the charge. As the result it failed.
Tomenable 9 months ago
@Tomenable And what sources do you have to back that up ? I do think they lost quiet a sizable number of they forces in the charge. At least enough to make it break and fail even when reaching union lines. Because 12,500 should of crushed the union even with reinforcements
AntagonisticEnemy 8 months ago
I recommend reading this part in the book. Really puts you in Armistead's head as to what he must have been thinking. Tragic.
LEOtheIsaurian 9 months ago
Too bad he forgot about how brave Hancock's men are. If they were someone like McClellan the charge might've worked.
somthin4nothin 9 months ago
It was Lee's only major blunder of the entire war, he was an outstanding tactician and leader, who in the first two years of the war presented a real chance of victory, its just the north had more men, more factories, and more infrastructure to move them. If the south was a s advanced, in these terms, boy, Civil War would've been longer, bloodier, and the south may have come on top. But, like Hannibal and Napoleon, all military geniuses can fall with one mistake.,
pkart7 9 months ago
The scene w/Armistead talking about Hancock just gets to me everytime and its a reason why the Civil War is the most tragic event in the history of our country. Yes the two sides might have believed in different things at the time....but we WERE THE SAME. All of us Americans, all of us brothers. No matter the result, its something I can never feel good about.
dabomb2045 9 months ago
Go south.. Even though they lost but go south
master14514 10 months ago
Lee should have known better than to launch such a hopeless attack, Even if the confederates had taken half the casualties they did crossing the field it was unlikely that they'd have enough men to route the union center.
KrazyKommieKiller 10 months ago
@KrazyKommieKiller I think Lee really did expect the Union troops to run away as soon as his men got close, and he fervently believed his men were invincible. He was just wrong on both counts.
rob9641 10 months ago
@rob9641 I think from a certain standpoint the strategy was sound because logically the union center would be the least defended since the bulk of the action was taking place on the flanks. Although Lee should've realized the terrain and how much area his troops had to cover before they could even get close enough to return fire.
TOCR815 9 months ago
@TOCR815 Lee's decision is especially baffling if you've ever been to Malvern Hill. The terrain and the way the forces were set up were almost exactly the same as at Gettysburg Day 3, except that the Union forces did NOT have a wall, and Lee directed a similar charge that also failed badly.
rob9641 9 months ago
The Part where he yells,
"Verginians! Who will come with me?" Always sends chills up my spine.
koboldlord 10 months ago
Why is this theme not on the Gettysburg soundtrack? It is without a doubt the most epic piece from the score. Why not include it?
RebelYank 10 months ago
@RebelYank Always wondered myself why it wasn't on the CD of the score. Fantastic bass line. Blow you out of the room with the bass pumped up.
rob9641 10 months ago
it would be crazy if all of a sudden 20 american camandos with 10 helis and a few tanks killed the federats
halo4531 10 months ago
one thing that makes this battle cool is that now union soldiers have same uniforms so its easier to see who are the confederate and who are the union soldiers
2:58 LETS GET READY TO RUMBBLE!!
NoobSnoopy 10 months ago
Heres a good example of why charging across an open field in full view of enemy infantry and artillery is a bad idea.
They had plently of balls though.
Wildcat425B 10 months ago
@Wildcat425B C'mon now... think about it. Smooth bore, muzzle-loaded muskets firing "somewhat" round balls of lead using questionable powder are not accurate weapons. The only way to use them effectively was massed volley fire at close range. And the effectiveness of cannon of the era against advancing troops in the open is entirely dependent on how quickly the gun crews can fire, reload, and fire again. They were sound tactics given the era.
MrComatost 10 months ago
Pickett should have died with his division that day
dupahh 10 months ago
@dupahh How dare you !!!! Read about George Pickett before you run your mouth!!! He never forgave Lee or Longstreet for making him make that charge
fredqwan 10 months ago
General Pickett said, "whats happening to my boys" Frankly sir, if you were with them where you belong, like any other good infantry commander, you wouldn't be wondering.
lionel21000 10 months ago
@lionel21000 I've been in the infantry for years and never, in Iraq or Afghanistan, did I ever see a general officer on the ground fighting with us. The highest officer I've ever been in a fight with was a captain, now that I think about it. Pickett was exactly where a division commander should have been, given the tactics of the day.
The11BJoe 9 months ago
@The11BJoe During the Civil War, the Brigade commander (usually a Brig Gen) was expected to lead his troops into battle, as Armistead did. The division commander would be back somewhat overseeing his division, as Pickett was on 7-3-1863. The Corps commander would be back overseeing all his involved divisions.
rob9641 9 months ago
@rob9641 Exactly, Pickett was right where he should have been, as I said. I know about Civil War era tactics, I was just trying to inform lionel that you could no more expect a division commander to be in the rank and file back then anymore than you could now.
The11BJoe 9 months ago
@The11BJoe I was in both Iraq and Afghanistan too. The Generals had the technology to control the fighting from miles away. A commander needs to be in a place where he can influnce and control the battle. Pickett obviously could do neither. A good commander should share the risks. I am an officer and I went where my soldiers went. I shared the hazards and risks that they did and I'd never ask them to do something I wouldn't do myself.
lionel21000 8 months ago
Your an officer and actually think generals control the fighting? They manage the larger A/O. Lower level officers are responsible for controlling the fighting and really it's the NCO's that control it. General Pickett was exactly where a division commander, for the period, should have been. He was watching his brigades and ensuring the tactical orders were being followed. Should they not have been, he would have sent one of the aides that were around him, to correct the brigade commander.
The11BJoe 8 months ago
@The11BJoe You still aren't getting it. It doesn't matter if its a general, a captain or a sergeant. You must be in a position to control your unit. As you can see, he had no idea what was happening. He'd lost control of his force. Its one thing to give your subordinates freedom of manuver. Its another thing to have no control.
lionel21000 8 months ago
You still aren't getting it. Pickett could not have seen the maneuver or had total control of anything if he had been down in the rank and file. He knew exactly what was happening until he got knocked off his horse. Take also into account the fact that his men were at the Union line in hand to hand combat, at that point, it's a matter of will the enemy break or not. Pickett was right where a Division commander should have been given the tactics of the day. Or are military historians full of shit
The11BJoe 8 months ago
@The11BJoe I'm not talking about being right in the rank and file, but he was too far back. How can he know if the enemy is going to break? He didn't have a clue what was going on. Consider D-Day. General Cota was the ADC for the 29th and he was on the ground in the 3rd wave. He was changed division orders ON the front line 300 yards from the water. Otherwise, the battalion commanders would have continued dying trying to move up the draws.
lionel21000 7 months ago
@The11BJoe Another example is General Roosevelt. He was ADC for the 4th ID and landed on Utah in the first wave. He was the only one authorized to adjusted the place where they assaulted and saved countless lives. My point is that doctrine is only a guide. As a commander, you need to be in a place to take action and make decisions. Read your post again - its pretty much saying that he issued the orders and either they succeed or fail. Thats not the way to do business.
lionel21000 7 months ago
I fully understand what you are trying to say and I know full well that generals can and have been with there men. I challenge you, however, to tell me what Pickett could have accomplished being in the ranks. Could he, from that vantage point, have controlled a line roughly half a mile across. Also, there were two other divisions involved in this charge, not just Picketts and those commanders did not make the charge either. Nor did Lee, whose plan it was, nor did Longstreet or AP Hill.
The11BJoe 7 months ago
@The11BJoe Excellent point. My suggestion is that if Pickett were further forward, he would have realized that Amistead's brigade was actually making progress. Perhaps he could have reinforced that success. Perhaps he could have realized failure faster and withdrew to save more men for the next fight. All three of his brigade commanders and all 13 of his regimental commanders were either killed or wounded. Also, both other division commanders in his corps were wounded. That doesn't look good.
lionel21000 7 months ago
I see now where you are coming from, though I do not doubt Pickett's courage and even if he had seen Armisteads full progress or realized the futility I doubt there was much he could have done. Union artillery was at it's absolute finest on this day. It is very true things could have been managed better, but that is true for all levels of leadership. Many commanders, Lee and Longstreet included(especially), were not acting their usual selves during this battle.
The11BJoe 7 months ago
@The11BJoe It is true, the CSA leadership was at its worst and the US artillery were at its best. I think a key point you brought was that his higher level leaders weren't playing their best game either. A historian wrote that as a brigade commander, Pickett was the best, but as a division commander he was in over his head. This was indeed his first battle as a division commander so I guess its a bit harsh of me to critize. But he never really improved after this battle and was later relieved.
lionel21000 7 months ago
True indeed. That happened with many officers actually. Dick Ewell and AP Hill, both good, effective division commanders under Stonewall Jackson, as corps commanders had many problems, especially Ewell. Even with all the mistakes, the numerical/tactical disadvantage and the best men being out of character, the south still nearly pulled this one off. Problem was, they lost many of their best and most promising at Gettysburg, with no way to replace them. The war truly was lost here.
The11BJoe 7 months ago
@The11BJoe You hit the nail on the head there. The south lost the best of their infantry in that fight and a lot of their good leaders too. Another name I'd add to that list is JB Hood. After the first serious wound, he was never quite the same. Also, like the others you mentioned, he didn't handle being a Corps and Army Commander well either. Both armies struggled with that. I blame it on the rapid expansion. Jeb Stuart, Hood, these guys were just Captains and a couple years later, generals.
lionel21000 7 months ago
The cream of Virginia died in that charge. The Great Commonwealth bled its soul on that day.
noff27 10 months ago
Keep up the hard work and great videos, Rob!
rebel2276 10 months ago
My best friend is from Virginia. I'm from Illinois. I am supremely jealous.
mysongsend 11 months ago
@mysongsend Why jealous? Illinois is beautiful and supplied many, many brave men in the Civil War and other wars.
rob9641 11 months ago
@rob9641 Oh don't get me wrong, what I mean is I'm jealous of the tradition and history of Virginia, as you well know I'm sure it's far older than Illinois. I take no pride in sending men to their deaths.
mysongsend 10 months ago
Armistead has one of the most underrated charges in history.
ReptileRanger719 11 months ago 2
@ReptileRanger719 Actually, it was the most glorified charge in history. One of the reasons grass won't grow on the spot where Armistead fell - too many visitors, a couple million each year.
rob9641 11 months ago 2
@rob9641 What? The most glorified charge in history? That's a pretty narrow view of history. Balaclava; charge of the Light Brigade. Waterloo; charge of the Scots Greys. For sure Pickett's Charge is a famous one, but "the most glorified?" Nuh-uh.
MrComatost 10 months ago
@ReptileRanger719...and to think, Richard Jordan was dying as he played Armistead
throbbin87 10 months ago
@throbbin87 Jordan with a brain tumor was a better actor than most healthy ones.
rob9641 10 months ago
At 2:30 it actually looks like the South might win!
Butternut731863 11 months ago
@Butternut731863 was a very close battle,very close. mistakes were made by the South.
Dogmeat1950 11 months ago
@Butternut731863 that brigade you saw was the only one that made past the wall, all the others died before they got there
CM99501 10 months ago
Every time I watch this, I keep thinking maybe they'll take that wall!
lutonmoore 11 months ago 2
@lutonmoore They took it the night in 1992 when Stephen Lang (Pickett) jumped up on the bar at Farnsworth's and yelled "I've taken the high ground!"
rob9641 11 months ago
@rob9641 lmfao...
XxxSakura101 11 months ago
@lutonmoore I know..i get the same feeling when i watch Glory, the moment is so grand that i feel that the 54th and other regiments (who get like 0.5 seconds of screen time at the fort xD) are finally going to take it..
XxxSakura101 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
a few years ago I actually had a military general from Argentina stay at my home for about a week. My brother and I watched this movie with him, and seeing through his eyes I gained yet another level of respect for the military decisions/ideas during this battle, all 3 days of it
backflyer18 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
a few years ago I actually had a military general from Argentina stay at my home for about a week. My brother and I watched this movie with him, and seeing through his eyes I gained yet another level of respect for the military decisions/ideas during this battle.
backflyer18 1 year ago
Epic story, epic actors but it lacked a great deal in the directing and editing.
ole9421 1 year ago
if i was the leader i would have said this : FOR NARNIA!!!!!! wait wrong movie... BEYONETTES..... FOR FREEEEEEDOOOOOOOOM!!!!!!!!! CHAAAARGE
samantha5801 1 year ago
It is amazing to think that of all the places in the world, of all the land on this sphere we call the Earth, that such a small piece of land would be the spot that the Union almost became undone.
It's such peaceful ground now. I cannot imagine what it was like July 3rd 1863
EvaIowaCubsFan 1 year ago
What is the name of the song at 0:51? btw i love this movie :)
likelegoz 1 year ago
@likelegoz - It's called "Armistead is Hit" on the 2-disk CD of the music from the film.
rob9641 1 year ago
@rob9641 thanks a lot, been trying to find tht name for a long time lol :D
likelegoz 1 year ago
If you believe what if's are a waste of time, you don't have to discuss them. Military historians such as Stephen E. Ambrose, James M. McPherson, John Keegan and many others don't seem to think so, hence why they came together and wrote the book "What If?" Grant may very well have destroyed Lee's army were he in McClellan's place. I don't intend to take anything away from the courage of either side, let alone at Gettysburg. I was simply stating a theory that some historians agree with.
The11BJoe 1 year ago
thats the style lo, thats the style!
smithsharks 1 year ago
@wildirish998 I agree with you. That's why I get annoyed when people try to label one side as good and one as evil. Both sides were fighting for what they thought was best for their state and country.
TOCR815 1 year ago
FREDERICKSBURG! FREDERICKSBURG!
agrigoat 1 year ago
FREDICKSBURG! FREDICKSBURG!
agrigoat 1 year ago
Hey, Ted Turner was in the Civil War @ 0:50... who knew?!
kpz1234 1 year ago
MG. Rodes took at least 2,000 casualties, Iverson, O'Neal and Daniel's brigades were hit hard. Ramseur had a small brigade from the start and Dole's brigade fought hard as well. So if any attack on Cemetery Hill, it would have had to been on MG. Early's division. Gordon's brigade took the most losses, Hays and Avery/Hoke minor. No, I just don't see Ewell or Early taking Cemetery Hill, I believe it was a wise choice.
rebel2276 1 year ago
If Cemetery Hill was to have been captured, the Confederates would have to have run behind the retreating 1st and 11th Corps soldiers. BG. Smith claimed he saw Union cavalry on the York Pike. Thus Smith and Gordon's brigades were detailed to watch the extreme left of the 2nd Corps, if not all of the ANV on the field at the time. With thousands of Union soldiers running around in Gettysburg, all formations were broken up for both sides. So no, I do not believe Ewell or Jackson could have taken it
rebel2276 1 year ago
"Hey guys, you wanna know about this great plan I have that's bound to succeed? So we have 15,000 tired, sick, poorly trained troops right? Well you see the Yankees up on that hill, with their superior training, and big-ass cannons, protected by a fence that might take a minute to get over and would make us easy targets for their riflemen? Well, I was thinking we should charge them head-on with little regard for our own safety! It's foolproof!"-Typical dumb redneck war strategy.
saiyanprince09 1 year ago
@saiyanprince09 it was the strategy for the whole war or at least a good portion of it until Petersburg. Cold Harbor and Fredericksburg had the typical dumb northern strategy of doing the exact same thing. They were far from poorly trained. While not a great plan the fault of that is squarely not RE Lee's feet not the soldiers.
TigerRifle1 1 year ago
@TigerRifle1 Well the fact that they let Lee come up with their battle strategies just comes to show how idiotic they were.
saiyanprince09 1 year ago
@saiyanprince09 It was Robert E Lee's strategies that allowed the outnumbered Army of Northern Virginia to badly and often beat the Union Army of the Potomac for the first two years of the war. Granted Lee had some outstanding commanders under him as well, namely Jackson and Longstreet. Had General Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson not been killed at Chancellorsville and been present at Gettysburg, the battle would have had a very different result.
The11BJoe 1 year ago
@The11BJoe It's a stretch to make an argument like that. Given the Confederate predicament I think it's quite logical to say the outcome would not have been much better considering many aspects...such as the basic ideas that were even possible in their position. Stonewall Jackson couldn't have made a plan much better than Lee's. There could not have been a bettter way. Had his calvary not failed, and his assaults of the high ground not failed, the battle could've been won
matters9319 1 year ago
@matters9319 Exactly and had Jackson been present, the high ground on the Union left at the round tops would have been secured the first day of the battle and the failed assaults on the second day would not have been necessary. General Ewell, who commanded Jackson's old Second Corps and was ordered by Lee to secure the high ground if practical, failed to secure the high grounds after his forces had driven the Union completely off. The more aggressive Jackson would have seized the initiative.
The11BJoe 1 year ago
My mistake. Ewell failed to take Cemetery Hill on the Union right. Still, Ewell failed to seize what would have been a tactically advantageous position against the Union right flank, something most historians agree Jackson would have done and could almost certainly have changed the ultimate outcome of the battle.
The11BJoe 1 year ago
@The11BJoe I don't think there's a lot of agreement among historians that Jackson would have taken either Cemetery or Culp's Hill on Day 1. There was an article a few months ago in one of the CW journals debating it. Union Gen. Howard had troops dug in up there long before the Union line nw of town collapsed. Even trying to take it would have cost Jackson big time, leaving Lee with a big hole in his forces. Days 2 and 3 would have played out differently.
rob9641 1 year ago
@rob9641 I've read and talked with many historians who agree Jackson could have and would have taken Cemetery Hill. I did read in the Civil War journal arguments against it as well, however citing many division and brigade commanders under Ewell who all agreed the hill could have and should have been taken I would tend to side with them. It is somewhat difficult to say, given that Jackson's corps was divided after his death so he would have had a larger unified force to work with, were he there.
The11BJoe 1 year ago
@The11BJoe I've seen plenty of debate on the subject. Jackson's command divided between Ewell and Hill, yes, but Hill was there with Ewell, and it's Hill's inability to support Ewell because his men were played out that was one of Ewell's reasons for not pressing forward. The men were there - they were just fought out, and Union forces were entrenched with more coming. Some say Jackson would have taken it, but some say no. It's really a sizeable debate from what I've seen.
rob9641 1 year ago
@rob9641 A very sizeable debate, which can never truly be settled. There are countless what if's that could be taken into account. What if Jackson had lived after Chancellorsville? What if General Heth had obeyed orders and not engaged at Gettysburg? What if Lee moved to reinforce Vicksburg in the west instead of moving north? Endless possibilities that are fun to discuss but, after all is said and done, what actually happened cannot be changed.
The11BJoe 1 year ago
Oh the hair styles back then.
tychecks 1 year ago
@tychecks There was a particular style I've seen a couple times, where a man would let his beard grow all over his neck but shave his face down to the jawline. Made him look like he was wearing a fur collar all the time.
rob9641 1 year ago
and the cemetery ridge line held...
MMSMikey 1 year ago
1:48 BOOM i dont understand why they wouldnt move out of the way even a little bit
jc3Ai 1 year ago
why Armistead apologize at the end?
Rostokouban 1 year ago
@Rostokouban - One of Hancock's aides said the real Armistead apologized because he was Hancock's friend from before the war and had sworn to Hancock that God should strike him dead if he ever left Virginia "should worse come to worse." The real Armstd also apologized to a Union sergeant he recognized from before the war. When you think you're dying, you do tend to things like that.
rob9641 1 year ago 2
@rob9641
Yes in this movie there is an actual scene were Armistead is saying to Longstreet about his friendship with Hancock and the strike me down comment is there. I actually find that scene in Longstreet's tent rather moving.
TheGriefmaker 1 year ago
@TheGriefmaker I posted that scene in Longstreet's tent as Armistead's Gethsemane, which is what it reminded me of. I also thought Richard Jordan did a great job with it, and I liked the way it was written, as a monologue with Longstreet just listening, never knowing what to say. It definitely got the point across - there were plenty of men from the old army who hated doing what they felt they had to do to their old friends.
rob9641 1 year ago
To the person who was asking about the part in the movie where Lee says its his fault. Type in Gettysburg The Great Battle Part 4. You will find it there.
civilwardoc1 1 year ago
I am the Surgeon for the 11th Pa. co K . Every year we try and get out to the Gettysburg reenactment. Since most of us were in this movie. General Hood, Patrick Gorman . Has come back for alot of the reenactments. Its funny everytime I see him I ask him to say. Pete, YOU SHOULD HAVE LEFT ME GO AROUND TO THE RIGHT ! He is a great guy and always does it.
civilwardoc1 1 year ago
@civilwardoc1 He's one heck of a goodlooking man, too.
rob9641 1 year ago
@rob9641 He's also far older than Hood actually at the time of the battle.
Crymson1 1 year ago
@Crymson1 Something that's struck me is how many of the men in the CW looked far older than they were at the time. JEB Stuart looked well over 40 when he wasn't 30. Lee was only 57 at Gettysburg, but he looked more like 70. Life was hard in those days. You got old looking in a hurry.
rob9641 1 year ago
@rob9641 Hood was 32 at the time of the movie, yet he looked older than Longstreet. It was simply a poor choice of actors, IMO.
Crymson1 1 year ago
2:11 "Still the confederates came on!"
Butternut731863 1 year ago
Rebel2276 Check out this book Lee's Real Plan at Gettysburg by Troy Harman. This is a great book. I have read it twice.
civilwardoc1 1 year ago
@civilwardoc1 I shall check it out at the Library of Congress. I work on captured Union flags and that has taken nearly 20 years of my spare time, but when I/We are done, you all will be very surprised at what flags we have found. I do have friends working on captured Confederate flags as well. Those are easy, Union flags are very rare, because Union regimental commanders rarely admitted to losing a flag. I like the challenge.
rebel2276 1 year ago
well and again it is proof that it truly takes guts and sacrifice and brave men to truly stand for what they fight for, may the souls of both rest in peace
xxdead2mexx 1 year ago
I was in this movie at the wall at Picketts charge. I have been a reenactor for 15 yrs and have been studying the Civil War for about 30. I have been to Gettysburg at least a 100 times. I will tell you this Picketts charge did not happen the way history says it did. Ref: Check out Gettysburg Lee's Plan Unchanged
civilwardoc1 1 year ago
@civilwardoc1 You seem to be the person I am looking for, I too have nearly 30 years of experience and did reenacting for a long time. I have a group of friends here in Washington DC and we deep research at the Library of Congress and National Archives. I am just waiting to retire from the Army in about a year and ten months, get my thirty years done.
John Michael Priest in the North and South Magazine, (Lee's gallant 6,000) claims half the Confederates fell out of the attack!
rebel2276 1 year ago
@rebel2276 Priest has written a great book about Pickett's Charge called "Into the Fight." A ton of research, describing the charge in extreme detail, minute by minute.
rob9641 1 year ago
@rob9641 Thank you very much, Rob! I am a huge Civil War book fanatic.
Rob, have a great Christmas and safe New Years with your family!
rebel2276 1 year ago
I don't care what ever side you prefer,but those condfederates i tip my hat to. they were sooo brave.
chopperpilot5 1 year ago
very moving scene..brings a tear, and Im not American or live in America
TheBlueCream 1 year ago
@TheBlueCream - I am American. I thought I understood the "brother against brother" aspect of the Civil War, but Richard Jordan's Armistead made me FEEL it for the first time. May they both rest in peace.
rob9641 1 year ago 16
@rob9641 : amen. God bless our Confederate Army.
eric5906 1 year ago
@TheBlueCream
Yeah, this scene is a tear jerker.
Polaris382 1 year ago
and the cemetery ridge line held
MMSMikey 1 year ago
@MMSMikey : unfortunately it held. Wish the Confederates broke the damn line.
eric5906 1 year ago
@eric5906 I sure don't. Either the war would have lasted 3 years longer or we would have had a confederate government and another war 20 years later.
ih8makinusernames 1 year ago
@ih8makinusernames Errr... Your predictions would be highly incorrect. What logic are you using?
shiron236 1 year ago
@shiron236