11 posts tagged “civil war”

"GONE WITH THE WIND" (1939) Review

About a month ago, I had come across an article that provided a list of old classics that the author felt might be overrated. One of those movies turned out to be the 1939 classic, ”GONE WITH THE WIND”. Not only did the author accuse the movie of being both racist and sexist, he also claimed that the movie had not aged very well over the past 69 years.

Did I agree with the author? Well, let me put it this way. I would say that "GONE WITH THE WIND" has managed to withstand the tests of time . . . to a certain extent. As the author had pointed out, the sexism and racism are obvious and rather off-putting. The slaves came across as too servile for my taste. And although the slave Prissy was not the only dimwitted character in the story (think of Aunt Pittypatt, the Tarleton brothers and Charles Hamilton), she had the bad luck to spout that unfortunate line that must have been the bane of actress Butterfly McQueen’s life - ”Miz Scarlett, I know nothin’ bout birthin’ no babies.”. And the sexism was no better. I found Rhett’s determination to view Scarlett as his own personal child bride rather distasteful – along with his act of marital rape. But if I must be honest, I have seen movies that are just as bad or even worse. I had once seen ”GONE WITH THE WIND” at one of my local movie theaters when it had been re-released to celebrate its 50th anniversary in 1989. The first half of the film struck me as being well-paced and filmed. The dialogue sparkled and Vivian Leigh and Clark Gable, and the rest of the cast could not have been better. I could not say the same for the film’s second half.

The real problem with ”GONE WITH THE WIND” manifested in Part Two. Once Scarlett married Rhett . . . the movie simply fizzled. Oh sure, it had its iconic moments – Scarlett appearing at Ashley’s birthday party in the infamous red dress and Bonnie Blue Butler’s death. Unfortunately, it did not take me very long to fall asleep . . . even before poor Bonnie Blue’s death. I managed to wake up in time to witness Hattie McDaniel's brilliant monologue on the decline of Butlers' marriage. I do not think one can really blame the movie's credited screenwriter, Sidney Howard and the screenwriters who worked on the project. Margaret Mitchell's novel has the same problem as the movie. Namely, it started brilliantly and ended with me crying in despair for the story to end. I suspect that Selznick had decided not to risk earning the fans' ire by refraining from changing the novel's structure too much.

And the main reason why ”GONE WITH THE WIND” threatened to fizzle out in the end? Quite frankly, the story seemed unable to maintain the same pace throughout the film. Even worse, this seemed to have turned ”GWTW” into a movie with conflicting genres. I do not know whether to list it as a historical drama or a costumed melodrama. Most of the movie seemed like a historical drama – especially the first half that ends with Scarlett’s return to Tara. But once Scarlett’s second husband - Frank Kennedy – was killed during the Shantytown attack sequence, the movie became a costumed melodrama. This change in genre not only made the movie seemed slightly schizophrenic, it nearly grounded its pacing to a halt.

But . . . despite its political incorrectness and the dull last hour of the film, ”GONE WITH THE WIND” still managed to hold up pretty well. Despite being nearly 70 years old.

Second Look: "THE BLUE AND THE GRAY" (1982)

In 1982, CBS television aired a three-part miniseries about the experiences of two families during the Civil War. Sounds familiar? It should, for John Jakes had wrote something similar in three novels between 1982 and 1987 – namely the ”NORTH AND SOUTH” Trilogy. Jakes’ novels were adapted for television in 1985, 1986 and 1994. However this miniseries was produced by Larry White and Lou Reda. And despite the mildly similar theme to the ”NORTH AND SOUTH” saga, there are some vast differences.

”THE BLUE AND THE GRAY” had not been based upon any particular novel or series of novels. Instead, it was based upon a story concept by Bruce Catton, a famous historian who had written a book on the Civil War with the same title. As I had stated before, the miniseries told the story of two families and their experiences between 1859 and 1865. The two families in question are the Geysers and the Hales. The Geyers and the Hales are linked by two sisters portrayed by Colleen Dewhurst and Diane Baker. Although the miniseries revealed the families’ experiences via many characters, the two main characters in the story are John Geyser (John Hammond), who is the third son of the Virginia Geysers and Jonas Steele (Stacy Keach), a former Pinkerton agent and abolitionist who befriends John and marries the latter’s Pennsylvania cousin, Mary Hale (Julia Duffy).

Many sagas about the Civil War – especially those on television – tend to focus upon wealthy families or those from exclusive families. Prime examples of this would be ”GONE WITH THE WIND”, the ”NORTH AND SOUTH” Trilogy, ”BEULAH LAND” and ”LOUISIANA”. ”THE BLUE AND THE GRAY” took another route in which its main characters hailed from a middle-class background. The patriarchs of the two families seemed to reek of the middle class. As I had earlier pointed out, John Geyer’s father was a middling farmer named Ben Geyser (Lloyd Bridges). And his uncle by marriage – Jacob Hale Sr. (Robin Gammell) – happens to be the owner and editor-in-chief of a small newspaper in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania.

Even after twenty-six years, I still enjoy ”THE BLUE AND THE GRAY”. It has not lost its allure one bit. It rarely played footloose with history. And aside from the miniseries’ last fifteen to twenty minutes, it managed to maintain a brisk pace despite being at least eight (8) hours. The two leads – John Hammond and Stacy Keach managed to create an excellent chemistry and it was easy to view the pair as close friends. And both men were ably supported by a first-class cast. But amongst them, I was especially impressed by the performances of Julia Duffy as Mary Hale – John’s cousin and Jonas’ wife; Brian Kerwin as Malachy Hale, Mary’s oldest brother; Cooper Huckabee as Matthew Geyser, John’s oldest brother; Dan Shor as Luke Geyser, John’s irrepressible younger brother; and Gerald S. O'Loughlin as the Hale brothers’ sergeant, O’Toole. I also have to commend upon Gregory Peck’s steady, yet humorous take on Abraham Lincoln and Sterling Hayden for refraining from an over-the-top performance, while portraying abolitionist John Brown.

Someone once complained that the battle sequences in ”THE BLUE AND THE GRAY” came off as rather bloodless. I found this complaint a little ridiculous, considering that this story was presented as an eight-hour television miniseries, rather than a theatrical movie. Besides, I saw plenty of blood in the miniseries. But two of the most chilling scenes in ”THE BLUE AND THE GRAY” barely featured any blood:

*John Geyser’s brother Mark (Michael Horton) found himself badly wounded during the Battle of the Wilderness, while the woods surrounding him burn from shellfire.

*John’s close friend, a free black named Jonathan Henry (Paul Winfield), is lynched for helping two runaway slaves by a local slave patrol led by a fanatical pro-slavery preacher (Warren Oates). What is amazing about this scene is that it happened partially off screen.

As much as I like ”THE BLUE AND THE GRAY”, it does have its flaws. My main complaint about the miniseries has a lot to do with the vast number of extras and minor characters in the story. Granted, there are some minor characters portrayed by veteran character actors like Rory Calhoun, Christopher Stone, Julius W. Harris and Geraldine Page. Unfortunately, their presence could not hide the number of amateur . . . or should I say very untalented actors and actresses in minor roles. A prime example would be a nameless actor who portrayed a patriotic Union officer that John Geyser met at the Willard’s Hotel. And there was the actor who portrayed Confederate general Barnard Bee, whose declaration of a famous line was at best hammy. I have no idea why producers White and Reda had hired these people in the first place. Perhaps they were desperate to fill as many roles as possible.

Another problem I had was the romance between John Geyser and the daughter of a Massachusetts senator named Kathy Reynolds, portrayed by Kathleen Beller. Quite frankly, they made quite a boring pair. There is nothing more boring than a couple consisted by two people inclined to be reserved. Superficially, they looked cute. Individually, both John Hammond and Beller gave very solid performances. But as an on-screen romantic pair . . . they bored the pants off me.

But ”THE BLUE AND THE GRAY” had some memorable scenes. Two of them featured actor Cooper Huckabee. Portraying the oldest Geyser sibling Matthew, I believe that he gave the best performance. And Huckabee had the opportunity to shine in the following scenes:

*A brief, yet emotional reunion between Matthew and John Geyser (Hammond) in the lines right outside Vicksburg, Mississippi.

*Matthew’s death, following a minor battle at the Geyser Farm (beautifully acted by Huckabee).

And there were other memorable scenes, as well. There was what I consider to be the two funniest in the entire miniseries – namely Malachai Hale’s hilarious encounter with a Confederate soldier, while both were trying to hide from a battle; and the barn dance behind enemy lines that the Hale brothers and John Geyser had attended at the invitation of John’s younger brother Luke (Dan Shor), a mischievous Confederate soldier. The latter scene also featured Canadian actor Duncan Regehr (”Zorro”) as a Confederate officer, affronted at the idea of two Union soldiers and a correspondent behind enemy lines at a barn dance. I also enjoyed the scene featuring the Hale family witnessing a speech by President-elect Lincoln at a whistle stop in Southern Pennsylvania. And both the lynching of Jonathan Henry and the entire Battle of the Wilderness sequence seemed both poignant, yet too harrowing to believe.

It seems a shame that ”THE BLUE AND THE GRAY” is barely mentioned by film critics or fans in regard to Civil War movies in the theaters or television. Quite frankly, it is one of the better ones I have ever seen. It gave a view of the late antebellum period and the Civil War through the eyes of the masses rarely seen in movies like ”GONE WITH THE WIND” or the ”NORTH AND SOUTH” trilogy. I heartily recommend it.

Below is a gallery of photos and publicity stills from the 1939 classic, "GONE WITH THE WIND", from the following two links:

"Tomorrow Is Another Day" and "Scarlett Online":

"GONE WITH THE WIND" Photo Gallery

 

 

The Major Problems of “NORTH AND SOUTH: BOOK II”

In the eyes of many fans of the trilogy of miniseries based upon John Jakes’ saga, ”The NORTH AND SOUTH Trilogy”, the only miniseries not worthy of the entire saga is the third one - ”HEAVEN AND HELL: North and South Book III”. I wish I could agree with them. After all, the production values for ”Book III” had not been as impressive as the other two. And of the three miniseries, ”NORTH AND SOUTH: BOOK II” had the best costume designs. But looking at the three miniseries from the prospective of a writer, I have finally come to the conclusion that it was ”Book II” (set during the Civil War), and not ”Book III” that ended up being a lot more disappointing to me.

None of the three miniseries were exact copies of the novels from which they had been adapted. Changes were made in all three. Despite some flaws, I had no problems with most of the changes in ”Book I” and ”Book III”. But I found some of the changes in ”Book II” to be very questionable. In fact, some of these changes really did nothing to serve the miniseries’ story, except pad it unnecessarily in order to ensure that it would last six episodes.

Below are some examples of the questionable plotlines I found in ”BOOK II”:


*Around the end of Episode I, Brett Main Hazard (Genie Francis) – a South Carolina belle who had recently married Pennsylvania-born army officer, Billy Hazard (Parker Stevenson) - and her maid, Semiramis (Erica Gimpel), had left Washington D.C. just before the Battle of Bull Run (July 21, 1861). The former had received a written note about Madeline LaMotte (Lesley Anne Down)’s kidnapping by her estranged husband (David Carridine) and the injuries that Brett’s mother – Clarissa Main (Jean Simmons) – had suffered following a barn fire at the Main’s South Carolina plantation, Mont Royal. Brett and Semiramis finally reached Mont Royal in November 1861. I have a lot of problems with this.

1) Why was the message about Clarissa and Madeline sent to Brett in
Washington D.C. and not to Brett’s older brother, General Orry Main (Patrick Swayze) in Richmond? It would have been easier to reach him, since Richmond was inside Confederate territory.

2) Would it have been easier for Brett and Semiramis remain in Richmond and wait for
Orry to depart for South Carolina? What was the point of them leaving him a message and continuing their journey south? They would have reached Mont Royal a lot sooner.

3) Why did it take them three to four months to reach South Carolina? It took them at least less than a week to travel from Washington D.C. to Richmond, Virginia – despite being delayed by Union troops. They were on horseback. So why did it take them an additional three-and-a-half months to reach Mont Royal in South Carolina?


*In Episode III, despondent over being unable to see Brett for two years, Billy decides to go AWOL, following the Battle of Gettysburg (July 1-3, 1863) and head south to South Carolina to see Brett. Upon his arrival at Mont Royal, he stays there less than 24 hours and leaves to return to the Army. He returned to duty in Hiram Burdam (Kurtwood Smith)’s Sharpshooter regiment in late April/early May 1864, in time to participate in the Battle of the Wilderness. And I had problems with this.

1) It took Billy less than a month to travel from Southern Pennsylvania (Gettysburg) to Mont Royal in South Carolina. Yet, it took him at least eight to nine months to rejoin his regiment, who were back in Virginia by the time of his arrival. Why did it take him longer to travel from South Carolina to Virginia, than it did for him to travel from Southern Pennsylvania to South Carolina? He was on horseback.

2) Billy had been AWOL from the Army for at least nine to ten months (July 1863 – late April/early May 1864). Why did Colonel Burdan fail to punish him for abandoning his post without permission . . . for so long? In the spring of 1864, the Union Army was not exactly desperate for an increase in manpower, unlike the Confederate Army. In fact, Billy never even faced a court martial or trial of any kind for his actions. His only punishments were a stern lecture from Burdan and being passed over for a promotion to the rank of captain. This is illogical . . . even for a fictional story.


*Charles Main (Lewis Smith) and Augusta Barclay (Kate McNeil) first met each other while the former was on a scouting mission for the Confederacy and the latter was smuggling medicine in July 1861. They met again, the following year, when Charles appeared at her farm, wounded. In the spring of 1864, following the Battle of the Wilderness, they began a love affair that lasted until they said good-bye for the last time in February 1865. Two months later, following the surrender of the Confederate Army at Appomattox, Charles returned to Barclay Farm and learned that Augusta had died while giving birth to his son. Charles learned that Augusta’s South Carolina relatives had taken custody of Charles Augustus Main and returned to Charleston. There, Charles took custody of his son for the first time. I have a problem.

1) Charles and Augusta saw each other for the last time in February 1865. When Charles returned to her farm, two months later, her former servant – Washington (John Nixon) – informed him that she had recently died from giving birth to Charles’ son. Yet, Augusta certainly did not look pregnant, during Charles’ last visit two months ago - when the unborn baby should have been at least six to seven months old. And she was wearing a corset.


2) Following his discovery that he was a father, it did not take Charles very long to return to South Carolina and claim his child. Yet, the recently Charles Augustus Main looked at least between one to two years old. If that had been the child’s real age, Charles and Augusta’s son would have been born a year earlier – before they had consummated their relationship in May 1864.

*After being driven from Mont Royal by the discovery of a family secret by Ashton Main Huntoon (Terri Garber), Madeline Main (Lesley Anne-Down) settles in Charleston around July-September 1863. The following spring in May 1864, she meets a former slave/refugee named Jim (Bumper Robinson) and his sick mother. Because of this meeting, Madeline decides to offer aid to many of Charleston’s war refugees – whether they are ex-slaves or poor whites. She also learns about Jim and his mother’s personal history. Apparently, they were Tennessee slaves who were freed upon the arrival of Union troops at their former master’s plantation, who decided to make their way to Charleston.

1) WHAT IN THE HELL IS THIS? Why on earth would recently emancipated slaves make their way deep into Confederate territory? Did the writers of the miniseries honestly believe that slaves were that stupid? Jim and his mother were from Tennessee. They could have made their way to any of the following cities:

*Nashville, Tennessee – which fell to Union troops in February 1862
*Memphis, Tennessee – captured by the Union in June 1862
*New Orleans, Louisiana – fell to Union troops in April 1862
*Louisville, Kentucky – which remained in the Union throughout the war

Any of the above cities were closer to the plantation owned by Michael’s master and could have provided safe refuge for him and his mother. Certainly not Charleston, South Carolina, which was too far and still Confederate territory by the spring of 1864.

2) The writers could have written Michael and his mother as South Carolina slaves. And yet . . . they would have been wiser to head for Hilton Head, the only safe refuge for runaway slaves in South Carolina, until February 1865.

"NORTH AND SOUTH Trilogy" - Certain Topics

In the past, there have been questions regarding plot points for the three miniseries of the "NORTH AND SOUTH" Trilogy. I thought I would clear up a few matters.

Elkhannah Bent's Survival Following Fight with Orry Main

Some "NORTH AND SOUTH" fans have wondered how Elkhannah Bent (Philip Casnoff) had survived his fight with Orry Main (Patrick Swayze) in the second book, "Book II - Love and War". In the second novel, Orry and Bent had some sort of fight near the James River that ended when Orry shoved the latter over the falls and (at least I thought) to his death. Imagine my surprise when I read "Book III - Heaven and Hell" and saw that Bent never died after all. He ended up in an army hospital in Richmond.

In the second miniseries, North and South - Book II", Bent rushed inside that warehouse just before it blew up. I thought that was the end of that bugger - until I read the novel, "Heaven and Hell" one year later. When the miniseries, "Book III - Heaven and Hell" finally aired, Bent was alive at the beginning of the first, although scarred. How he had survived that explosion, I don't know. After Bent killed Orry, he and Ashton Main Huntoon (Terri Garber) quarrelled. Bent had said the wrong thing to Ashton and she did to him, what Orry did in the book - shoved him over the falls and into the James River. And just as in the book, Bent ended up in an army hospital, crazy as ever.

Orry's Swordsmanship in Book I

I must admit that I had a problem with Orry defeating Bent in that brief sword fight in Part I of the first miniseries. Especially since Orry was described as not being a talented swordsman. I had asked several people about sword fighting and according to them, brains and a solid understanding of strategy are required to be a good swordsman.
Since Orry was never that great with his studies (including military subjects), I never saw how he was able to defeat Bent, who was. The explanation that Patrick Swayze (who portrayed Orry) happened to be an excellent dancer did not seem much of an excuse. Nor did it seem like a good excuse to include that scene in the miniseries. This does not mean that all Northern cadets made better swordsmen than Southern cadets. After all, I can think of a good number of Southerners who had excelled academically at West Point - including Robert E. Lee, Pierre Beauregard and Porter Alexander.

Hanging in Book III

In the third miniseries, one of the characters - an ex-slave named Issac (Stan Shaw), ended up hanged by the local Ku Klux Klan. A "NORTH AND SOUTH" fan had believed that a similar hanging had taken place in the third novel, "Heaven and Hell". I am here to say that no such hanging scene in the third novel. Issac's literary counterpoint in the third novel turned out to be a former Mont Royal slave named Andy Sherman. Andy ended up being killed during the Klan's attack upon Mont Royal. Ironically, Andy's counterpoint in the second miniseries, was Ezra (Beau Billingslea), who happened to be in love with Semiramis (Erica Gimpel).

Mortgage on Mont Royal

In both the first novel and the first miniseries, Orry had put Mont Royal on mortgage, so he could pay back George for: a) the funds George gave to the Mains for construction of a steamship in the novel; and b) George's investment in a cotton mill he co-owned with Orry in the miniseries. For those who do not know, the character of Cooper Main - Orry's older brother - appeared in all THREE novels. However, the producers had decided to cut out his character in the first two miniseries. When Cooper finally appeared in Book III (in the form of Robert Wagner), the writers explained that he was the one who held the mortgage on Mont Royal. Where he had been all this time, they never bothered to explain. A moment of sloppy writing, if you ask me.

If you have any further questions regarding the plots of both Jakes' three novels or the three miniseries, please do not hesitate to ask.

 

Below are photos from the 2005 miniseries produced by Steven Spielberg called "INTO THE WEST".  The miniseries starred Matthew Settle, Tonantzin Carmelo, Rachel Leigh Cook, Irene Bedard, Skeet Ulrich, Daniel Gilles, Michael Spears, Tyler Christopher, Christian Kane, Keri Russell and Zahn McClarnon:

 

"INTO THE WEST" Photo Gallery

 

 

Second Look: "BEULAH LAND" (1980)

In the fall of 1980, NBC Television had aired a three-part miniseries called, ”BEULAH LAND”. Starring Lesley-Ann Warren, Michael Sarrazin, Dorian Harewood and Paul Rudd, the miniseries told the story of an 19th century Savannah-born woman named Sarah Pennington and her impact upon the Kendrick family and their cotton plantation in Georgia during the years 1827 and 1872.

The miniseries was based upon two novels by Lonnie Coleman - ”Beulah Land” and ”Look Away, Beulah Land” It featured a cast that included television and movie stars Eddie Albert, Hope Lange, Michael Sarrazin, Dorian Harewood, Meredith Baxter, James Eachin, Paul Rudd, Don Johnson, Jonathan Frakes, Jenny Agutter, Franklyn Seales and Madeline Stowe.

Recently, I had just finished watching "Beulah Land". To my surprise, I still found it enjoyable. Unlike other antebellum and Civil War sagas like ”NORTH AND SOUTH” and ”THE BLUE AND THE GRAY”, the setting for Beulah Land seemed to be restricted to southeast Georgia, with brief forays to Charleston, South Carolina and Atlanta, Georgia. It has its usual stock of family melodrama – sometimes portrayed in an over-the-top manner by some of the cast members. It also gave an interesting look at the ambiguous relationships between slaves and slave owners; whites and blacks – regardless of whether they were free or slave; and between wealthy and poor whites in the antebellum South. There had been accusations by some that ”BEULAH LAND” had skimmed the darker aspects of American slavery or indulged in a negative and clichéd portrayal of the African-American characters. All I can say is that whoever made these accusations had not seen the miniseries. Here are more observations I had made:

1. The period in which Lauretta Pennington (Meredith Baxter) and her son-in-law, Adam Davis (Jonathan Frakes) experienced The Siege of Atlanta, is erroneous. According to the miniseries, the actual siege took place during mid-November 1864. William Sherman’s siege of Atlanta occurred between late July and early September of the same year. Lauretta and Adam left Atlanta around the same time Sherman began his march through Georgia.

2. I have noticed that Lauretta and other citizens fleeing Atlanta hardly seemed to be expressing any signs of panic, while dodging Union shells. Very odd.

3. Jonathan Frakes is a first-class actor, but his Southern accent was not very good in this miniseries. It was a good thing that he had portrayed a Northerner in the ”NORTH AND SOUTH” Trilogy.

4. Unlike most of the actresses in the ”NORTH AND SOUTH” Trilogy, the ones in ”BEULAH LAND” must have avoided wigs. Which would account for their loose and natural hairstyles.

5. The first fifteen minutes of ”BEULAH LAND” was set in 1827. Yet the female costumes had resembled fashions of the 1840s. As the miniseries progressed, the costumes became more accurate. But not completely.

6. For me, the following actors and actresses gave the best performances - Lesley Ann Warren (Sarah Pennington Kendrick), Dorian Harewood (Floyd), Eddie Albert (Felix Kendrick), Paul Rudd (Leon Kendrick), Paul Shenar (Roscoe Coltray), James McEachin (Ezra), Jean Foster (Pauline), Don Johnson (Bonnard Davis), Hope Lange (Deborah Kendrick),Franklyn Seales (Roman Kendrick), Allyn Ann McLerie (Edna Davis) and Jenny Agutter (Lizzie Coltray).

7. Meredith Baxter would have made the list, if it were not for her occasional bouts of hammy acting. However, I have noticed a good number of other performers like Illene Graff (Annabel Davis), Clarice Taylor (Lovey), Laurie Prange (Rachel Kendrick Davis), K.C. Martel (Young Benjamin Davis), and especially Bibi Osterwald (Nell Kendrick) really tend to chew the scenery. Along with a good number of performers in minor roles.

8. Below is a list of what I consider to be the best scenes:

*Selma (Madeleine Stowe) and Bonnard's wedding night
*Slaves' talk in the kitchen during Sarah and Leon’s wedding reception
*Sarah and Floyd become aware of their attraction toward one another
*Lauretta's revelation of her affair with Leon
*Rachel and Edna Davis's deaths
*Death of corrupt Union sergeant
*Floyd's death

”BEULAH LAND” is not what I would call a work of art. And to be frank, I can say the same about the novels in which it is based upon. As for this belief that the African-American characters were portrayed in an embarrassing and clichéd manner as ”docile and happy” slaves – it is not true. The only times the slaves appeared ”happy and docile” over their situation, occurred when they were faking this attitude toward their white owners. Although ”BEULAH LAND” is not great television, I have to give it kudos for its accurate portrayal of the surprisingly complex and ambiguous society of the antebellum South. I say . . . give it a shot.

 

 

"COMMANCHE MOON" Photo Gallery

Below is a gallery featuring photos from the new CBS miniseries, "Commanche Moon", starring Karl Urban, Steve Zahn, Linda Cardonelli, Wes Studi, Rachel Griffiths and Val Kilmer.  Based upon Larry McMurty's novel, it is a second prequel to the 1989 miniseries, "Lonesome Dove" and is set in Texas during the 1850s and 60s:   

 

 

 

 

NATIONAL TREASURE 2: THE BOOK OF SECRETS" and "CHARLIE WILSON'S WAR" Reviews

Two movies were recently released in the theaters, last Friday . . . two movies that could not be anymore different than if they had tried.  I am speaking of "NATIONAL TREASURE 2: THE BOOK OF SECRETS" and "CHARLIE WILSON'S WAR".  The first movie, starring Nicholas Cage and Jon Voight, is a sequel to the 2004 Disney film, "NATIONAL TREASURE".  The other is a comedy-drama about a Texas congressman from the 1980s who found himself involved in Afghanistan's attempts to free itself from a Soviet invasion.

 

"National Treasure 2: The Book of Secrets"

This sequel to the 2004 movie - "National Treasure" - opens with the Gates family - Benjamin and Patrick (Nicholas Cage and Jon Voight) - learning from a black market dealer named Mitch Wilkinson (Ed Harris) that their Civil War ancestor Thomas Gates (Joel Gretsch) may have been the mastermind behind Abraham Lincoln's assassination.  Wilkinson's so-called proof came from assassin John Wilkes Booth's diary.  To prove their ancestor's innocence and family honor, Ben and Patrick recruit the aid of family friend Riley Poole (Justin Bartha), Ben's estranged girlfriend Abigail Chase (Diane Kruger), Patrick's ex-wife Emily Appleton (Helen Mirren), FBI Agent Sadusky (Harvey Keitel) and even the President of the United States (Bruce Greenwood) to help them find the treasure of gold that would vindicate Thomas Gates and the family's name.

In a nutshell, this sequel turned out to be just as fun and exciting as the first movie.  Ben Gates and company follow clues that lead them from Paris to London to Washington D.C. and finally Mount Rushmore in the Dakota Black Hills.  The cast were their usual competent selves and Ed Harris turned out to be just as effective as a villain as Sean Bean had been in the first film.  My favorite sequences included Ben, Abigail and Riley's attempt to gain access to one of the rooms at Buckingham Palace, Ben and Abigail's minor adventures at the White House and Ben's kidnapping of the President at Mount Vernon. 

I did have a few problems with the movie.  My biggest gripe turned out to be the treasure itself.  I realize that the Templar treasure found in the first film could not be topped.  But I must admit that the City of Gold found beneath Mount Rushmore had failed to impress me at all.  And why end the movie at Mount Rushmore?  Granted there was a war between American settlers and the Dakota Sioux in 1862, but what did that have to do with the Civil War?  I would have been happier if the movie's setting had remained on the East Coast. 

Aside from these minor gripes, "National Treasure 2: The Book of Secrets" turned out to be as entertaining as the first film.  I would highly recommend it.

"Charlie Wilson's War"

This historical drama told the story of Texas congressman Charles Wilson (Tom Hanks)'s efforts to get the United States to aid the Mujahideen (Afghanistan freedom fighters) in their fight against the military invaders from the Soviet Union during the 1980s.  Urged on by his staunchly anti-Communist friend and romantic interest, Texas heiress Joanne Herring (Julia Roberts), Wilson became deeply involved to help the Afghans throw the Soviets out of their country without the world knowing about U.S. involvement.  The film not only revealed Wilson's growing disdain for the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, it also gave moviegoers a look into his gregarious social life of women and partying.

Judging from the movie's Golden Globe and Screen Actors Guild nomination, one could see that "Charlie Wilson's War" has become a front-runner for Academy Award nominations.  Does it deserve the acclamation?  I do not know.  Granted, Mike Nichols did a competent job in allowing moviegoers a peek into Washington and international politics, and C.I.A. policies.  Tom Hanks, Julia Roberts and Philip Seymour Hoffman (as C.I.A. operative Gust Avrakotos) were excellent.  But if I must be honest, the movie did not give me a charge.  I liked it.  I really found it entertaining.  But I did not love it.  When leaving the theater, I had this feeling that something was missing.  It could have been the unsatisfying ending, which I found to be rushed.  Or perhaps I thought the story could have required a little more depth.

I cannot say that "Charlie Wilson's War" was great.  But I did find it entertaining.  And if you are intrigued by a look into American politics during the 1980s, I would highly recommend it.

Here are some photos from the sequel to 2004's "NATIONAL TREASURE".  It is called "NATIONAL TREASURE 2 - The Book of Secrets" and like the first movie, it stars Nicholas Cage: