|Hooper_X - 2009-12-07 |
Also, if you've got like 18 hours to spare.
Still, a great film and a watershed moment in documentary film making.
|MongoMcMichael - 2009-12-07 |
I hate learning, but I loved this!
|Louis Armstrong - 2009-12-07 |
Good way to spend a morning.
|Lauritz Melchior - 2009-12-07 |
Multi-submit wasn't working, but parts 2 - 9 are also there.
I really want to see his WWII documentary.
|Scrotum H. Vainglorious - 2009-12-07 |
I don't need your Civil War.
|Bort - 2012-04-12 |
Easily five stars. My one complaint is that Burns tries a little too hard to be conciliatory to the Confederates, and play up "states' rights" while downplaying the "slavery" motive. For example, Burns describes the Confederate Constitution as a near clone of the US Constitution, but neglects to mention that there were a half dozen places where they added verbiage that guarantees slavery will never be outlawed in the CSA. Other than that one major change, yeah, it was nearly identical.
This is not to say Burns neglects the topic of slavery; he just frames it as one of the Confederate concerns and not the overarching one to the point of eclipsing all others. But if you've read the declarations of secession drafted by the various Confederate states, you know they come right out and admit it was all about slavery. Historically embarrassing, and I think Burns recognized that.
Wish I could retract my stars, because the more I look at it, the more I realize the point of "The Civil War" (or at least Burns' take on the Civil War) is to paper over conflict between the North and South, so they can agree that everyone was more or less good guys and we can all forget all about it. Which would be fine except that there is this tradition of abusing blacks in the South (also in the North), and I'm left thinking that Burns is trying to minimize that little bit of unpleasantness. That is the topic that MOST needs to be addressed, not the battle tactics at Little Round Top.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|