Except that Pete Longstreet was noted for his swearing! 🙂

Very Powerful acting....and presentation.

@@williamclifford4441 had to keep it clean because it was a "made for tv" movie. Also why there's very little to no blood, screaming wounded, etc.

Was he rich from the luggage company fortune or sometin?

He was outstanding and maybe the hardest role in the movie.

Agreeeee

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/lc5kd72Wp9LJfKc.html&ab_channel=PunditPlanetMedia

Lee: General Pickett, sir you must look to your division. Pickett: General Lee.... I have no division!!!

You mean from behind the Codori barn. And don't forget Pickett was busy at a shad bake at another important battle,,,NOT being where he was supposed to be..

@@tomjones2202 was he not in a conference with his neighbouring division commanders

​@@thodan467 it was a luncheon, not a conference. They felt that the Union would not attack since it was later in the afternoon already

@@waynebeckham3807 Honestly i expect Leaders in this Situation Not only parley over wine and poetry when they dine togerher. Sometimes i learned, you can clear Things better with a few breadrolls and Not a formal council

The confederate artillery completely missed their marks. They over shot the Union cannons leaving them to decimate the charge. Which they did. Still, the confederates attacked & were slaughtered.

The grapeshot alone raised holy hell. Fun Fact, though. When the artillery started the sound carried as far as Washington, DC. Must have been a sight.

@@johnshanahan6439 Something about the paper fuses becoming damp during the march up from Virginia, during days of rain, caused the shells to explode later than they were intended.

​@@Gallagherfreak100Sometimes I wonder why Alexander didn't check clearly the damage of the Union position before telling Longstreet and Lee about their defensive. I hardly think a man like Lee would order the charge like that when their position still intact without any damage

@@thanhhoangnguyen4754 Really hard to see details in battles like that, there's a ton of smoke getting kicked up and they didn't have modern optics.

I did not know that. Thanks.

And, speaking as a TarHeel, he nailed the North Carolina accent!

One and done as 007, correct?

That never happened to the other fellow.

Dont forget Pickett being the last to salute and sensing something about Longstreet's tone, pausing to see his resolution before making his way to his horse.

The youngest fullbird on both sides was 19, how crazy is that. Alot of the ranks were brevet and they lost them after the war (see, Custer who died as a LTC even though he was a major general in the war)

Talk about an ill advised attack!!

@@robertkrause4861 Longstreet says it plainly in the film as well it being well documented that he pushed back on Lee to not make the charge. Lee was not full briefed on the situation due to Stuart being late to the party and also being sick with diarrhea and possibly heart issues, made the attack haphazardly.

He answered, "I'm 29, sir."

West Pointers do not have to say anything. They just tap their rings.

I was in the Army. The pointers were arrogant, stupid, and useless. ROTC officers were awesome.

The best officers are former enlisted, graduates of OCS.

Pettigrew was not such a man. He was brave, smart, and cunning. In this battle, even Patton would have taken a beating.

This is why Lee found himself in the situation at Gettysburg. Stuart's best calvary officers were not with Lee's army because Stuart did not get along with them and they were kept away from Lee so they would not spread rumors about him (Stuart) to Lee.

Didnt quite like him as Pickett. OTOH he was DEVASTATING as Stonewall in G&G. Totally aced the role.

Agreed - what is obvious from this scene is how he will push the attack to the utmost - which is what Longstreet finds quietly devastating - he is sending someone who will run head-first into the meat-grinder, and Longstreet is convinced this attack must fail. And George is just the man to ensure that its failure will be as bloody as possible.

Pickett was a paper soldier.

(Acknowledging this is a 14 year old comment) Hard to say whether the smiling reaction actually happened, but Pickett was very critical of R.E. Lee in later years over the failure of the charge. If Pickett had reservations ahead of time, they should have been voiced up the chain of command prior to the charge. Otherwise it is rather unfair to enthusiastically endorse a battle plan, but then revoke that endorsement later. This is of course assuming Pickett had the same intelligence on the Federal positions that Lee had.

@@jdsmith542 B.S.

Agreed. His plan stunk here. Too bold, too much open space.

No joke, that is where I stayed when I visited. It was nice and breakfast was included. I also highly recommend the horse guided tour around the battlefield.

They got great beds.

Been there once, nice place😉👍

Or the Gettysburg Inn

We shouldn't be to hard with Gen. Lee here about that specific point, his biggest mistake was rather his wrong choice concerning the question on which side he should act in this war.

You don't want to be hard on Lee, he should have lost his command over this fiasco.

@@davidjarkeld2333 Well, we should be fair, the war had eaten up to many soldiers, it was time to get on the way to end this hole thing without any real hope for a good end for the southern staates. Also: good number-one-commanders don't grow on trees. 🤷🏻‍♂️

While it true the attack was a mistake, a lot of people forget or ignore that Lee was under a lot of pressure both politically and militarily to win a decisive battle up north and was desperate to get it as well. Politically, the confederate President Davis put on a lot of pressure of Lee telling him that they needed a major victory in the north and be in a position to threaten Washington, which would have strengthened the growing peace movement in the North and the opposition party and pressured Lincoln and his government to seek peace on confederate terms. Militarily, Lee also knew he needed a quick and decisive victory so to force a negotiated peace with the federal government that favored the confederation, since it was the only way the confederation could win. Lee knew that the longer the war went on the stronger the Union would get and the weaker he and the confederates would become as the South simply couldn't compete with the industrial might, manpower and resources of the North, making a war of attrition unwinnable especially with the Union's naval blockade on all confederate ports, which put even more pressure on the South's economy Lee had already made attacks on both flanks at Gettysburg and failed a break the Union lines, leaving only the center to attack and didn't want to withdraw due to the pressure he was under to win the battle and was afraid a withdrawal would demoralize his men's moral and believed that this battle was the only chance to he would get to invade the north and win

After 1 July, Lee had no alternative but to either attack or abandon the campaign in failure. His tactical decisions were correct- because errors made by Lee himself before the battle even began placed him and the AoNV in that position.

It was brave and heroic indeed, but it ultimately achieved little, other than decimating a Confederate unit

Brandon Korner Veteran units too!!

Adrian Jackson Well that makes it even more pointless then.

Don't forget - much of Shaara's book and the belief's of many today are based on Longstreet's highly dubious memoir, in which he is gifted with marvelous 20/20 hindsight. In fact, all that he claimed he thought, felt and said to General Lee at Gettysburg is utter nonsense, and it was disproved by Clifford Dowdey in his magnificent book 'Death of a Nation.' The true story of what happened at Gettysburg is far different from what many believe and what is in 'The Killer Angels' and this film.

they were fighting for thier country!

Gen Joe Wheeler had 16 horses shot from under him plus another in Cuba in the Spanish American War. Gen Forrest had 31 horses shot from under him. Grant and Sherman were both scared shitless of both of them. Petigrew had a horse shot from under him covering Bobby Lee's withdrawal from Gettysburg.

At Shiloh, and earlier in February 1862, Grant was twice away from his men when they were attacked. The commander of an army can NEVER be away from his men, for any reason, at any time. If he is on leave, ill, or injured as Grant was, then he must inform his superiors and appoint, or have appointed, a replacement who is fully in command of the army until he returns. Now, why was Grant frequently away from his army? So he could go on benders. He would drink himself into a stupor, and went off to do this so he would not be seen by his staff or men. This is dereliction of duty; he nearly lost his job for it in February, and should have lost his job for it after Shiloh, but this time, he and Sherman lied in their after action reports, so Halleck and Lincoln did not remove both of them. They were corrupt men, which they proved throughout their lives.

BeefyLevinson Pickett did that.

jmitterii2 Picket was a mile behind the lines, where a major general should be.

+jc3cp3123 Not Pickett's fault. He was ordered into that charge.

hagamapama It didn't stop the brain-dead southern hicks from blaming him anyway. Poor Picket :(

+BeefyLevinson I think personally I'd heroically advance in a direction away from all the fighting noise. =0

I decline to join The Charge herd. I've got his Salish Sea Fort and other military works. Also, British, which Pickett had displaced.

I remember standing where the Confederate soldiers jumped off, looking up that ridge. It was humbling.

The heat of the day didn't help.

And the movie came on two cassettes, IIRC.

"Oh Lee, You SCREWED it all up"!

HE COULD Be BLOODY MINDED !!!and DEAF !!!on Purpose ???ie HOOD Told HIM THEY Have The ROUNDTOP !!!&.TO Drew A FAINT !!!to MAKE The FEDS Leave Thire HIGH Ground And Come AFTER Them.??? BUT NO LEE Would NOT Go Back An INCH ??..BLOODY FOOL g

The "Lee worship" was far from universal. Many senior officers and even soldiers wrote critically of his judgement in the fight.

@@althesmith afterwards

@@bobdole6768 I doubt many soldiers exactly had the time to write home in the middle of the fight. But after the campaign there was plenty of criticism and some from his own officers.

It doesn't work that way. Pickett was a West Pointer, fought in Mexico, fought superbly earlier in the war, especially on the Peninsula. The reason Longstreet gave him the diagram was because he was the Corps commander and also in charge of the attack - which he bungled. Pickett, as Division commander, was subordinate. There are dozens of different ways to attack - you have to do what the boss tells you. Longstreet completely failed to properly involve A. P. Hill's Corps - and its artillery - and failed to carry out the pont a feu that Lee ordered. I am the only historian who has pointed this out; amazingly, all the rest have overlooked it.

You make it sound like Longstreet himself was firing every artillery gun and controlling every division of infantry. At the end of the day, Longstreet created a comprehensive plan to best complete an impossible objective. The plan was doomed to fail before it began, but if anyone in particular exacerbated the process I would say it was Edward Porter Alexander’s ineffective preliminary fire support and direct fire support solutions due to overshooting.

Well, I just sound like someone who knows how battle plans operate. To begin at the bottom, Alexander could only work with what he was given; it was Longstreet's job to give him the guns and the ammunition to carry out his orders - and Longstreet failed to do this. He also failed to give proper orders to Alexander. Lee ordered a 'pont au feu,' and Longstreet should have replied, "I do not know how to do that." Lee would have responded by taking over the details and doing it properly. Lee's big fault was he was a macro manager and where he could leave Jackson and Stuart to do their work and they'd succeed, he could not do this with Longstreet. Examine the record: from Fair Oaks to the Wilderness, when left on his own, Longstreet either grandly failed, or showed up late, or both. Only when Lee kept him tightly in check or flat-out ordered him to move his ass, e.g. Second Manassas, the Maryland invasion, Fredericksburg, etc. did he succeed. You also have to remember that a great deal of "accepted" Civil War history comes from Longstreet's hugely dishonest memoir. Nowhere, nothing, and no one has ever confirmed his claims, yet they are taken by some as gospel. This is why his book was greeted with such anger by his colleagues. It's not because he criticized Lee, it's because he didn't tell the truth. As just one example, Longstreet speaks with 20/20 hindsight on Gettysburg, claiming he tried to thwart all of Lee's commands from disaster. The problem is, they were never alone - they were surrounded by corps, division and brigade commanders, and their staffs, and Lee's staff...and not a single one of them, at the time in letters and diaries, or after the war, ever stated anything near the conversations Longstreet claimed he had with Lee. What's more, upon publication of his book, not a single one of them confirmed his claims either. How could 30 men standing around Lee and Longstreet, and conversing with them, have never heard a single word Longstreet claimed was spoken? The man's memoir is not accurate or reliable. Historians need to do much revamping because they have foolishly believed Longstreet.

@@ericschafer5505I too agree about Longstreet’s book often being seen as historic gospel. As you said, the book had the benefit of years of hindsight. He also served in the American military after the Civil War which may have affected many of his later views. I understand he was a friend of General/President Grant.

Good to hear from you, sir. When I got my Masters Degrees in History I was taught to read carefully and always question, and it's obvious Longstreet "embellished." Have you ever read Clifford Dowdey's 'Death of a Nation'? Highly recommended for a truly accurate look at Gettysburg.

He also plays Valentino on General Hospital.

@@2snowgirl520 he was also on All My Children as Will Cortland.

His best role, IMO, was on Frasier as the gay ski instructor Guy. He was hilarious in that.

Did you write that book?

It's just like sports, if it happens in the west, it might as well not have happened.

Darvin Gramajo Hot air balloons with cannonballs.

+360Nomad And don't forget long boats, long bowman, and trebuchets.

+jmitterii2 they definitely could have won the day if they had trebuchets and longbowmen. I seriously believe that.

​@@timothyfreeman97you want to hear something incredible? Jackson ordered pikes(spears)for his men, but they never wound up getting them because he died when he did and they never got distributed. I believe that in the movie gods and generals that he said the bayonet must be for an American, what the Sarissa was for a Macedonian.

More "yard work" and less football on T.V. back in them days. Yes, they were that much tougher back then. (Just my opinion)

Longstreet always him hawed around, delayed, procrastinated, etc.

Excellent Hollywood romanticism, yes. However, less like the many well documented perspectives of that time. Historical fictions like these are my favourite .

Yes, I too wish there were more movies sympathetic to Nazi's. However, this movie that showed how good the people who fought a war over the right to own other human beings, as property, while portraying them in a noble and sympathetic light is so refreshing.

@@buckrogers7498 really? Give your racism a rest.

@@paulv4130 I was being sarcastic.

@@paulv4130 sarcasm doesn't often translate well into text, for that I apologize. What I was trying to illustrate was that the civil war was fought to continue the practice of slavery. The cause for the war was to continue the practice of human being being owned as property. It could be because the soldier or officer actually owned slaves, or the soldier or enlisted person benefited by the economy that the practice of owning human beings as property afforded them. Either way the original poster talked stated 'avoids all morale (sic) judgement," as a positive message. The practices of slavery in the United States was as morally repugnant as the Holocaust that was perpetrated by the Nazi's.

After 1 July, Lee had no other viable alternative. He had to either attack or abandon the campaign in failure.

@@manilajohn0182 I feel like you don't have a proper grasp on the strategic situation. Interposing the ANV in between DC and the AoP and forcing Meade to attack him on ground of his choosing is hardly a failure for Lee. It could have ended the war.

@@wntu4 Interposing the ANV in between DC and the AoP and forcing Meade to attack the AoNV was a great idea; in fact, it's what both Lee and Longstreet had originally planned to do. Unfortunately for Lee, the AoNV was in no position to do that after 1 July. 1. Meade's orders were only to protect Washington D.C. and Baltimore, and he had no obligation to attack. 2. The local road net gave the AotP the inside track over the AoNV, in that Lee's army and his supply trains with it couldn't possibly maneuver around the AotP at the operational level. 3. Longstreet's idea of a tactical movement around the Union left wasn't viable because the AotP could shift with him and remain between the AoNV and D.C. 4. The AoNV was foraging off of enemy territory and couldn't remain in any one area for more than 3- 5 days. They hadn't foraged since Lee's concentration order of 29 June and couldn't send out foraging parties in the immediate presence of the AotP. 5. The strategic objective of the campaign was to achieve a great enough success to remove pressure from the Confederate defenders at Vicksburg. Vicksburg had been placed under siege before Lee's campaign even began and the AoNV had taken an excessive amount of time in moving north because of the necessity to forage. 6. Lee's original plan of campaign was predicated on maneuvering the AotP into attacking the AoNV. The unexpected meeting engagement of 1 July ruined this plan of campaign because the minor victory cast the tactical initiative onto Lee. The minor victory of 1 July meant that the AotP- with a new commanding general at the helm- was unlikely in the extreme to carry out any offensive action against the AoNV. All of these factors left Lee with no alternative but to attack on 2 July- or otherwise to abandon the campaign.

@@manilajohn0182 yeah, regarding point 5, Lee probably should have acquiesed to Jefferson Davis' request to send troops to relieve Vicksburg back at the beginning of the month. Had he sent say the Tennessee, Alabama, Mississipi and Louisiana troops west with Longstreet, about 20,000 men, then the Union would have had to send equal numbers over a longer route to reinforce Grant or risk Grant being caught in the middle of Joe Johnston and Pemberton's boys in Vicksburg which probably would have been an equal fight, and might have made a difference, depending on whether Rosecrans could divert some additional troops from his campaign against Bragg to help. point 3 I think is one a lot of people don't look at more deeply, especially on Hood's request to go further around the right. Had he done so, he may have briefly had success as he did IRL, but in the middle of his attack he would be flanked by the 6th Corps which was coming up the road and would have been a pretty even match for him. had Sickles still moved forward like he really did, Longstreets two divisions might have been wiped out since Sickles would be in position to swing around McLaws left flank while the 5th Corps held the center of that southern line and then role Mclaws up. Hancock and the artillery on Cemetery Ridge would have been more than enough to dissuade Anderson's division from making a flank attack on Sickles and the 12 Corps would still be on Culps' Hill when Ewell attacked which could have destroyed Allegheny Johnson's divison. I think the best plan after the first day would have been to pull back to Seminary Ridge and await an attack on the 2nd and with no attack incoming, pull back beyond the Blue Ridge and then use the cavalry to screen their movements west and south back into Virginia, maybe by way of West Virginia taking out the Union presence there.

I agree, in the film Pickett, aware of the enormous responsibility Longstreet was shouldering, would try to give some reassurance.

There was no manner in which Longstreet could have been more aggressive. Most speculation of that type focuses on the previous day, with the unfounded accusation that Longstreet received orders before dawn but didn’t attack until afternoon. As for Pickett’s charge, General Lee believed the Union must have drawn men from the center to counter the prior attacks on their flanks. Union General Meade anticipated exactly this, and the result was a catastrophe for the Army of Northern Virginia. The blame rests on Lee, not Longstreet.

@@jacksons1010 The timeline of the second day is pretty close, but what many fail to understand is moving two ACW infantry divisions without tipping off the enemy in that country took extra time. You also have to let the men rest after marching to position, or they will be exhausted attacking the Wheatfield and Roundtops. Large ACW formations weren't capable of just sprinting from march formation to line of battle to the attack in minutes. Lee had no idea of the enemy disposition due to Stuart's failure. Lee should have waited and moved to better ground. But we also know the Confederates were short on supply, so had very little strategic flexibility.

That was not Berenger that snorted. It was a horse that was passing by them off camera in that scene.

-.-

Bas EvlRod ohh you dont say so sir

Bas EvlRod Nah, it's Berenger.

bwc3821 I enjoy the way he is "impressed" with Porter's experience ~0:32 into the clip ... "Uh huh"

In the film, no. In real life, he knew EXACTLY what was going to happen. He penned a quick note to his fiance just before "We have been ordered to launch a frontal attack. May God help us all!"

Grant didn’t expose himself much in battle, but he didn’t need to. He was at every time accountable by appearing on the marching roads to wherever that army went, in a dusty ass coat and dirty boots, and it rallied them. He also was unflappably tough “4am Courage…” you could tell him the rebels had turn his left flank at 4 am and he would remain as cool as ever.

I'll never forget the scene in this flick, where Hancock was wounded "Damn it all! I will not be moved, till this engagement is decided. Get me a tourniquet before I bleed to death! "

Yes! That battle was amazing. So sad that the right for white men to own human beings was ultimately lost.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Union forces win a major and just as important Battle of Vicksburg that same week?

This was more a move of desperation on Lee's part. For the first two days he attacked the north flank and south flank respectively of the Union line and to no avail. Lee was frustrated at the fact that the Federals were entrenched on high ground which were key positions at Gettysburg. Lee surmised that the Center of the line must be the weakest as his assumption was that since the north flank (by Seminary Ridge) and the south flank (Round Tops) were attacked furiously enough as to have Meade get those two areas reinforced. However, Meade deduced that since the left and right of his line was attacked that logically his center would be tried as well.

***** When you put it that way you are absolutely right. Lee and his Army were buoyed by the fact they had enjoyed many victories prior to Gettysburg so there definitely might have been an invincibility factor there.

They almost did it. He almost broke through the line. Blame the calvery.

Check out George R. Stewart's book on Pickett's charge. He does a great job explaining Lee's mindset and why Pickett's charge made sense to him.

I think a combination of things all culminated in this futile assault. 1. Lee wasn't in good health during this campaign-his failing heart condition was getting worse and possibly affecting his judgment. 2. His "right arm", Stonewall Jackson was gone and I think Lee was frustrated that his new commander Richard 'Baldy' Ewell didn't accomplish what I'm sure Jackson would have. (I'm definitely sure Jackson would have vehemently argued against the madness of a full frontal assault. Jackson recognized the rifled musket made defensive positions nearly impossible to break.) 3. J.E.B Stuart failed to get around the flank and disrupt the lines of communication. 4. I think Lee underestimated General George Meade-who proved himself to be a formidable foe when on the defensive. (Meade expertly placed his army in a large 'fishhook'. This allowed Meade to quickly shift and move reinforcements wherever needed.)

Yeah you almost forget they are the bad guys.

Read the book. One of the best novels ever written.

Vladpryde It is a war movie.. I don't see why they would.. and who is banning the confederate flag? Oh you mean take it down from government buildings? YES OF COURSE. You flying it at your house? I could give a rats ass

Michel Roque *Snort* Really? What about monuments and dead Confederate Officers that the butthurt minorities want to dig up and move somewhere else? I believe it's entirely possible that, if they got the Dukes of Hazzard removed from TBS (or whatever broadcast station it was on...was it TNT?), then they could get "Gettysburg" removed from circulation as well.

are those monuments privately owned or government owned? cause if they were government property I would take down the memorial. Why glorify and remember a bunch of people who took up arms against the country you live in? No one is telling you YOU can't fly the flag, but The government should only fly one flag and that is the flag of this nation

Michel Roque So you don't agree with State's Rights? The Right of a State to have individuality from the Federal Government.

what does that have to do with anything? You know who brought down the flag in the State of South Carolina? THE PEOPLE of that state, the GOVERNMENT of that state. what are you gonna say? out of pressure?

The fake beards are atrocious though 😁

Agreed@@halfrightface