Shenandoah (1965)

I love this movie so much

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

Shenandoah is directed by Andrew V. McLaglen and written by James Lee Barrett. It stars James Stewart, Patrick Wayne, Doug McClure, Glenn Corbett, Rosemary Forsyth, Phillip Alford and Katharine Ross. Music is by Frank Skinner and Technicolor photography is by William H. Clothier.As the American Civil War rages, a Virginian patriarch keeps his large farming family in the act of isolationism. But will the war leave them alone? A superbly acted and written Civil War Oater, Shenandoah is moving and poignant without over doing the anti-war message. First half of the pic lets us into the lives of the Anderson family, their beliefs, their loves and losses, and decisions that will shape their futures. Circumstances will of course come knocking at the door, which shifts the film into darker territory, where it is here that McLaglen and his team brilliantly show the emotional and physical hardships of the war between the North and the South. Story and the characters are consistently compelling, all while the locations envelope the dramatics with a beauty that is realised by the legendary Clothier. And then there is Stewart, a class act and the axis, the fulcrum of everything that is great about the pic, his character brought vividly - and crucially believably - to life, one of the best father portrayals in classic film. Battles rage, of the war, the heart and of the mind in one of the 1960s best American Oaters. 9/10

A mildly interesting take on the American Civil War, and its effect on the civilian population. Poses some good questions on the morality and reasons for the war, and picking sides. More particularly, not picking sides, and the consequences thereof. Problem is, it doesn't really answer these questions. Maybe that is the answer, that there is no solution, but some degree of attempting an answer would be good.So-so plot. Historically inaccurate at times, and many of the battle scenes seem quite contrived and/or flawed. Could also have been grittier - sometimes felt overly folksy and idealistic. Being made in 1965, however, I guess the producers couldn't be too graphic or tough-minded.Decent performance by James Stewart in the lead role. However, hardly anyone else gets a word in...

Virginia patriarch James Stewart tries to keep his family out of the civil war as it rages around them, but wars aren't like that.This beautifully filmed 1965 western doesn't have a plot so much as a series of events which take place as Stewart takes most of his children looking for one son who was taken prisoner. These events serve to challenge Stewart's (and our own) perceptions of the value of trying to avoid a war which is taking place in your back yard. From a moral position this makes the film a powerful statement, albeit one of mixed viewpoint. From a narrative position, the film is less successful: it does not meet the conventional story beats one expects (the 3 marauders, for instance, are no more than convenient contrivances to deliver an emotional event: this has no subsequent follow-up or payoff).For all that, this is a good film with a powerful performance - one of his best - from Stewart.

There are many historical inaccuracies in this movie, I am aware of them. There are issues that some would mock that make the movie seem moronic concerning plot problem (i.e. the boy wearing the confederate hat and none of the family addressing that issue. But when you look at the many war movies of the 20th and 21st century you see so many horrid inconsistencies and outright instances of pure propaganda that glorify war and demonize various groups of people such as the southern citizens and Native Americans, I have no problem overlooking the errors of this movie when i see the underlying message speaks volumes to those who understand the the war in Vietnam and all the ensuing wars our nation has taken up in the name of "freedom" that has only furthered the military industrial complex and expanded the power of our tyrannical government. In light of these facts, I find that this movie is a refreshing change from so many movies that Hollywood churned out as propaganda that helped form an opinion that America was right to become an Imperialistic power to involve itself in so many countries and sacrifice our sons and daughters to further the immoral cause to spread "democracy" to other countries rather than fighting to keep our own country free of tyrants who call themselves "leaders" who answer to corporations and special interest groups.I feel that Jimmy Stewart's speeches throughout the movie, particularly to Johnson and at the end of the movie when he speaks to his dead wife at the grave encapsulate what most libertarians feel about the role of government in our lives. Leave us alone to raise our families and let us decide what is right for us. If you interfere with that you should expect us to withdraw our consent to be governed by you. After all, it was what our forefathers chose to do with the government of England and it led to the revolution. The War of Northern Aggression against the Southern States wasn't about Slavery, it was about the state's right to govern themselves. If they had been allowed to secede from the union slavery would have ended peacefully without the killing of so many men. 2 separate countries, one free and one slave holding could not have existed very long when slaves were able to flee to a free country without any threat of return. Brazil went through the same process during this time and eventually outlawed slavery without the bloodshed. War is never right, it is the worst possible solution, this movie clearly points this out when a man and his family is forced to engage in this war. the outcome is never positive.