GRANT (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message

Joe D. -> GRANT (5/28/2020 10:07:47 PM)

Anyone catch the new miniseries on U.S. Grant that recently ran on the History Channel?

It was much better than most series, e.g., The Word Wars, that were previously shown on that channel.

Agree/disagree?



Ostwindflak -> RE: GRANT (5/28/2020 10:15:12 PM)

I did. I finished episode 3 last night. It actually wasn't too bad for modern day History Channel stuff. I thought it flowed well and lots of good info mixed in with the visuals.



OldSarge -> RE: GRANT (5/28/2020 11:02:32 PM)

I watched all three and thought they did a reasonably good job for such a short series, far better than some of The History Channel's other attempts at abbreviated history series..



Randomizer -> RE: GRANT (5/29/2020 12:30:33 AM)

U.S. Grant on the History Channel?

I had never realized that he must have owned a monster truck built by ancient space aliens to deliver non-existent buried treasure acquired while looking for Hitler to his overpriced pawn and vintage auto restoration/motorcycle chop shop. Somebody screwed up and there has to be a mistake somewhere if any history is shown on the HC.

Anyway, thanks for the heads up, will check it out at some point.

-C



budd -> RE: GRANT (5/29/2020 12:40:28 AM)

I enjoyed it. I'm sure it could of been much longer for this man's life, but thought they did a real good job, it flowed well.

I guess on Sunday's they will be doing a documentary series. https://www.history.com/sunday-night-documentaries



jwarrenw13 -> RE: GRANT (5/29/2020 3:00:49 AM)

I thought it was very well done for a TV cable channel documentary.



Pvt_Grunt -> RE: GRANT (5/29/2020 10:05:55 AM)

I thought you were talking to me! The voices are usually only in my head!

Grant. (Not the General)



Nimrod 9th -> RE: GRANT (5/29/2020 1:34:28 PM)

I too enjoyed it. As others have said, good job for only a 6 hour presentation on a complex and important American hero/leader/president/etc. I especially enjoyed the conclusion at the end when it summed up his life and accomplishments along with why history has given him such a bad rap (Lost Cause history). I did catch a number of historical mistakes though. Especially with the Battle of Shiloh.



Joe D. -> RE: GRANT (5/29/2020 7:00:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nimrod 9th

… I did catch a number of historical mistakes though. Especially with the Battle of Shiloh.


Was it a farmhouse or a courthouse in Appomattox where Grant and Lee met to discuss the surrender of the latter's army?



FirstPappy -> RE: GRANT (5/29/2020 8:49:39 PM)

Appomattox Court House was the town and the Mclean house was the actual site.

https://www.nps.gov/apco/mclean-house.htm



Joe D. -> RE: GRANT (5/29/2020 11:03:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirstPappy

Appomattox Court House was the town and the Mclean house was the actual site.

https://www.nps.gov/apco/mclean-house.htm


Thank you as I had misunderstood that all my life.



reg113 -> RE: GRANT (5/29/2020 11:30:49 PM)

Did y'all know that the U.S. Grant Presidential Library is at Mississippi State University in Starkville, MS?



OldSarge -> RE: GRANT (5/29/2020 11:31:19 PM)

For anyone interested, C-Span runs a series known as American History TV, it is quite good and alone justifies still having cable! [8D]

Here is the anniversary celebration of Lee's surrender at Appomattox: 150th Anniversary of Lee's surrender

An here is a discussion of U.S. Grant with General Petraeus




AndySfromVA -> RE: GRANT (5/30/2020 4:53:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nimrod 9th

I too enjoyed it. As others have said, good job for only a 6 hour presentation on a complex and important American hero/leader/president/etc. I especially enjoyed the conclusion at the end when it summed up his life and accomplishments along with why history has given him such a bad rap (Lost Cause history). I did catch a number of historical mistakes though. Especially with the Battle of Shiloh.


What were the mistakes you saw re the Battle of Shiloh? I thought they did a great job showing what a bloodbath it was and how Grant and Sherman managed to hold off the confederates at Pittsburgh Landing.



rommel222 -> RE: GRANT (5/30/2020 4:03:39 PM)

Greetings to All,
I liked the Grant series very much and found it to be one of the better history series on the History Channel. Makes me want to fire up JTS Corinth, Shiloh, Atlanta, Overland & Shenandoah games, not to mention Scourge of War Shiloh.




Nimrod 9th -> RE: GRANT (5/31/2020 1:00:41 PM)

I only recall 2 off the top of my head. May have been one or two others I'm not recalling right now.
1) They titled/called Sherman a corps commander at Shiloh. He wasn't. He was a division commander. At Shiloh, Grant did not organize his army into corps. He had 6 divisions that did not answer to corps commanders. All the division commanders answered directly to Grant.
2) I taught tactics/strategy for one of the US Army service schools for over 25 years. In the army, many words have specific meanings so subordinate commanders don't mis-interpret orders. "Delay" is one of the words. It has very specific meaning. According to US Army FM 1-02.1 Terms and Definitions (not a secret manual but one approved for public distribution) a delay is "when a force under pressure trades space for time by slowing down the enemy’s momentum and inflicting maximum damage on enemy forces without becoming decisively engaged." This was not going on at Shiloh. Not Sherman on Grant's right. Not Prentiss in the center. Neither were trading space for time. Neither were avoiding being decisively engaged. Both Sherman and Prentiss were told to hold their positions as long as possible (that is partly why so many of Prrentiss' men were captured ... they didn't pull back ... they held their ground even though their flanks finally collapsed). Both became decisively engaged. True Grant wanted them to hold as long as possible to buy time for Grant to re-organize routed troops near the landing. But there was nothing about "trading space for time" and "without becoming decisively engaged" about it.
3) Another thing I noticed about historical accuracy in general were the union uniforms. I noticed it was very hard to get a good view of what the common soldiers were wearing. When you did get a very brief close up shot of a Union soldier the blouse/jacket didn't look right. The most common (by far the most common with few exceptions like the dress jacket and "shell jackets") was called a "four button" because it had just that ... 4 buttons. These jackets looked like they had 6+ buttons. I also noted a limited number of times soldiers had their cartridge boxes on the wrong side but again, this was not common. Speaking of uniforms, Grant often wore one of those "4 button" jackets with his general stars on his shoulders. I don't recall seeing that at all in the series.

That's all I recall right now. I wasn't "keeping score" and did not write down every little mistake I caught.



AndySfromVA -> RE: GRANT (5/31/2020 5:52:57 PM)

Nimrod 9th

Thanks for all your great information. I feel I have a much greater understanding of the battle now.
You should teach military history, strategy and tactics.



zakblood -> RE: GRANT (5/31/2020 7:02:40 PM)

i've enjoyed the mini series, well worth a watch but a bit short, hopes there's some more than the first 3 so far watched



Gilmer -> RE: GRANT (6/1/2020 6:42:06 AM)

Did anyone think that the guy playing Grant more closely resembled Sherman and the guy playing Sherman didn't look like Sherman at all? My opinion.



zakblood -> RE: GRANT (6/2/2020 11:34:20 AM)

watched all 3 now, not bad overall, bit short but well made and now makes me want to play Brother Against Brother again



balto -> RE: GRANT (6/2/2020 11:49:11 AM)

Nimrod 9th, your comments in box 3 about the 'buttons' and the 'side of where the cartridges go', etc.., I was at a place that had a large amount of Civil War paintings, almost everyone in there but me was making the same type of "detailed comments' like you about the paintings.

One guy commented on how in a painting of Mosby's Raiders, the windows in one of the building was not the exact type of window pane of that still standing building!!! Not kidding.



balto -> RE: GRANT (6/2/2020 11:51:11 AM)

for some reason, part of my post above is being cut off. No big deal, just letting you know.



Nimrod 9th -> RE: GRANT (6/2/2020 1:50:53 PM)

When I see/hear/read about something I know about and catch mistakes (big or small) it makes me wonder what mistakes are being made about the things I don't know much about. The uniform/cartridge box didn't bother me. Figured it was "Hollywood" (or an "extra" getting dressed too fast) and felt it didn't distract. After all show wasn't about uniforms. It was about Grant. But the "delay" thing bothered me a lot and wrong position for Sherman a little. Showed either a lack of research or poor historical advise from the historical advisor or poor decision making by the director/producer/whoever who decided to use those words. The "delay" bothered me much more than wrong position. It isn't that big of deal in a film Grant to call Sherman a corps commander. After all, he did become one soon after. If it was about Sherman that would be different story. The use of the word "delay" gave people a wrong impression of the Battle of Shiloh. And often when that seed is planted it can be hard to removed. I did enjoy the series and glad Grant is beginning to get the credit he deserves for his successes and importance/impact to our country.



Hellen_slith -> RE: GRANT (6/2/2020 6:11:00 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Randomizer

U.S. Grant on the History Channel?

I had never realized that he must have owned a monster truck built by ancient space aliens to deliver non-existent buried treasure acquired while looking for Hitler to his overpriced pawn and vintage auto restoration/motorcycle chop shop. Somebody screwed up and there has to be a mistake somewhere if any history is shown on the HC.

Anyway, thanks for the heads up, will check it out at some point.

-C


LoL, quite true, I usually only watch History Channel for Ancient Astronaut stuff lately.

But, the Grant series was pretty well done I think, well enough for me to watch it and spur interest in reading about him.

I recommend.



Rodwonder -> RE: GRANT (6/3/2020 12:25:15 PM)

I liked it... Overall it was well done with a few details left out but not bad.



Curtis Lemay -> RE: GRANT (6/3/2020 1:03:05 PM)

I didn't care for the way Robert E. Lee was treated, or the South in general. Probably due to an influx of leftist history profs, that has steadily deteriorated over the last few decades.

The new ridiculous standard is now being applied to him: He is now being judged by the relative percentage losses he incurred instead of the gross losses. So, since Grant outnumbered him by 2 to 1, he needed to inflict double losses on Grant, just to break even and be considered average!

By that line of reasoning, the Spartans at Thermopylae were tactical idiots, since they lost their entire command, while the Persians only lost a fraction of theirs. Never mind that their gross losses were 300, and the Persians lost thousands.



kingstuart444 -> RE: GRANT (6/6/2020 1:46:29 PM)

I finished up the series last nite. I thought it was very good as I did not know much about him.

Two side comments. Seemed like half the two hours were commercials or promos for the remaining part of the show.
Glad I had it dvr’d.
Also in the battle scenes what is with all the soldiers getting shot in the head. Is that really how it was done back then?
Overdone and disturbing for the young.



demyansk -> RE: GRANT (6/6/2020 10:12:22 PM)

I agree, I hate the pc culture



MrRoadrunner -> RE: GRANT (6/7/2020 12:31:38 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

I didn't care for the way Robert E. Lee was treated, or the South in general. Probably due to an influx of leftist history profs, that has steadily deteriorated over the last few decades.

The new ridiculous standard is now being applied to him: He is now being judged by the relative percentage losses he incurred instead of the gross losses. So, since Grant outnumbered him by 2 to 1, he needed to inflict double losses on Grant, just to break even and be considered average!

By that line of reasoning, the Spartans at Thermopylae were tactical idiots, since they lost their entire command, while the Persians only lost a fraction of theirs. Never mind that their gross losses were 300, and the Persians lost thousands.


Totally agree. [sm=00000436.gif]

RR



Gilmer -> RE: GRANT (6/7/2020 5:03:40 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kingstuart

I finished up the series last nite. I thought it was very good as I did not know much about him.

Two side comments. Seemed like half the two hours were commercials or promos for the remaining part of the show.
Glad I had it dvr’d.
Also in the battle scenes what is with all the soldiers getting shot in the head. Is that really how it was done back then?
Overdone and disturbing for the young.


You can stream it if your cable gets the channel. No commercials.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.78125