To Appomattox (2013) a 8 part miniseries

[superdeluxe]

Cast list:

Spoiler: Cast list

Rob Lowe ... Ulysses S. Grant (8 episodes, 2013)

Stephen Lang ... Abraham Lincoln (8 episodes, 2013)

Will Patton ... Robert E. Lee (8 episodes, 2013)

William Petersen ... William Tecumseh Sherman (8 episodes, 2013)

Helen McCrory ... Julia Grant (7 episodes, 2013)

Richard Speight Jr. ... Nathan Wexler (7 episodes, 2013)

D.B. Sweeney ... James Longstreet (7 episodes, 2013)

Dwight Yoakam ... George Meade (7 episodes, 2013)

William Zabka ... Charles Dana (7 episodes, 2013)

Jason O'Mara ... George B. McClellan (6 episodes, 2013)

JoeDon Rooney ... Lieutenant Goree (6 episodes, 2013)

Johnathon Schaech ... Johann Mueller (6 episodes, 2013)

Noah Wyle ... George Pickett (6 episodes, 2013)

Kevin P. Farley ... Henry Halleck (5 episodes, 2013)

Walton Goggins ... Richard Ewell (5 episodes, 2013)

Gary LeVox ... Sergeant Combs (5 episodes, 2013)

Damian Lewis ... James B. McPherson (5 episodes, 2013)
Carl Edwards ... John B. Gordon (5 episodes)

Trace Adkins ... John Gregg (4 episodes, 2013)

Kim Delaney ... Mary Todd Lincoln (4 episodes, 2013)

Neal McDonough ... Joseph Hooker (4 episodes, 2013)

Bill Paxton ... Thomas Jackson (4 episodes, 2013)

John Scurti ... Ambrose Burnside (4 episodes, 2013)

Nick Searcy ... Joseph E. Johnston (4 episodes, 2013)

Paige Turco ... Sallie Corbell Pickett (4 episodes, 2013)

Laura Bell Bundy ... Abby Dunlap (4 episodes)
Jay DeMarcus ... Jesse Dunlap (4 episodes)

Powers Boothe ... Albert Sidney Johnston (3 episodes, 2013)
Matthew Rogers ... Rufus Ingalls (3 episodes, 2013)

Patrick Gorman ... Charles F. Smith (2 episodes, 2013)

Kix Brooks ... Winfield Scott Hancock (2 episodes)

Sara Evans ... Varina Davis (2 episodes)

About:

American soil is under attack, the nation engaged in its most unpopular war. The population is divided on every political and social issue. In the White House, sits the most hated President in American history—believed by more than half the citizens to have stolen the election to his first term; when he runs for his second term, he will barely beat a war hero Democrat who campaigns on a popular anti-war platform. Inept generals will make a mockery of predictions of easy initial victory; in Congress, anti-administration committees will convene to investigate the conduct of this war. As the war drags on over years (instead of months), the United States will lose its overseas allies while introducing the world to weapons and tactics more devastating than ever before seen… Yet, at the end of it all, the color barrier between black and white in America will be transformed forever and our nation will become a beacon of hope to the world.

The similarities between now and then are startling and provide a wonderful contemporary, unique lens for historical drama.

Dramatically, it can be viewed as JOHN ADAMS meets BAND OF BROTHERS: a historically accurate series that thrives upon the emotional lives of American icons against a backdrop of a war that has never been accurately or fully portrayed.

Pretty Ambitious project, It does NOT have a network yet. But it is apparently being backed by Sony and has a 50 million dollar budget. Really digging these historical mini-series. They have hired some notable historical advisors as well.

The Cast list is pretty diverse and varied. You got some recognizable Movie actors, as well as established TV actors as well. Then you have some interesting choices (A former American Idol, a couple of country stars and Nascar drivers)

A couple of things I noticed reading the casting changes/rumors etc.

Michael C Hall was originally cast as Ullysees S Grant, but had to drop out due to scheduling conflicts.

Paul Giammati was scheduled to be James Longstreet, but is no longer.

Rob Lowe was originally cast as George Mccellan, but then took the role of James Longstreet when Giammatti left he project, and then took the role of Grant.

Jason O'Mara was scheduled to be George Mccellan, but because of Scheduling conflicts with Terra Nova, had to take a smaller role, with Terra Nova Canned, he was able to re-assume his original role.

D.B Sweeney was slated to be Mccellan, but with O'mara coming back, and with Lowe taking Grant, has moved onto to James Longstreet

Richard Dreyfuss has the role of George Thomas.

And rumors of Jeff Daniels playing Mark Twain abound.



Here are some helpful websites:

Official Website

Ultimate Fan Blog

 

[tomalak301]

Why watch a series when the plot of this series sounds like America (Kind of, maybe except for the Attack on American Soil part) in the last 10 years.

 

[RandyS]

Why watch a series when the plot of this series sounds like America (Kind of, maybe except for the Attack on American Soil part) in the last 10 years.

I think that's the whole point.

 

[BennyRussel]

You had me at Billy Zabka

 

[superdeluxe]

Why watch a series when the plot of this series sounds like America (Kind of, maybe except for the Attack on American Soil part) in the last 10 years.

I think that's the whole point.

^^^

 

[superdeluxe]

You had me at Billy Zabka

Anything that has Billy Zabka, Jason O'Mara and Will Patton has to be good

 

[gh4chiefs]

a war that has never been accurately or fully portrayed.

I'm looking forward to this project and I'll definitely be watching, but I gotta say this line made me a little. But I guess they have to get the hype machine going.

 

[superdeluxe]

a war that has never been accurately or fully portrayed.

I'm looking forward to this project and I'll definitely be watching, but I gotta say this line made me a little. But I guess they have to get the hype machine going.

Actually if you review some of the civil war forums, Many have railed against the historically inaccurate Gettysburg and Gods and Generals.

The list of historical consultants that To Appomattox has is quite impressive.

http://www.toappomattox.com/Historical_Consultants.html

 

[Aragorn]

You had me at Billy Zabka

"Put him in a body bag, Charles Dana!"

 

[superdeluxe]

Mark Maritato, a historical consultant, is responsible for the look of the uniforms, here are a couple of uniforms with the great detail:

 

[gh4chiefs]

a war that has never been accurately or fully portrayed.

I'm looking forward to this project and I'll definitely be watching, but I gotta say this line made me a little. But I guess they have to get the hype machine going.

Actually if you review some of the civil war forums, Many have railed against the historically inaccurate Gettysburg and Gods and Generals.

The list of historical consultants that To Appomattox has is quite impressive.

http://www.toappomattox.com/Historical_Consultants.html

Well they can rail all they want but if there's anything I learned about history, it is that if you get a dozen "experts" in a room, they'll give you a dozen different accounts of any given historical event. To this day, historians can't agree on what John Wilkes Booth yelled when he jumped onto the stage at Ford's theater. Recently when watching a documentary on the Hatfield & McCoy, I saw supposed experts come on there and contradict each other on events.

I'm just saying that I think it's a bit of hype to say that nothing that came before them was ever accurate, and by implication, somehow they're going to get it right.

That doesn't mean I won't watch and enjoy it, because I'm sure I'll enjoy immensely. Really can't wait actually. But in the end, they're going to put THEIR spin on events and I'm sure just like every other production, they'll get some things right, and some things they'll modify for "dramatic effect."

 

[superdeluxe]

That is a good point gh4chiefs.

 

[J.T.B.]

I'm just saying that I think it's a bit of hype to say that nothing that came before them was ever accurate, and by implication, somehow they're going to get it right.

Agreed, hype. Setting yourself up as the historically accurate Civil War production seems to me like putting a target on your back. And what's written on the website has a strong editorial tone; nothing wrong with that, but its not the style usually associated with historical scholarship.

From the website: "The most bloody national conflict in world history is defined, ultimately, not by the conflict itself and that conflict's destruction, but by the preservation of the values of all Americans." I don't know how they define bloodiness, but there would seem to be conflicts that outdo the American Civil War. In China around the same time, village after village of non-combatants were being slaughtered and many more starved in the Taiping Rebellion wars. Total deaths estimated around 20 million.

Second, "the preservation of the values of all Americans?" Weren't there some values of some Americans that were specifically not preserved after the war? Hype again.

And also, according to the website, NASCAR racing is the "ultimate American sport."

Justin

 

[superdeluxe]

I'm just saying that I think it's a bit of hype to say that nothing that came before them was ever accurate, and by implication, somehow they're going to get it right.

Agreed, hype. Setting yourself up as the historically accurate Civil War production seems to me like putting a target on your back. And what's written on the website has a strong editorial tone; nothing wrong with that, but its not the style usually associated with historical scholarship.

From the website: "The most bloody national conflict in world history is defined, ultimately, not by the conflict itself and that conflict's destruction, but by the preservation of the values of all Americans." I don't know how they define bloodiness, but there would seem to be conflicts that outdo the American Civil War. In China around the same time, village after village of non-combatants were being slaughtered and many more starved in the Taiping Rebellion wars. Total deaths estimated around 20 million.

Second, "the preservation of the values of all Americans?" Weren't there some values of some Americans that were specifically not preserved after the war? Hype again.

And also, according to the website, NASCAR racing is the "ultimate American sport."

Justin

I hear you guys, maybe they are launching the serious hype machine to bring in investors and to grab a network. If the end product is great, then all of these efforts I think will be worth it (Including the bringing in of Country acts and Nascar drivers).

There were reports that ratings for Hatfields and Mccoys were the best in the South. I am sure that has much to do with Nascar/Country stars etc.

In general a good portion of the interest in the Civil War is in the South and Southern Eastern Seaboard, which makes sense.

 

[gh4chiefs]

Well the positive thing I'm taking from it that they're at least talking about historical accuracy as a part of what they're doing, so I find that encouraging. But I'm a shade skeptical that they'll be able to "walk the walk" when it gets right down to it. It's Hollywood after all, and we know how they like to meddle.

Time will tell I guess. And how awesome would it be if they really do come through in that respect and make a well done, historically accurate story?

 

[superdeluxe]

Well the positive thing I'm taking from it that they're at least talking about historical accuracy as a part of what they're doing, so I find that encouraging. But I'm a shade skeptical that they'll be able to "walk the walk" when it gets right down to it. It's Hollywood after all, and we know how they like to meddle.

Time will tell I guess. And how awesome would it be if they really do come through in that respect and make a well done, historically accurate story?

It would be awesome, did you guys watch hatfields and mccoys, now that got the tone right, but they really played up some of romantic aspects of it, kind of made it 'hollywood' still really enjoyed it!

I appreciate and understand the necessity to make it a little 'hollywood' so you can sell it. I just hope that they are true to the tone and spirit of the source material.

 

[JRS]

Looks like an interesting project
It reminds me a lot of the excellent Gettysburg(1993), that I think was excellent
The American Civil War is an interesting era and really worth making films about.

 

[gh4chiefs]

Well the positive thing I'm taking from it that they're at least talking about historical accuracy as a part of what they're doing, so I find that encouraging. But I'm a shade skeptical that they'll be able to "walk the walk" when it gets right down to it. It's Hollywood after all, and we know how they like to meddle.

Time will tell I guess. And how awesome would it be if they really do come through in that respect and make a well done, historically accurate story?

It would be awesome, did you guys watch hatfields and mccoys, now that got the tone right, but they really played up some of romantic aspects of it, kind of made it 'hollywood' still really enjoyed it!

I appreciate and understand the necessity to make it a little 'hollywood' so you can sell it. I just hope that they are true to the tone and spirit of the source material.

Yeah it was well done, many parts of it were reasonably accurate, and other parts were just pure horse manure. Not sure why they feel the need to do that, as somone said in the H&M thread, real history is interesting enough and it doesn't need embellishment or flat out fictional elements.

 

[superdeluxe]

Looks like an interesting project
It reminds me a lot of the excellent Gettysburg(1993), that I think was excellent
The American Civil War is an interesting era and really worth making films about.

It sure is, from what I have briefly read about this project is that half of it will be battles, the other half the relationships between Grant and others. I want to see what make these people tick!

Yeah it was well done, many parts of it were reasonably accurate, and other parts were just pure horse manure. Not sure why they feel the need to do that, as somone said in the H&M thread, real history is interesting enough and it doesn't need embellishment or flat out fictional elements.

I agree with you, but for some reason TV execs believe this kind of stuff is necessary. Why I am not sure? trying to bring the female audience in? I dunno.

 

[The Green Mushroom]

This is literally the first I have heard about this series and everything that I know of it comes from this thread. That being said, as a history teacher and the son of a Civil War buff, the description in the original post leaves me deeply, deeply concerned about this series.

American soil is under attack, the nation engaged in its most unpopular war.

Well I suppose you could say that American soil is under attack, but is under attack by Americans. And I personally wouldn't count the federal government as being an attacker when it tries to put down a rebellion.

And more importantly, I was under the impression that EVERYONE wanted to fight in this war when it started--that doesn't sound like it started out being very unpopular.

The population is divided on every political and social issue.

Perhaps, but wasn't slavery the only one they cared about?

In the White House, sits the most hated President in American history—believed by more than half the citizens to have stolen the election to his first term; when he runs for his second term, he will barely beat a war hero Democrat who campaigns on a popular anti-war platform.

Hated at the time by the nine million or so who supported the country, yes. The most hated in American history today? Yeah right! And who amongst the 23 million Northerners except for a few Copperheads believed that he stole the election?

Inept generals will make a mockery of predictions of easy initial victory; in Congress, anti-administration committees will convene to investigate the conduct of this war.

Finally, something that is true...

As the war drags on over years (instead of months), the United States will lose its overseas allies while introducing the world to weapons and tactics more devastating than ever before seen…

What overseas allies? The British and French who hated us so much that they didn't fight for the South? Or the Russians who actually tried to recruit as an ally against the British and French should war have broken out?

And while the weapons and tactical part is true, the world missed the lesson. European officers who observed the war described it as "two armed mobs running around the country" and believed that nothing that happened in the war could be a lesson for the future.

Yet, at the end of it all, the color barrier between black and white in America will be transformed forever and our nation will become a beacon of hope to the world.

You mean it wasn't a beacon of hope before the war? Like say for all those Irish people who chose America over London during the Famine? Or the Germans who came over after the Revolutions of 1848 were put down? Or say that hideous monster Abraham Lincoln who said something about American government being a great example for the world?