NF Why are there so few Vicksburg documentaries?

[huskerblitz]

So why are there no real good Vicksburg documentaries like there are with Gettysburg and other eastern battles? Frustrating....

 

[Vicksburger]

So why are there no real good Vicksburg documentaries like there are with Gettysburg and other eastern battles? Frustrating....

I agree, and no movies either, unless you count 'The Horse Soldiers" but still Vicksburg is never portrayed. What dramatic subjects to choose from, and yet nothing is attempted. Maybe Ron Maxwell can do Jeff Sharra's "A Chain of Thunder" but Ted Turner's money would be needed. But, have you seen the Vicksburg documentary from the 1990's series 'The Unknown Civil War" it is pretty good, narrated by Stephen Lang. They have them on Ebay.

 

[Pat Young]

I don't do documentaries, but I blog a lot on the Civil War. I try to give equal weight to campaigns in the Maryland/Pa/Virginia theatre and to those elsewhere in the war. Generally the eastern battles get 25% more hits. I don't know why, but others have told me they have similar experiences.

 

[zburkett]

Speaking as an old documentary film maker who had ancestors at Vicksburg and did a documentary on Gettysburg in the early 70s, Vicksburg isn't that cinema graphic. A three day battle with massive charges and running horses is far more visual than months of slogging through a swamp and starving people hiding in caves.

 

[Karen Lips]

I can't believe no one has ever made a movie about the siege of Vicksburg.

 

[jackt62]

Just like historical perception, anything having to do with the western theater of operations takes a back burner to the eastern theater, in particular Lee and the ANV vs. the AOTP.

 

[Kurt G]

Speaking as an old documentary film maker who had ancestors at Vicksburg and did a documentary on Gettysburg in the early 70s, Vicksburg isn't that cinema graphic. A three day battle with massive charges and running horses is far more visual than months of slogging through a swamp and starving people hiding in caves.

I agree . Although there may be some Eastern Theater bias , long protracted battles and sieges aren't nearly as interesting to some as a relatively quick and decisive battle . I don't remember much done on Petersburg either .

 

[Coonewah Creek]

Why complicate things? Everyone KNOWS the Civil War just consisted of the firing on Fort Sumter, Gettysburg and Appomattox.

 

[Pollaco]

Just a guess but wasnt it during the Vicksburg Campaign that Grant went on one of his famous Drinking Sprees? That would almost certainly have to be disclosed in a documentary.

 

[zburkett]

Just a guess but wasnt it during the Vicksburg Campaign that Grant went on one of his famous Drinking Sprees? That would almost certainly have to be disclosed in a documentary.

It is my understanding that is one of the many smear campaigns against Grant. Not historical fact.

 

[CWH1234]

I feel like someone need to do a Movie about it.

 

[LasPalmas]

Just a guess but wasnt it during the Vicksburg Campaign that Grant went on one of his famous Drinking Sprees? That would almost certainly have to be disclosed in a documentary.

True
On a steamboat trip up the Yazoo River to Satartia Miss. Not a smear campaign.

 

[Karen Lips]

Speaking as an old documentary film maker who had ancestors at Vicksburg and did a documentary on Gettysburg in the early 70s, Vicksburg isn't that cinema graphic. A three day battle with massive charges and running horses is far more visual than months of slogging through a swamp and starving people hiding in caves.

I still think it would be possible maybe if it was more about the citizens and how the war turned their lives upside down.

 

[Patrick H]

The answers are already revealed in the various posts above. First, it didn't happen in the east. Therefore, it holds minimal interest for most people. Second, it just wasn't glorious like thousands of men walking up a hill to the certain death of many of their number. It was dirty and boring and it took months. However, I'm one of those who believes Ulys won the war at Vicksburg.

 

[Mark F. Jenkins]

I think that it's not that Vicksburg has a relative lack of drama compared to, say, Gettysburg... I think it's a perceived lack of drama, because there were certainly plenty of exciting "scenes." The fact that the outcome appears so lopsided in favor of the Union in retrospect really underplays the difficulty of the feat and how hard the Union had to work to get there. Gettysburg has a solid place in our culture (rightly or wrongly-- the latter in my opinion) as the "moment" where it all could have gone differently, so it's easy to sell a producer on the drama. The would-be Vicksburg filmmaker has to work harder and do more to convince a production company-- but I think it would amply repay the effort. (If done well, of course.)

For instance, on the surface, the story on the rivers at Vicksburg appears to be one of total Union dominance, right? But... look closer. When I was choosing the most dramatic/exciting things to possibly cover in a potential talk at our CWT Vicksburg trip, my mind naturally turned to the USS Cairo and the dash of the CSS Arkansas... both Confederate successes. I thought that remarkable. (And I was reminded of Ed Bearss' book, Rebel Victory at Vicksburg. Maybe that title would get a producer's attention?)