The Civil War: 150th Anniversary Commemorative Edition

With simple narration and still photographs, Ken Burns is able to evoke joy and sorrow, laughter and tears. It's a singular achievement, beautifully composed and profoundly moving.

The Civil War

Director: Ken Burns
Cast: Sam Waterston, Morgan Freeman, Shelby Foote, David McCullough
Distributor: PBS
Rated: Unrated
Year: 1990
Release date: 2011-03-29

In 1990, Ken Burns produced The Civil War, a masterpiece of documentary filmmaking that stands today, even after 21 years, as the definitive examination of the subject, and seems poised to hold that title for the foreseeable future. The Civil War is a feather in the cap of not only Burns, but also PBS; it's unlikely that such a film could have been produced on a for-profit, commercial network. PBS allowed Burns to create a truly powerful work the way he wanted, and helped him find a welcoming and thankful audience.

As we remember the sesquicentennial of the start of the American Civil War this April, PBS and Paramount have issued a six-disc, 150th anniversary commemorative edition of The Civil War, featuring digitally enhanced images, audio commentary, and bonus interviews with Stanley Crouch, George Will, Jay Ungar and Molly Mason (composers of the haunting "Ashokan Farewell" theme), and Shelby Foote.

When it originally aired, Foote emerged as the star of The Civil War. His wizened face, lilting, Southern drawl, and warm anecdotes about the individuals who fought made it seem as if he had walked right out of the past to tell us about something he had witnessed personally. He had the grace, nobility, and charm that we want to believe that Grant, Lincoln, and Lee may have possessed.

Still, there was always something uneasy about anchoring this documentary around the commentary of a white man who grew up in the Jim Crow South, and who, despite his education, savvy, and equanimity, seemed to lionize the Southern cause even knowing that its motives were indefensible. The extra interviews included on this commemorative edition of The Civil War are far more explicit in confirming this than anything Burns included in the original cut. In unused footage from Foote's 1987 interviews, he explicitly downplays the significance of slavery as a cause of the Civil War and expresses a belief in the mythical paternalism of slavery, claiming it was better for African Americans than the post-war sharecropping system because as slaves, they at least had to be cared for, fed, and clothed by their owners.

In a 2002 interview, Foote briefly (and very lightly) criticizes Burns for his focus on slavery, saying "It seemed, to me, to lean a little heavily on slavery as the biggest problem of the war, which I don't think it was." His views are disappointing, if not unsurprising, but also completely and verifiably false. Thankfully, Foote is right about Burns. He did not allow Foote's personal opinions to color the substance of The Civil War, using him for his strengths in storytelling and in personalizing the conflict, while leaving his less enlightened analysis on the cutting room floor. The best counterarguments to Foote's views are woven throughout Burns's documentary, in the inspiring words of Frederick Douglass (Morgan Freeman) or the scratchy recording of a former slave who says that were she told she would ever have to be a slave again that she would "end it all."

Foote's contention that slavery was a minor factor in causing the Civil War found popularity in certain circles during the 20th century, but the historical record is clear. Slavery was the most significant political and social question of the decades leading up to the war. Secession was a reaction to the election of a Republican president, as the Southern states feared that the party's abolitionist platform meant emancipation was near, threatening their vast slave wealth. The articles of secession for several of the Southern states explicitly mentioned slavery as their motivation, and Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens maintained that the "new government" was expressly founded on the tenets of white supremacy and eternal bondage for African Americans.

Burns himself looks back on the making of the documentary in a bonus interview, and touches on the Foote phenomenon with mixed feelings. He rightly lauds Foote for his contributions to the documentary, but talks about how Foote's prominence and subsequent fame led contributors to his other documentaries to make an unfortunate effort to be the Shelby Foote of their respective films. It's hard to imagine that Burns is not somewhat responsible for this, however, considering the focus he gave Wynton Marsalis in Jazz and Senator Daniel Inouye in The War.

What The Civil War gives us is an opportunity to confront the demons of the past, and understand the true history of the United States. America is founded on lofty ideals that Americans have, too often, failed, but there is always hope for redemption, for atonement, and for reconciliation. Burns expertly conveys the gravity of the war, and clearly lays out the stakes. It was a battle for freedom, for humanity, and for the triumph of good over unspeakable evil. A penance for the nation's original sin. With simple narration and still photographs, Burns is able to evoke joy and sorrow, laughter and tears. It's a singular achievement, beautifully composed and profoundly moving.

The Civil War: 150th Anniversary Commemorative Edition is available on DVD in fullscreen standard-definition; it's likely that any attempt to convert it to HD would have been prohibitively expensive or would require modifications to the cropping and framing that would have harmed the film. For fans who already own The Civil War, it seems unlikely that this edition offers enough extras to justify purchasing it again. For those who don't, though, this box set is a sound investment that will no doubt see much use in years to come.


So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.