This comment discusses "North and South Book II" dealing with the Civil War (1861-1865).
As I have mentioned in my comment on "North and South Book I", the movie absorbed me so much that I felt an undeniable need to see its sequel based on John Jakes' novel LOVE AND WAR. However, as sequels on screen usually tend to be worse than the originals, one may have doubts: at first different credits, a different director, some changes in the cast...nevertheless, from the beginning, "North and South Book II" appears to be good in a more or less equal but unique way... yet surely different.
Why will you find it different? The Civil War content inevitably draws your attention not so primarily to the families' saga, as it was the case with Book I, but rather to history and politics. Although the sequel retains most characters from the Maines and the Hazards, it contains such historic figures like Abraham Lincoln, Robert Lee, Ulysses Grant and Jefferson Davis. There are pure facts embedded in the story, there are battles, imprisonments, executions, there are also dreams of peace. Therefore, "North and South Book II" is very educative as a historical piece of work, as an insight into a nightmare of war, and as a provider of historical imagination since the past comes to life here.
Old characters are the same, yet different, war changes them in time, makes them tired of hardship and cruelty that war has brought. They start to long for peace. It is simply unbelievable how, for instance, Virgilia Hazard (Kirstie Alley) changes - from a fanatical abolitionist into a nurse supposed to help both northerners and southerners. Couples in love face separations, friends divisions, and the elderly loneliness. The whole country seems to go mad (as in any war). Dreams of honor and righteousness seem to belong to the days of yore. Yet, finally, it is not the evil of war that wins.
There is, however, one significant fact to mention about these old characters. Some of them seem to me a bit less fascinating than in Book I. That is my only complaint to the sequel. Richard T Heffron, the director of the first part, seemed to care more for the development of characters. Perhaps, the historical facts absorbed Kevin Connor so much that he allowed some shortage in this case. That does not refer to all characters from Book I but some, mostly those performed by different cast: Billy Hazard (now Parker Stevenson) and Isabel (now Mary Crosby). However, I loved some new characters, in particular Augusta Barclay (Kate McNeil) and Rafe Beaudeen (Lee Horsley). Both head for helping other people, both find love; yet, what is ahead of them is only a nightmare...
Someone said that the performances are weak. I don't agree with this opinion, there may be a drawback in character development but the acting is equally great as in Book I. I even admit that Book II is worth attention in this case due to beautifully characterized Hal Holbrook as President Abraham Lincoln and especially appealing Anthony Zerbe as General Ulysses Grant...consider the moment he drinks apple juice while others accuse him of drinking too much whiskey. Zerbe is a terrific actor and that part of Grant is one of his best performances. James Read and Patrick Swayze again shine in their roles as well as Kirstie Alley and Terri Garber. I also admire Lewis Stone for his charismatic part of Charles hardened by war but softened by love. Some guest appearances are also worth consideration, including Olivia de Havilland and late James Stewart.
Both parts of NORTH AND SOUTH constitute wonderful history lesson, but history which is not filled with neutral facts but history filled with emotions. This mini series made me interested in American Civil War the results of which cried out how important it is to live in peace. That Palm Sunday of 1865 should always remind America that peace is the only way and even if there are storms of hatred, prejudice and divisions, true love will conquer them in the end. See both parts of "North and South" and you'll see that it is a history on screen watched in tears. Highly recommended! 8/10!
As I have mentioned in my comment on "North and South Book I", the movie absorbed me so much that I felt an undeniable need to see its sequel based on John Jakes' novel LOVE AND WAR. However, as sequels on screen usually tend to be worse than the originals, one may have doubts: at first different credits, a different director, some changes in the cast...nevertheless, from the beginning, "North and South Book II" appears to be good in a more or less equal but unique way... yet surely different.
Why will you find it different? The Civil War content inevitably draws your attention not so primarily to the families' saga, as it was the case with Book I, but rather to history and politics. Although the sequel retains most characters from the Maines and the Hazards, it contains such historic figures like Abraham Lincoln, Robert Lee, Ulysses Grant and Jefferson Davis. There are pure facts embedded in the story, there are battles, imprisonments, executions, there are also dreams of peace. Therefore, "North and South Book II" is very educative as a historical piece of work, as an insight into a nightmare of war, and as a provider of historical imagination since the past comes to life here.
Old characters are the same, yet different, war changes them in time, makes them tired of hardship and cruelty that war has brought. They start to long for peace. It is simply unbelievable how, for instance, Virgilia Hazard (Kirstie Alley) changes - from a fanatical abolitionist into a nurse supposed to help both northerners and southerners. Couples in love face separations, friends divisions, and the elderly loneliness. The whole country seems to go mad (as in any war). Dreams of honor and righteousness seem to belong to the days of yore. Yet, finally, it is not the evil of war that wins.
There is, however, one significant fact to mention about these old characters. Some of them seem to me a bit less fascinating than in Book I. That is my only complaint to the sequel. Richard T Heffron, the director of the first part, seemed to care more for the development of characters. Perhaps, the historical facts absorbed Kevin Connor so much that he allowed some shortage in this case. That does not refer to all characters from Book I but some, mostly those performed by different cast: Billy Hazard (now Parker Stevenson) and Isabel (now Mary Crosby). However, I loved some new characters, in particular Augusta Barclay (Kate McNeil) and Rafe Beaudeen (Lee Horsley). Both head for helping other people, both find love; yet, what is ahead of them is only a nightmare...
Someone said that the performances are weak. I don't agree with this opinion, there may be a drawback in character development but the acting is equally great as in Book I. I even admit that Book II is worth attention in this case due to beautifully characterized Hal Holbrook as President Abraham Lincoln and especially appealing Anthony Zerbe as General Ulysses Grant...consider the moment he drinks apple juice while others accuse him of drinking too much whiskey. Zerbe is a terrific actor and that part of Grant is one of his best performances. James Read and Patrick Swayze again shine in their roles as well as Kirstie Alley and Terri Garber. I also admire Lewis Stone for his charismatic part of Charles hardened by war but softened by love. Some guest appearances are also worth consideration, including Olivia de Havilland and late James Stewart.
Both parts of NORTH AND SOUTH constitute wonderful history lesson, but history which is not filled with neutral facts but history filled with emotions. This mini series made me interested in American Civil War the results of which cried out how important it is to live in peace. That Palm Sunday of 1865 should always remind America that peace is the only way and even if there are storms of hatred, prejudice and divisions, true love will conquer them in the end. See both parts of "North and South" and you'll see that it is a history on screen watched in tears. Highly recommended! 8/10!