User reviews

Because of my sympathy for the Cause, and a glowing review I had read elsewhere, I was prepared to love this movie, but I can't. I can recommend it, but with the following qualifications: It is a good story, but not well told. The principal problem is the story is chopped up into numerous flashbacks, to the point where the "unity of time" is lost. Not only is this mildly confusing at times, but it prevents the full power of the story from developing.

The acting is average at best. The script, surprisingly, does not seem to have much room for a wide range of emotions, but rather most scenes are executed with the same solemn sincerity. I wasn't yawning, but I was surprised by the lack of vitality in some scenes that really called for it.

The cinematography was very fine. The story was not greatly partisan; it could have made much more of Union Army atrocities against Southern civilians, but took the high road and chose to illustrate, but not dwell on them. It leaves me with a strong sense of the tragedy that was the War, and I think and hope that was one of the makers' main intentions. So it is successful on some levels.

In 1860 Captain Robert Adams of South Carolina (Julian Adams) falls in love with Eveline McCord from Pennsylvania (Gwendolyn Edwards). Their challenges during the Civil War are chronicled. Eveline's brother and his wife are peripheral characters (Joshua Lindsey & Amy Redford), as is the comrade played by Eric Holloway.

Based on a true story, "The Last Confederate: The Story of Robert Adams" (2005), originally titled "Strike the Tent," is a Civil War story produced, written, and directed by the descendants of Robert and Eveline, which compelled critics to write it off as a 'vanity project.' The low budget (about $1 million) is comparable to "The Colt" (2005) and "Pharaoh's Army" (1995), but with a story akin to "Cold Mountain" (2003).

This is basically a Western transplanted to the Eastern Front of the Civil War. The tone is lyrical in a pleasant way that entrances the viewer, but the brutalities of combat are also depicted. Gwendolyn and Amy Redford (Robert's daughter) are beautiful and Adams makes for a convincing protagonist. The ironies of war are shown, e.g. The hero mercilessly mows down four Union soldiers and then is spared for unknown reasons by a Federalist.

The film runs 1 hour, 36 minutes, and was shot in South Carolina (Columbia & lower Richland County), North Carolina (Wilmington & another area), Georgia (Conyers) and Maryland (Hagerstown). Mickey Rooney and Tippi Hedren have small parts.

GRADE: B-

When I sat down to watch the 2005 movie "The Last Confederate: The Story of Robert Adams" (aka "Strike the Tent"), I must admit that I was expecting a bit more of a war drama. Sure, I wasn't familiar with the story upon which the movie is based, so I didn't know what I was in for here. But I was expecting a tad more than what directors A. Blaine Miller and Julian Adams delivered here.

Sure, "The Last Confederate: The Story of Robert Adams" was watchable, and it provided adequate enough entertaining for a single viewing. But this was hardly an outstanding or memorable movie set in the time period of the American Civil War.

The acting performances in the movie were actually good, but it was just a shame that the characters in the movie were a bit too bland and generic. They were simply lacking more spark and more dimensions for me, in order to feel like wholehearted and complete characters in the story.

I will say that the sets, props and atmosphere in "The Last Confederate: The Story of Robert Adams" definitely felt like it took place during the American Civil War, and that was something that added to the overall enjoyment of the movie.

I am sure that this 2005 movie will provide adequate entertainment for viewers familiar with the story, or for viewers looking for a love story set within the American Civil War. However, I was expecting a bit more warfare and action, so I was somewhat disappointed with this movie.

My rating of "The Last Confederate: The Story of Robert Adams" lands on a mediocre five out of ten stars. This is not a movie that I will be returning to watch for a second time.

A noble cause in wanting to make this film by the family of John Adams, but uh boy, there are serious script flaws, lack of believability in some of the characters due to sub-par acting (by Julian Adams, mainly), continuity problems, and a wardrobe that at times looks like it came out of a cracker-jacks box. This film is billed as being filled with passion and being "explosive", according to one IMDb reviewer. I think dead people are more passionate and explosive! I don't know why this film is getting so many positive reviews, it's really not good at all. I'm only giving it 3 stars myself out of consideration for the family's desire to tell the story of their heritage (assuming it is all true, but I've found nothing on the history of Robert Adams anywhere else but in this film, so who knows how much of the movie is historically accurate).

Even if you're a civil war history buff, this film will likely barely hold your interest (if at all).

Sorry, Adams family. Nothing personal, I'm just calling it like I see it.

The Last Confederate is a dull, uninspiring spin off of the Robert Adams story. Nothing in this movie impressed me. The acting was atrocious. There was not one believable character in the film. It just didn't seem authentic and the cinematography was amateur at best. It reminded me of a late night movie that would come on the lifetime channel. The production values are low and there is hardly any action . If you are expecting a hardcore war movie, look elsewhere because this feels more like a lousy romance novel. After watching Seraphim Falls with Pierce Bronson, a hardboiled western set after the civil war, you can tell the difference in the quality of direction and writing, and it was just so much more fast paced. Leave this one on the shelf.

Strike the Tent is a beautifully shot film that captures the external and internal conflict of the civil war and a families history of the period. Julian Adams shows strong acting ability in portraying the story of his family and the tough choices that have to be made for love and country.

I enjoyed the pace of the movie and have to comment again on the impressive cinematography. I can't tell but if this was shot digitally and transfered kudos to the production team in the final print. The story tells how true love overcomes all obstacles in its way. The film effectively captures a country split ideologically, socially and geographically and the plight of South Carolinians protecting their home and lands from the onslaught of war, illness and tyranny. It depicts the weary soldiers seeking not only victory but revenge and the plunders of war. Tragic in its honest depiction of the sacrifices both armies and families had to endure. In the end, the love that is all but impossible is the only thing that will never die in this historical memoir. Thanks again for sharing this remarkable story of your family. I look forward to seeing the film again once it is released on DVD. I enjoyed this first effort and look forward to other projects from these promising film makers.

I saw a few good comments on this and thought I'd give it a try. What a mistake. The movie started with a flashback within a flashback within a flashback, and just got worse from there. The outfits were unauthentic and looked like inexpensive costumes, the speech too modern sounding, the acting awkward, and the transition from scene to scene choppy. A crucial rule for me is that to enjoy a movie, I have to be able to get lost in the movie. When I can't get through two scenes without being shocked by mismatched outfits, speech, or photography, the movie won't get a good rating from me. Call me picky, or maybe it's just that I've seen enough movies to know what's expected in a historic movie.

The story is based on a true person (although only a corporal in real life portrayed as a captain). The family connection of the writer and actors was appreciated. The movie had unnecessary cursing and a sex scene, all of which could have been omitted and the story would have been enhanced. These "modern" devices insult the imagination and taste of viewers like me. My Christian family could have enjoyed it without these elements. The story and action stalled about three quarters of the way through, kind of like a sermon gone too long.

Appreciated the inclusion of a "Copperhead" character, a Northerner who had sentiment for the Southern society and cause. There were a multitude of these "Southern sympathizers" throughout the North, but one would be hard-pressed to find such facts in history books. Good movie except for the elements already mentioned.

In the movie these are the details that were given. Robert Adams was born in 1832. Eveline McCord two years after him in July 1834. On the grave stones give this information also. But Nelson's grave stone reads Nov. 1834. Wasn't Nelson and Eveline siblings?? How and they both have been born in the same year but the most puzzling part is one was in July and the second in November. That just isn't right, is it? Also I have searched Google, Wikipedia and ask.com for Robert Adams None of the information presented were not dated in the 1800's. Can anyone help me with this information? I very much enjoyed the movie. But the details are very important to me. I hope someone can find the time to help me with this information I search for. Contact sppmybabies@AOL.com Thank you Gail

For a movie made on a low budget, the cinematography is pretty good and has some very good looking scenery. Unfortunately, this one good thing is not enough to overcome the atrocious acting and bad storytelling. The story itself might have been better if told chronologically, rather than using a flashback of a flashback. It seemed like an unnecessary device to use. The lack of any emotion from the actors, especially the lead, led to the story falling flat and pointless. The lead actor just read his lines in a monotone voice like he was reading off of a cue card. It's virtually impossible to have a good drama without either an excellent script or excellent acting. This had neither. I have no doubt that the main problem with the movie is that it was produced, directed, acted, and written by the family. With the same amount of money, someone else could have made a better movie because they were emotionally detached from the content and could have seen the obvious shortcomings.

OK, first and foremost i like good "realistic" war films, secondly i like films even better if they are based on fact. This was both, and a bonus to both of those critical points is the lead role, who is a descendant of the "historical" character who is the main focus of the film. My wife enjoyed the film too, hard to find a film both of you can watch knowing there's going to be some bloodshed mixed in with a love story, but it works and it works well. Its hard to tell at times this is not a big budget film, but reading about it elsewhere you know its not and you can appreciate it even more. You can see there's a lot of personal effort gone into getting this film made. You see so many people on here saying "well thats 90 minutes of my life wasted" well this is just the opposite, i wish it had been longer, you get a great insight into some real peoples lives during the civil war, and the authentic backdrops and locations just add to its quality.

You see movies all the time that are controlled by the flashbacks that show events not seen in the movie to explain the plot. But it is extremely unusual to have a flashback of someone actually having a flashback which is shown at least 10 times during this film. When i first witnessed the horror that was Strike the Tent, i was looking for a good film to watch with my friend, but what we got made a fourth grade spelling bee on film look exciting. From the costumes to the extremely bad dialoge, this movie just plain sucked. The only thing that kept me from throwing this disc into the fireplace was that it was funny beyond belief. There were no southern accents, and the soundtrack made me constipated. The one believable character had three lines and was a 70's comedy actor, but all in all, this movie made me watching my lame Cousins Barbe movies look like a life saving activity. Save yourself from this atrocity and if you can write your local critic and tell them of this bag-o-crap from a long line of bad Thinkfilm pictures.

This movie lacked well...just about everything. Anything from the soundtracks to the acting without southern accents was enough for me to just simply laugh at this film during the whole dreadful ninety-six minutes. Mickey Rooney, I will admit was good and one woman actually had a southern accent, but otherwise it was a waste of money. When I look at a documentary type movie, like this, I think they should have historical accuracy, real acting, a basic understanding of some type of plot and emotion. This film also had flashbacks to scenes that either happened twenty seconds ago, had no significance, or weren't even in the movie to begin with. This movie is surprisingly dull for a 2005 release. The director and production company should be ashamed that they actually made something worse than the recently released Bratz movie, which I was dragged to see by my girlfriend. I guess this is why you rent a movie before you buy it, so you don't waste your money on something worthless. My ultimate idea is that every disk of this movie should be destroyed in a fiery grave, so that no one will have to endure its torture ever again.

The Last Confederate is a film conceived and brought to the screen by its star Robert Adams. Apparently with considerable help from the South Carolina Film Commission and state government. It certainly presents the Confederate cause in the best possible light, something of particular interest to South Carolina since it was those folks who were the first to secede and get the drums beating out a fast tempo.

After saying that it's also a good romantic film showing the love of star Adams's great great grandfather Julian Adams and his Yankee sweetheart from Pennsylvania played by Gwendolyn Edwards. With flashbacks to the Ante Bellum period we see Adams in the last days of the war knowing full well the cause was lost, but as he says it they're now fighting for a way of life. Of course the question of slavery is kind of glossed over as you would expect.

As romance however the film is first rate. After being taken prisoner and spending time in Elmira, the Union's Andersonville Adams and two friends escape and go to Pennsylvania because that's not what his captors would think he would do and because Edwards has fled there to be with her grandfather, an aged Mickey Rooney. Rooney his scenes mostly in bed delivers a fine performance, a man you can watch live almost his entire almost century life on the big and small screen.

The romance has some real poignancy to it. The film was shot on a lot of actual locations for the story. As history many will find it suspect.

Being a native of South Carolina, I just truly "lived" in this movie. The actors 'became' the characters and I could feel what it was like during that turbulent time.

This is not a "slick" film one way or the other. Gwendolyn Edwards makes you want to bow and offer her your hand for a promenade; Julian Adams makes you realize what true Southern men went through during that time: it was not easy, nor pat, nor automatic. It was a time that was hard on all Southerners.

This film made it natural that you identify with the characters: they were not heroes, supermen, or plastic celebrities. They were real people.

I'll add this to my collection, and that is a rare honor indeed. Movies are so cheap and easily attainable that it's not worth the time and trouble to buy them. But I will definitely buy this one so that I always have it near to hand.

A million thanks to Julian and Weston Adams and to Gwendolyn Edwards. You all made it so real and so natural.

Thank you.

Jim Kirk

Paris, Tennessee

I thought it was a well scripted, well shot, well acted movie. This movie is an independent and low budget movie, but you won't notice. It takes place during the Civil War, but it's more than just that. It's the story of a guy fighting for what he believes in and who he loves. The story starts out before the Civil War and progresses through out the war, to the end of the war when he comes home. It is more than just a story of the Civil War but what happened to people during the war. This story is taken from the letters and diaries of the people portrayed in the movie. I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. This movie was a labor of love for the producers and the whole crew and it shows through on the film.

Very well done, especially considering the budget. I liked the independent, realistic feel to it, vs manufactured or contrived Hollywoodism.

I read somewhere a reviewer saying that this was "revisionist history" wrt this movie's depiction of how the slave owners treated their slaves so nicely. Absolutely untrue... there really wasn't that much depiction of slave owners with slaves to begin with, and to see one white gentleman actually talk nicely to a few slaves was totally believable.

That same reviewer also said this movie was about "nostalgia" for the pre-war south. But I think it was more about southerners protecting their tradition, and then finally knowing when to surrender (hence the title "Strike the Tent"). Otoh, the extra featurette on the DVD about how the film was conceived did show that Julian's intention was to proudly depict his much beloved, land-owning family history.

The film depicts pre-war southern life favorably, yet doesn't demonize the north (much), even after it's clear that the south had lost the war and had to free their slaves. It was a good depiction of one side "protecting their own", but pretty much intentionally blind to the issue of slavery itself. An interesting "real life" depiction of real history--at least from a southern, white-man's point of view.

Many of the posters who have made negative comments on this fantastic film are apparently some who were rightfully fired from the production. How unfortunate for them, because this was quite a movie.

I also understand that the budget of this film was around one million US dollars. That seems impossible, because of the lush and broad scope of the film, but those who told me that were sources within South Carolina government who had knowledge (who also told me of the employees, who were rightfully fired from the production, who've spoken ill of the film simply as an attempt at revenge). Apparently those fired were involved as well in the destruction a television show in the Charleston area.

A fantastic production in every way. A wonderful story and a touching tale of love's strength.

I have watched a lot of botched historic movies, especially about my country Canada. This was an excellent movie. Great care was taken to do it right. I was absolutely spellbound by the story of "The Last Confederate". I do not agree with Mr. "Why Bother", truth is why bother us with the boring trivial statement you call your opinion. I mean you could 49, but your opinion makes you sound like your 12. A lot of care and love for history as well as a sense of family went in to this movie, as well as the belief in telling a good story. Movies like "Gone With The Wind" is a good story in general is typical of Hollywood screwing up history, just like filming a movie called "Saskatchewan" in Jasper, Alberta.

Enjoy the movie for what it is. I can't find any proof that he was a corporal and not a captain as the other reviewer says. Also, it is for entertainment. Enjoy the sex scene. Enjoyed it for the historical and theatrical aspects.