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.

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

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.