A Review Of Glory Essay, Research Paper

Glory captures the heroism of Colonel Robert Gould Shaw and

the first black regiment in the Civil War, the Massachusetts

“Fighting” Fifty-fourth. An extremely talented cast and crew

earned three Academy Awards (cinematography, sound and supporting

actor) and five nominations for their work in Glory. The

outstanding cinematography, sound, score and acting recreate the

events leading up to the Union attack on Fort Wagner on July 18th

1863.

Matthew Broderick portrays the young Bostonian abolitionist

Col. Robert G. Shaw who takes command of the Fifty-fourth,

following the Emancipation Proclamation. Shaw along with Cabot

Forbes (Cary Elwes) leads a band of ex slaves, servants and other

black volunteers including a rebellious runaway slave Trip

(Denzel Washington), Shaw’s educated childhood friend Thomas

Searles (Andre Braugher), and a former grave digger Rawlins

(Morgan Freeman). Together these men face the adversity of a

racist Union Army, struggling to prove themselves worthy of their

government issued blue uniforms.

After months of training and exploitation for physical

labor, the Fifty-fourth gains the opportunity to fight in an

attack on Fort Wagner on the beaches of South Carolina. Poised

to dispel the belief that blacks would not be disciplined under

fire, the Fifty-fourth leads the almost suicidal attack on Ft.

Wagner. There Col. Shaw valiantly falls and the Fifty-fourth,

suffering great losses, displayed the courage that persuaded the

Union to enlist many more black soldiers.

Matthew Broderick delivers a noteworthy performance in the

role of Col. Shaw, which Leonard Maltin calls his most ambitious

part. In an interview for the New York Times, Broderick spoke of

his method acting,

“The first step [in preparing for the role of Robert Gould

Shaw in Glory] was to try to learn as much as I could about the

real person. That was mostly from letters, photographs,

descriptions and a poem by Emerson. The thing I had to do was

bring myself into that situation. I didn’t want to be an

imitation of what I thought Shaw must have been like.”

Broderick’s acting talent has been noted on Broadway as well as

in films. Broderick won a Tony Award for his performance in

“Brighton Beach Memoirs” in 1983, a year after his film debut in

Max Dugan Returns. (Maltin, 102) But it was his role as a

computer hacker in War Games and his role as a handsome young

teen touring Chicago in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off that alerted

moviegoers to his talent.

Denzel Washington has received critical acclaim for his role

as Trip (as well as an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor).

Denzel commented on the role of Trip in an interview with the New

York Times.

“Trip’s an instigator – wild, rebellious, angry. He’s a

product of racism who’s become a racist. He hates all white

people, Confederates most of all. But in the end, when he sees

the white officers make the maximum sacrifice, he’s the most

patriotic one in the bunch.”

Director of Glory, Edward Zwick described Washington by stating,

“Whatever that mysterious chemical process is that makes the

camera love someone, he has more of it than any one person

should.”(Maltin, 921) It is that presence that earned him an

Oscar for Glory and nominations for his roles in Cry Freedom and

Malcolm X.

Equally as important as acting to the impact of the movie

Glory is the Musical score composed by James Horner. In the

final battle scene in Glory, Horner chose the Boys Choir of

Harlem which creates a moving effect during the death of Col.

Robert Shaw.(Magill, 158) Horner won a Grammy Award for the

score for Glory. He was nominated the same year for an Academy

Award for the score for Field of Dreams. Horner’s previous

Grammy Awards include song of the year and best song written for

a motion picture or television, all for “Somewhere Out There”

from An American Tale in 1987. (CTFT, 228) Leonard Maltin calls

Horner one of today’s most prolific film composer’s. Horner

composed thirty one motion picture scores from 1979 to 1989.

(Maltin, 411)

There are many elements that contribute to the success of a

film. Glory combines the best cinematography, sound, score, and

acting to create a moving representation of this portion of U. S.

history. Roger Ebert called it a “strong and valuable film.”

In his review written for the Chicago Sun-Times, Ebert notes the

amount of effort devoted to accurate period detail.

One of Ebert’s criticisms of Glory is that the perspective

of the movie is constantly seen from one view, that of the white

officer. Ebert points out that a white man is cast as the lead

role when the movie is essentially about a black experience.

Glory could have been told from the eyes of a black soldier in

the Fifty-fourth. Ebert makes a valid assumption when he suggest

that a totally different film could be made from the same

material.

Indeed Glory is a story of how the freed blacks were able to

prove themselves in battle. The Fifty- fourth regiment could

also be considered one of the first times we see blacks look for

equal opportunity. Ebert notes the scene when the black soldiers

of the Fifty-fourth learn they will not be paid the regular

(white) wage. “Blacks march as far, bleed as much and die as

soon, they argue.”(Ebert) It would be 100 years later that they

gained equal opportunity when in Vietnam both black and white

soldiers were interspersed in the military. While Roger Ebert

discusses the idea of a different point of view he notes that

Glory is an important film no matter who’s eyes it is seen from.

Blake Lukas on the other hand is far more critical of the

film. In Lukas’ review for Magill’s Cinema Annual he picks at

elements of the film, including weak characterization and

directing that leaves something to be desired. Lukas seems at

times to be lost in his own rhetoric when he writes about the

dismal war genre. He delves into the number of Vietnam films

that are “a far more popular subject in this period.”(Magill,

155)

After a brief synopsis of the film Lukas comments on the

dynamics of the protagonist character who we see mature through

the film. The remaining characters Lukas believes lack

dimension. He calls the role of Cabot Forbes “fleetingly

interesting” and the role of Trip, (which Denzel Washington won

Best Supporting Actor for) “predictable.” He goes on further to

say that the role of Rawlins portrayed by Morgan Freeman is only

enlightened by this “brilliant actor’s own characteristic

intelligence.” Therefore without the phenomenal acting talent

presented in Glory Lukas feels the movie would be flat.

In addition to finding flaw in the characterization Lukas

compares director Edward Zwick to the director John Ford. Ford

directed earlier Civil War films such as The Horse Soldiers(1959)

or Sergeant Rutledge (1960)which based on the an all black

calvary regiment in the Civil War. Lukas suggest that Ford was

able to attain a “thematic richness” that alluded Zwick. Lukas

also remarks that Zwick used ineffective “emphasis on close ups

and shallow focus which do little to make the film’s historical

moment seem …alive in spite of admirable attention to detail in

the art direction sets and costumes.”

Lukas is impressed however by Zwick’s direction of the final

scene in which he uses “vigorous tracking shots ” to create a

“stunning effect.” Lukas also comments on the James’s Horner’s

inventive use of the Boy’s Choir of Harlem. Lukas suggest that

Zwick looked to appeal to contemporary audiences. Interestingly

enough Lukas is surprised that Glory met with such “critical and

commercial success.”

I was surprised to read the review written by Blake Lukas

where he constantly compares Zwick to a former director of Civil

War films John Ford, and when he persist in mentioning the dismal

nature of most war films. Lukas states that “Glory offers an

idealism and sense of heroism that contrast powerfully to the

spectacle of bloodshed and war’s waste of life that it also

visualizes.” Lukas seems hung up on the waste of life that is

portrayed in war film’s. In my opinion Glory was not a movie

about whether or not we as a nation should participate in wars.

It was about the progress of the black race and the fierce battle

they had to fight a long the way to attain each rung on the

ladder of freedom. Lukas criticism seems out of place when he

writes about Vietnam and the “American soldier’s potential for

barbarism.”

Lukas also seems hung up on the past. he makes two comments

which seem out of place. First when comparing Zwick to Ford he

states that Zwick does not attempt the same “thematic richness”

and that “(Zwick’s) sensibilities are more attuned with the

responses of the 1989 audiences.” I don’t think Zwick should be

faulted for creating a film that is appealing to contemporary

audiences.” I certainly would not go see a film directed by

Lukas.

Desson Howe reviewing Glory for the Washington Post like

Lukas notes that the scriptwriter Jarre (who’s credits include

Rambo: First Blood Part II) provides only a superficial

characterization “his script is made better by the performers.”

Howe believes that the is too much “liberal eyed giddiness

(thanks chiefly to the gushy, rhapsodizing score by James

Horner).”

Both Ebert and Lukas acclaim Broderick’s performance of Shaw,

yet Howe criticizes it writing, “In this movie he is an amiable

non-presence, creating unintentionally the notion that he Fifty-fourth earned its stripes despite wimpy leadership.” This

comment lead me to wonder whether Howe and I saw the same movie.

Howe notes that the performance of Denzel Washington, and Morgan

Freeman uplift the film.

Perhaps the reviewers did not have the luxury of time to

research the history of Robert Gould Shaw or the Fifty-fourth.

If so they would have found that Shaw was indeed a youthful

officer given charge of the Fifty-Fourth as Colonel at the age of

26. Understanding Shaw philosophical views as an abolitionist

and the societal views of blacks being subservient to whites,

certainly a young man leading the first black regiment would

experience a certain degree of self doubt and contradiction. In

the end Shaw develops the courage to lead his men into battle to

a symbolic triumph displaying the bravery of these black

soldiers. Broderick’s portrayal of Shaw is credible from my

point of view.

The credibility of Glory is heighten by the amount of effort

devoted to recreating the historical details. From the camps to

the costumes Glory captures the aura of battle. Most of the

critics agree that the historical detail was a redeeming element

of the film.

Glory is a film that balances it shortcomings out with

exceptional talent. Perhaps a lack of dimension in the

characters is balanced with outstanding performances. Any faults

in the directing are made up by the detail put in to the film and

the superior sound and score. Glory is a carefully constructed

film with a didactic theme. It is an accurate representation of

the lives of Civil War soldiers.

The climax of the movie is fairly accurately represented.

The Fifty-fourth regiment had slightly over five hundred members

when they marched into battle on July 18th, 1863. Over two

hundred and fifty members of the regiment died in that battle and

several more were injured. That is what proved to the white

regiments looking on that the black soldiers were worthy of

battle. Glory captures that triumph.

Contemporary Theatre, Film and Television. Detroit: Gale

Research, Volume 10

Ebert, Roger. The Chicago Sun-Times, January 12, 1990

Howe, Desson. The Washington Post, January 12, 1990

Lukas, Blake. Magill’s Cinema Annual 1990, Englewood Cliffs,

N.J.: Salem Press, 1990

Maltin, Leonard. Leonard Maltin’s Movie Encyclopedia, The

Penguin Publishing Company, New York, NY 1994.

All I ever needed to know about Glory, I learned in AMCV 192.

Stephanie Beck

April 9, 1997

Prof. Deutch