A review of Glory
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.
Bibliography
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
No comments:
Post a Comment