Review: Glory (1989)

Glory (1989)

4.0

WAR
U.S. Release Date: 12/15/89
Running Length: 122 Minutes
MPAA Classification: R (Violence)
Aspect Ratio: 1.85:1
Cast: Matthew Broderick, Denzel Washington, Cary Elwes, Morgan Freeman, Jihmi Kennedy, Andre Braugher, John Finn
Director: Edward Zwick
Screenplay: Kevin Jarre, based on the books "Lay This Laurel" by Lincoln Kirstein and "One Gallant Rush" by Peter Burchard and the letters of Robert Gould Shaw
Cinematography: Freddy Francis
Music: James Horner
U.S. Distributor: TriStar Pictures

Review by: Carter Moulton

12/28/08

Glory is easily one of the best war movies of all time. The enchantment lies in the simplicity of the story. No confederate antagonist, no scandal, just men fighting for freedom. It’s a movie that somehow gets every aspect of filmmaking to fall in the right place. The soaring theme song blares right out of the gate, and Edward Zwick (director of The Last Samurai, and the new film Defiance) immediately displays the impact that battle has on our moral fiber. Zwick has a delicate care for his characters, threading the Civil War into their story—not vice versa. His direction is reticent, which, contrasted against today’s yearning for big, expensive war films, creates a motion picture that feels authentic.

Matthew Broderick takes the lead role of Colonel Robert Gould Shaw, and to be honest, his character was the only one I was skeptical about. Colonel Shaw is placed in charge of an African American (the 54th) volunteer regiment. Broderick is likable in films like Ferris Beuller’s Day Off and You Can Count On Me, but I really wasn’t convinced that he was cut out for a war film. About a quarter-way through the film I bought into his performance, and at the end of the film I was compelled by it. Equally as strong is the supporting cast, including Cary Elwes (The Princess Bride), Morgan Freeman (every other movie besides The Princess Bride), and Denzel Washington (Training Day). Washington’s Oscar-winning (best supporting actor) performance is a tour de force. He steals every scene he’s in.

In a historical context, Glory follows the 54th regiment, but only Robert Gould Shaw actually existed. Inconsistencies and exaggerations are obviously present, but to watch a dramatized version of the bond that Shaw forms with his regiment is enthralling. The fact that most of the characters are uncertain about their future, even if the war ends in their favor, dives even further into the genuineness of Glory. The film feels like a history lesson—in fact, I watched a watered down version in middle school. When a movie can tear emotions apart while at the same time informing well enough to be viewed in classrooms, I’d call it an historic achievement.

Nothing is forced. It’s reassuring to see a motion picture that boldly counts on the viewers to attach themselves to the story based on their moral judgment. As stated earlier: compared to other war films, Glory finds a visual beauty in the laughter and tears of the soldiers—not the explosions on the battlefield. That being said, the set designs and battle scenes deliver when necessary. All involved in Glory collectively etch a sensationalized verse in American history. Zwick’s shot of seagulls on and off the battlefield towards the end of the film is one of the more powerful in recent memory.