Thoughts on Glory

via Tumblr

"You fought very well yesterday, Trip. Sgt. Rawlins has recommended that you receive a commendation."

"Yes, sir?"

"Yes. And I think you should bear the regimental colors." 

"No."

"It's considered quite an honor. Why not?"

"Well, I'm ... wanting to say something, sir. But I ..."

"Go ahead."

"All right. See ... I ain't fighting this war for you, sir."

Does any screenwriter set out to write an ensemble movie, or does an ensemble movie emerge from somebody's screenplay? I'm mulling over that question as I consider Glory. There is a potent collection of characters, but for better or for worse, the movie is mostly defined by two of them.

We have Col. Robert Gould Shaw (Matthew Broderick), whose letters partially formed Kevin Jarre's script*, directed by Edward Zwick. An Antietam veteran, Shaw ends up commanding the 54th Massachusetts Infantry Regiment. The people he regularly interact with include fellow silver spoon turned leader Cabot Forbes (Cary Elwes); Thomas Searles (Andre Braugher), whose dedication often exceeds his skill; gravedigger turned leader Rawlins (Morgan Freeman) and the button-pusher with a heart of gold, Pvt. Silas Trip (Denzel Washington).

*Lay This Laurel by Lincoln Kirstein and One Gallant Rush by Peter Burchard were also credited source material.

"I mean, what's the point? Ain't nobody gonna win. It's just gonna go on and on."

"Can't go on forever."

"Yeah, but ain't nobody gonna win, sir."

"Somebody's gonna win."

"Who? I mean, you get to go on back to Boston, big house and all that. What about us? What do we get?"

Watching Glory, I realized Trip functioned a bit like Jo from The Facts of Life (gimme a break, she was the first similar character I could think of). Aggressive but righteous, Trip even has a Blair analogue with Thomas. A movie or TV show can have familiar types and character relationships, but it's unfortunate when they don't develop past the second dimension. That was my biggest problem with the movie. One's impression of a character or his role usually solidifies by his second or third scene and there's almost nowhere else to go.

I say "almost" because Glory is a war movie. We can assume the characters are going to meet one of two possible fates, success in battle or death in action. For much of Glory, a third fate seems likely. I understand why Shaw and company would want their service to have meaning. I just wish more was done with the strings attached to that meaning.

"Well, you won't get anything if we lose. So, what do you want to do?"

"Don't know, sir."

"It stinks, I suppose."

"Yeah. It stinks bad. And we all covered up in it, too. Ain't nobody clean. Be nice to get clean, though."

"How do we do that?"

"We ante up and kick in, sir. But I still don't want to carry your flag."

Recommended with reservations.

Thoughts:

-- Box Office: Grossing nearly $27 million on an $18 million budget, once this received a wide release, it usually was at No. 10 or lower. Still, it came in at No. 45 for 1989.

-- Awards Watch: Denzel won an NAACP Image Award, the film's sole Golden Globe and one of its three total Oscars. It's interesting that most of the Globe nominations were for "bigger" categories (Best Motion Picture - Drama, Best Director, etc.), whereas most of the Oscar nominations were for technical categories (like Best Cinematography and Best Sound, both of which it won for). Anyway, this also won an Image Award for Outstanding Motion Picture. Finally, James Horner's score won a Grammy, a unique feat for movie music which wasn't also Oscar-nominated.

-- Critic's Corner: "This is a good, moving, complicated film," Vincent Canby wrote. Variety: "Stirring and long overdue." Kevin Thomas, Los Angeles Times, and Roger Ebert both had issues with Shaw's seeming to be the dominant point of view. Ebert: "I consider this primarily a story about a black experience and do not know why it has to be seen largely through white eyes." Calling the film "a lightweight, liberal-heart-swollen high," Desson Howe of the Washington Post said the actors elevated the script. "Hold the hallelujahs for this botched Civil War epic," Peter Travers wrote.

-- Critic's Corner, Broderick: "Catastrophically miscast" with "a bland countenance," according to Travers. "Never becomes the charismatic leader the movie needs him to be ... lacks both physical and emotional stature," People wrote. Howe: "provides a certain gee-willikers empathy, but he should probably give Neil Simon a call and see what's shaking."

-- Different Times: A remake would explore Shaw's apparent PTSD in more detail.

-- "Give them hell, 54th!"

-- Next: Born on the Fourth of July. On deck: Roger & Me.