MovieChat Forums > Glory (1990) Discussion > Matthew Broderick is brilliant in this m...

Matthew Broderick is brilliant in this movie

posted 13 years ago by eastwind29
34 replies | jump to latest

I've read so many of the opinions that he was miscast for this role but I have to say that quite honestly, it is his performance that sets the entire tone for movie for me. When I see him in this role, he is no longer Matthew Broderick but the complete embodiment of Colonel Robert Gould Shaw, from his Bostonian accent (as a New Englander, one that is spot on and consistent throughout the film) to his timidly firm command of a regiment in which he frequently questioned his own ability and experience to lead. It was more than Broderick's youth that aptly fit this role, but his ability to convey so much emotion while saying so little truly astounded me and his warmth and paternal guidance over the men all while still retaining the vulnerability of his age. No where is this more visible than when he puts his hand on the shoulder of one of his men while lining up for the battle and looks at him with such great pride. It touches me every time I've seen this movie.

Matthew Broderick is a truly underrated actor in a very underrated performance. I look at a time where an actress like Sandra Bullock wins an oscar for Blind Side (which by the way, I thought she was great in), and compare it to Broderick's performance and feel as I did when I first saw it--he deserved recognition. For me, without Broderick in the role, it just wouldn't have been the same movie.

[–] hnt_dnl 13 years ago

Great performance IMHO. Just as good as any of the other main actors in this film.

[–] crinnutz 12 years ago

Yeah, there were many good performances in this film, but i have to say I was blown away by Denzel Washington. Was this by any chance his break out role?

[–] hnt_dnl 10 years ago

That's a tough call, because this was not Washington's first Oscar nomination. Cry Freedom in 1987 was. And both of these roles are Supporting. I guess you could say that this movie was a breakout because it was a flashy role which won him his first Oscar, but a lot of Oscar winners have died into obscurity after winning. His star was definitely on the rise at this point.

[–] surgecess 10 years ago

I'm not much of a Broderick fan, but I will agree. This was my favorite role he ever played, (next to War Games).

.. I am, in a word, terse.

[–] Michael71 10 years ago

Yeah its the scenes where he has no lines where he comes off really well. He played the part extremely well I agree. This film should be more popular, it is educational, should be shown in schools in history lessons definately. :P

[–] Sylvie17 10 years ago

That scene where he is looking out over the ocean with the gulls flying, and the emotion that plays over his face, saying goodbye to the beauty of the world...it just gets me. What a beautiful performance.

[–] moon_star_skies 10 years ago

100% on target! Matthew was brilliant in "Glory" and deserved more recognition for his moving performance, not to mention his stunning performance in "How to Succeed." He can perform any character...dance & song man, drama, scientific characters, political figures, etc., etc. He is brilliant.

[–] Herreken 9 years ago

When I see him in this role, he is no longer Matthew Broderick but the complete embodiment of Colonel Robert Gould Shaw, from his Bostonian accent (as a New Englander, one that is spot on and consistent throughout the film) to his timidly firm command of a regiment in which he frequently questioned his own ability and experience to lead.

It's good to see people who know about the real Shaw positively judge Broderick's performance. I'm not a huge Broderick fan but I always thought he was good in this movie even though I never knew anything about Robert Shaw.

Broderick was convincing as a young Colonel who might've been a little unsure of himself. When I watch Glory, I don't think "Hey it's Ferris Bueller". On the other hand when I watch Bramstocker's Dracula, I think "Ted Theodore Logan is doing a very bad British accent". Now that is miscasting right there.

DISPLAY thy breasts, my Julia!

[–] twhiteson 9 years ago

I agree. "Glory" was Matthew Broderick's finest moment as an actor. Although he continues to work steadily in film and had some real triumphs on the Broadway stage, "Glory" remains his crowning achievement as an actor. Apparently, he's on record that this is his favorite role.

It's ironic that in 1989 Broderick was the biggest star of the cast. At the time, Denzel Washington was a TV actor who dabbled in films. Morgan Freeman was a veteran supporting actor still awaiting his big break. (One of his better known early roles was in the 1970's children's TV program "The Electric Company" on PBS.) And Andre Braugher was virtually unknown. Yet, today, Morgan Freeman is a household name. Andre Braugher is a very busy TV actor. And Denzel Washington is one of the biggest movie stars in the world. Meanwhile, Broderick's star as a film actor has decidedly diminished. Post-Glory saw the careers of Washington, Freeman, and Braugher take-off, but Broderick's career as a major movie star started to fade which is surprising considering how good he was in this role.

[–] AfroGeek 9 years ago

Broderick had a few good scenes but I thought he was outshined by the rest of the cast. I wouldn't put him in the top 5 performances in just THIS movie.

---
Call them ISIL. Isis is an overloaded term that has many other legitimate uses.

[–] homercles11 8 years ago

I am a big Civil War buff and loved this movie from the get go. I initially didn't like Broderick in the role, he seemed to light weight for such a heavy topic. But as time goes on I think he did a great job with the role, playing the innocent idealist to a tee. He really got the Shaw part down. There was so much about his portrayal that was subtle that one really needs to pay attention deeply. Like meeting Frederick Douglas and being offered the colonelship of the 54th. You could see so much in his expression, with so few words, not the least of which was being called on his idealism in front of the epitome of his ideal-Frederick Douglas. That and his first hand knowledge of the horrors of war.