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

Matthew Broderick is brilliant in this movie


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.

reply

Just watched this movie for the first time and thought it was outstanding. One of the best war movies ever made.

Performances were outstanding from Broderick, Denzel, and Freeman.

I agree that it's Brodeicks best acting performance because he gets to be more serious and dramatic, even in the subtle moments.

reply

Totally agree, I have no tie for the man normally but in this he is brilliant.

reply

Yeah, I thought he played it oddly when I first watched it. He didn't seem like a commanding officer at all. But that was the point -- he was young and idealistic, wanting to do the right thing and in over his head. Probably no experienced officers wanted the job, or they were needed to lead more experienced regiments already fighting the war. Then he realized that he had to act like a commanding officer to get his men the equipment and supplies they needed to become a real fighting force.

reply