GLORY is so underrated. Gene is right here. It's a TRUE STORY about a white officer commanding a group of black soldiers. The film isn't about Matthew Broderick's character. It isn't just about Morgan Freeman's, Andre Braugher's or Denzel Washington's characters. It's about this regiment of soldiers who, initially, don't have much in common but who share in the triumphs and tragedies of war (in this case, as Union soldiers in the Civil War). They live together. They fight together. They grow together. And, sadly, they die together. It's a truly remarkable film.
I just finished watching She Devil. I think it could have done with a few less characters and Streep and Begley should have been better written but aside from those rough spots, it's actually a surprisingly sharp comedy with a terrific ending.
Yeah, I loved Gene but I'm marveling at how he can so get the dark humor of "The War of the Roses" but that of "She Devil" passes him by. I know Siskel wanted more scenes between Meryl and Roseanne but ultimately the revenge that Barr constructs is mostly against her husband. It's really a story about female empowerment, especially female economic empowerment. But it also asks sly questions about how patriarchy pits women against each other and how Barr also uses the young women of the temp agency she forms to enact her revenge. I also agree with Roger that Meryl Streep is hilarious and that no other actor would have approached Mary Fisher in quite the same way.
That burn Ebert gave Rosanne at the end of the She Devil review was definitely not his classiest moment; usually the appearance talk downs were reserved for Siskel.
I was 12 when Glory came out. I was a big fan of The Princess Bride and Ferris Buellers Day Off. I wanted to watch the movie because I liked Carey Elwes and Matthew Brodrick but I immediately became invested (and fans) in Morgan Freeman, Denzel Washington, Andre Braugher, and Jihmi Kennedy. The soundtrack by James Horner is one of his best and the ending is incredibly powerful. I understand Roger Eberts frustration but as a kid I wonder if I might not have given the movie a chance. I’m glad I did.
I get Roger's frustration too, and sympathize with it. But in the case of "Glory," Gene has a point that the film is based on the actual story of the 54th Massachusetts which was led by a white Colonel. We need to have Broderick's character present to underscore the class and racial differences that were still very much present in the North and in the Union army too. But I also agree with Gene that the film's focus really shifts to the black soldiers, as it should. And frankly one of the most heartbreaking aspects of the final battle is that, despite the respect the black soldiers slowly earned from the white soldiers, the Union still chose to send in a black regiment first to take the heaviest losses rather than the white men. But Roger could not be more right about the weaknesses of "Cry Freedom."
15:09 what a strange and dumb point made by Ebert. He's asking why _Glory_ couldn't just tell the story of the black soldiers without a white lead actor (?) It's because the Massachusetts 54th regiment was LED by a white Lieutenant Colonel (Robert Gould Shaw), and the film was based on the actual letters written by him to his parents. The film does an excellent job of highlighting the bravery of the black soldiers during the Civil War. It does not upstage Morgan Freeman or Denzel Washington's character, and even shows how Freeman's character earned a promotion to Sergeant Major.
What a great episode! People always say that the most interesting moments were when Roger and Gene disagreed, but I think that their agreements were just as fun to watch. Here they liked everything equally (except for She-Devil) and still had very insightful things to say. To agree on something doesn't mean you will say the same things. God, I miss them.
"The War of the Roses," as shown in that clip, suggests that Kathleen Turner has turned Michael Douglas's dog into food, but then we get one shot later that shows the dog outside on the lawn (but that's it, just that one shot). I always wondered if that one shot was included just to reassure everyone that the dog wasn't really dead -- even though it probably was supposed to really be dead, as far as the script was concerned. Perhaps this was a bone (no pun intended) thrown to the executives who wanted Danny DeVito to change the ending of the film. "I won't change it to a happy ending, but I will let people think that, okay, the dog is still alive."
I'm surprised that Gene, in his review of "She-Devil," didn't point out that no mother would actually get rid of her kids as Roseanne was in that scene. And any woman who *would* get rid of her kids is no woman deserving of any sympathy. I remember pretty much nothing of "Driving Miss Daisy." Didn't it win the Oscar?
"Glory" transcends racism because it's not about racism. It's about brotherhood and courage in the face of adversity during the Civil War. Go watch "Mississippi Burning" if that's what you're looking for. Both terrific films for different reasons
Siskel had right at the end of his opinion about The War of the Roses. At the end of 80s decade the comedy, for some reason, got darker and darker. You had things like that one, The Burbs or Heathers.
What annoys me is that Ebert loved Driving Miss Daisy which was the usual demeaning safe movie about racism, yet he had a problem with Glory which yes did focus on the white leader. It was nowhere near as bad as Driving miss daisy
The only reason we know about that regiment is because of the officer. I saw a picture of the real life guy and he actually kind of does look like Matthew Broderick, which is to say that Matthew Broderick looks like him
DMD was not a "demeaning safe movie about racism". The movie is about a Friendship between an old lady and a man that happens to be black and her driver. The film is challenging you to see these people as individuals.
Glory didn't choose to have Broderick...glory is based on real life and robert shaw was a real man lol
GLORY is so underrated. Gene is right here. It's a TRUE STORY about a white officer commanding a group of black soldiers. The film isn't about Matthew Broderick's character. It isn't just about Morgan Freeman's, Andre Braugher's or Denzel Washington's characters. It's about this regiment of soldiers who, initially, don't have much in common but who share in the triumphs and tragedies of war (in this case, as Union soldiers in the Civil War). They live together. They fight together. They grow together. And, sadly, they die together. It's a truly remarkable film.
Talk about a time capsule....there was a day that Broderick was a bigger star than Denzel.
“Glory” was the best film of 1989 and one of the best of all time and it wasn’t even nominated for Best Picture.
All these years later that movie still moves me
Good movie, yes
Best cmon no way
I just finished watching She Devil. I think it could have done with a few less characters and Streep and Begley should have been better written but aside from those rough spots, it's actually a surprisingly sharp comedy with a terrific ending.
Yeah, I loved Gene but I'm marveling at how he can so get the dark humor of "The War of the Roses" but that of "She Devil" passes him by.
I know Siskel wanted more scenes between Meryl and Roseanne but ultimately the revenge that Barr constructs is mostly against her husband. It's really a story about female empowerment, especially female economic empowerment. But it also asks sly questions about how patriarchy pits women against each other and how Barr also uses the young women of the temp agency she forms to enact her revenge. I also agree with Roger that Meryl Streep is hilarious and that no other actor would have approached Mary Fisher in quite the same way.
That burn Ebert gave Rosanne at the end of the She Devil review was definitely not his classiest moment; usually the appearance talk downs were reserved for Siskel.
Yeah, that was beneath Roger. Besides, Barr's character is supposed to be unglamorous. That's part of the point.
3 incredible pictures in one episode. Driving Miss Daisy is one of my favorite films of all time.
none holiday movies
Our mostly black high school for history class took a field trip to see Glory!
We were all so blown away, cheering and carrying on the whole time!
I was 12 when Glory came out. I was a big fan of The Princess Bride and Ferris Buellers Day Off. I wanted to watch the movie because I liked Carey Elwes and Matthew Brodrick but I immediately became invested (and fans) in Morgan Freeman, Denzel Washington, Andre Braugher, and Jihmi Kennedy. The soundtrack by James Horner is one of his best and the ending is incredibly powerful. I understand Roger Eberts frustration but as a kid I wonder if I might not have given the movie a chance. I’m glad I did.
I get Roger's frustration too, and sympathize with it. But in the case of "Glory," Gene has a point that the film is based on the actual story of the 54th Massachusetts which was led by a white Colonel. We need to have Broderick's character present to underscore the class and racial differences that were still very much present in the North and in the Union army too. But I also agree with Gene that the film's focus really shifts to the black soldiers, as it should. And frankly one of the most heartbreaking aspects of the final battle is that, despite the respect the black soldiers slowly earned from the white soldiers, the Union still chose to send in a black regiment first to take the heaviest losses rather than the white men.
But Roger could not be more right about the weaknesses of "Cry Freedom."
15:09 what a strange and dumb point made by Ebert. He's asking why _Glory_ couldn't just tell the story of the black soldiers without a white lead actor (?) It's because the Massachusetts 54th regiment was LED by a white Lieutenant Colonel (Robert Gould Shaw), and the film was based on the actual letters written by him to his parents. The film does an excellent job of highlighting the bravery of the black soldiers during the Civil War. It does not upstage Morgan Freeman or Denzel Washington's character, and even shows how Freeman's character earned a promotion to Sergeant Major.
What a great episode! People always say that the most interesting moments were when Roger and Gene disagreed, but I think that their agreements were just as fun to watch. Here they liked everything equally (except for She-Devil) and still had very insightful things to say. To agree on something doesn't mean you will say the same things.
God, I miss them.
I love watching all these old episodes of Siskel & Ebert. Thank you That Old T.V.!
"The War of the Roses," as shown in that clip, suggests that Kathleen Turner has turned Michael Douglas's dog into food, but then we get one shot later that shows the dog outside on the lawn (but that's it, just that one shot). I always wondered if that one shot was included just to reassure everyone that the dog wasn't really dead -- even though it probably was supposed to really be dead, as far as the script was concerned. Perhaps this was a bone (no pun intended) thrown to the executives who wanted Danny DeVito to change the ending of the film. "I won't change it to a happy ending, but I will let people think that, okay, the dog is still alive."
I'm surprised that Gene, in his review of "She-Devil," didn't point out that no mother would actually get rid of her kids as Roseanne was in that scene. And any woman who *would* get rid of her kids is no woman deserving of any sympathy.
I remember pretty much nothing of "Driving Miss Daisy." Didn't it win the Oscar?
I think she was bluffing.
"Glory" transcends racism because it's not about racism. It's about brotherhood and courage in the face of adversity during the Civil War. Go watch "Mississippi Burning" if that's what you're looking for. Both terrific films for different reasons
Enemies was Siskel’s choice for Best Pic of that year, if I’m recalling correctly.
Siskel had right at the end of his opinion about The War of the Roses.
At the end of 80s decade the comedy, for some reason, got darker and darker. You had things like that one, The Burbs or Heathers.
This was a bad week for marital happiness.
What annoys me is that Ebert loved Driving Miss Daisy which was the usual demeaning safe movie about racism, yet he had a problem with Glory which yes did focus on the white leader. It was nowhere near as bad as Driving miss daisy
The only reason we know about that regiment is because of the officer. I saw a picture of the real life guy and he actually kind of does look like Matthew Broderick, which is to say that Matthew Broderick looks like him
DMD was not a "demeaning safe movie about racism". The movie is about a Friendship between an old lady and a man that happens to be black and her driver. The film is challenging you to see these people as individuals.
Your take on DMD is wrong.
those were holiday movies?