Box art for Glory


action & adventure, drama

The saga of the first black fighting unit in America's civil war is an inspiring testament to courage, the human spirit, and the value of freedom.Starring MATTHEW BRODERICK, DENZEL WASHINGTON, CARY ELWES, MORGAN FREEMAN, and CLIFF DE YOUNG

Rotten Tomatoes® scores

  • Critic Score
  • Audience Score

common sense

PAUSE for kids age 15
0 out of 5
Drinking, drugs, & smoking
1 out of 5
3 out of 5
Positive messages
3 out of 5
0 out of 5
4 out of 5

Excellent Civil War movie for mature teens.

what parents need to know

Parents need to know that there is graphic war violence here; all the bloody killings may be too much for many tweens and some teens. Know your kid. Also, the movie deals with racism and other mature themes. Note: most of the soldiers here die in service.

what families can talk about

  • Families can talk about the history of racism in this country. Families can also research the complex reasons why the US split into Union and Confederacy and clashed in battle, which are not covered in this film.

movie reviews from Rotten Tomatoes®

  • Tomatometer®

    reviews counted: 14
    see all Glory reviews
  • Audience


Top Critic Reviews


- Chuck O'Leary, Fantastica Daily, Thursday, June 24, 2010

Fresh: It's hard not to get carried along.

- Desson Thomson, Washington Post, Saturday, January 1, 2000

Fresh: Still one of the best war epics ever made, with all around fantastic performances...

- Felix Vasquez Jr., Film Threat, Thursday, June 24, 2010

Audience Reviews

4 stars

Best Civil War movie ive ever seen. Top to bottom the acting was amazing.

- jmanard52, Thursday, March 29, 2007

4 stars

First and foremost: everything I have to say about this film is being said after taking the historical innacuracies and artistic liberties into consideration. While I am an American historian, the Civil War is not my specialty. I have taken classes on both it and military history though. With that out of the way, I can say that Glory is one of the finest and most well-made films about the CIvil War. What makes it even more distinct is that it is the story of the first all-black regiment. In his review, Roger Ebert complained about movies like this where the leaders are all white. It bugged him that it is always like this with the movies. here is one time where the critic needs to look at history. The fact that the 54th Regiment existed to begin with is a miracle enough. The movie also shows that the Union wasn't completely anti-racist either. Two details I'm glad the filmmakers got (mostly) right. One look at this movie makes it obvious that it was designed and planned as a prestige picture, aka "Oscar bait". The film's original release date furthur emphasizes this. There is nothing wrong with that though. Even if this film did not receive the three Oscars that it did, it is still a fantastic film. The casting is quite nice. The supporting actors (including winner Denzel Washington) are brilliant. I really like Broderick as well. He had a hard role to play. Like what his character goes through, he had a lot to prove and a lot of growing up to do. While he's not perfect, he gives probably his best performance considering this was his first real dramatic role. If I were to be really harsh I'd slam him. Not his performance mind you, but the chracterization (from the writing perspective). As I said though, the Civil War is not my specialty, so I am nicer about these kinds of things. As far as the cinematography: I can see why it won the Oscar. The music is also stirring. Zwick's direction is strong. This is the movie that made him an A-lister. As I said, my hisotry gripes have already been considered. I have other gripes as well. The movie is guilty of patronization and emotional manipulation, but it is being presented as a celebratory and inspring piece. While there is nothing wrong with that, it can be too easy to let that become the focus, taking away from the historical basis. The film does a mostly decent job of not letting it get too out of hand. Some of my colleagues would probably think I'm being a little too lenient on this film, and while I know of the danger of letting Hollywood shape one's historical knowledge, I like historical based films (mostly) because they can be used in conjunction with the real deal, and can allow for discussions of why liberties are taken, and that sort of thing. It can be hard to find a balance between history and entertainment, but Glory is successful.

- cosmo313, Friday, February 26, 2010

4 stars

As much as I like this film I still can't shake the nagging suspicion that someone else could have brought a little more depth to the part of Colonel Robert Shaw. Broderick does a good job but his portrayal doesn't entirely ring true. It's as though his 20th century sensibilities keep him on the cusp of the character without completely melting into it. I'm never unaware that it's an actor playing a part, and that is a distraction (albeit a minor one) from a richly engrossing story.

- flixsterman, Sunday, November 1, 2009