Americas 250th Birthday Cinemathon #22: Glory (1989)

Glory tells the story of the 54^th Massachusetts, one of the first black Civil War regiments. One of the conditions of Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation was that, starting January 1, 1863, African-Americans could officially join the Union Army, though many were already giving a big hand with logistical support, thus freeing up more white troops to get to the front lines. The 54^th Massachusetts in particular received much attention because it had the full support of Massachusetts Governor John Andrew and saw action fairly quickly in the southeast around Charleston. Also, as an early black regiment, it got to have the state's distinction in its name while other units were listed as USCT (United States Colored Troops). Already made known in art and general histories, the regiment is certainly well known now because of its 1989 film adaptation.

The movie was the brainchild of New York cultural figure Lincoln Kirstein and screenwriter Kevin Jarre (adopted son of none other than Maurice Jarre, composer of Lawrence of Arabia). Both were inspired by the regiment’s monument in Boston (featured in the end credits), several books (including one by Kirstein himself), and Colonel Robert Gould Shaw’s letters. Shaw (Matthew Broderick) provides narration via his letters, but the quotes are a mix of real ones and fake ones to accommodate the changes made for the story.

Americas 250th Birthday Cinemathon #14: The Alamo (2004)

 

Among the more filmed moments of American history is the Battle of the Alamo. To those who don’t know the story, Mexico, trying to popular their largely unsettled northern territories, invited Americans to depart the United States and come to Texas. Naturally, letting thousands of Protestants, many with their own unique beliefs of what a society should be, flood into a Catholic held land caused many social problems. I can’t claim to understand the dizzying Mexican political scene of the 19^th Century, which was constantly shifting and saw frequent revolts and revolutions. However, the United States best remembers the Texas Revolution of 1836, which featured the legendary last stand of under 200 men at the Alamo in San Antonio. With no option for surrender, they fought to the last man and inflicted over thrice their number in Mexican casualties.

If I include Disney’s Davy Crockett series, I’ve seen only three of the Alamo adaptations. I considered trying a new one, but decided to rewatch the last of them, the 2004 effort directed by John Lee Hancock and produced by one of Disney’s many production companies. The movie was a big bomb. While I can see how it might not connect with audiences, I think the cause was the historical debate about the event that was happening. There was some revision going on, some of it well-researched and credible. I remember people in right-wing media and in my social circles thinking the movie was going to be a left-wing retelling that would paint the Alamo defenders in a negative light or worse vilify them. Actually, while the movie gets rid of some of the admittedly ludicrous glorification (I’ll discuss a couple aspects of this) it still paints the Texan Revolution in a fairly positive light. In fact it removes a couple facts that would undercut the heroism. On the other hand, production issues led many people to decide it was a bad movie before it even came out, so that didn't help.

Movie Review: All Quiet on the Western Front (2022)

 

All Quiet on the Western Front is the third adaptation of Erich Maria Remarque's famous World War I novel, and surprisingly the first German one considering it is from the perspective of that nation's soldiers. Paul Baumer and his school chums enthusiastically sign up for the German Army and are sent to the Western Front in France. They soon lose their glorious and patriotic notions of war as they encounter filthy trench conditions and a string of murderous battles. Veteran soldiers try to help them adjust and survive, with Stanislaus Katczinsky taking personal responsibility for Paul. It's one of the most famous anti-war stories (though Remarque famously never explicitly stated it as such).

I've never read the novel and only watched the famous 1930 version, so I'll have to compare this latest offering to that one. I did read that Director Edward Berger cut out a few supporting characters and scenes and changed or added new ones to differentiate his interpretation. This leads to my main criticism. There's a subplot that follows real life figure Matthias Erzberger and his attempts to form an armistice and end the war. It and relevant scenes showing German generals do add more historical context, but personally the movie should have focused only on the frontline soldiers. Removing this scenes would have also trimmed it closer to a two hour film (then again, these scenes might be necessary considering many younger folks don't have the best grasp of history). As for other changes and additions, they manage to keep the spirit of themes from the novel and previous adaptations. Another criticism is the musical score. The composer went for more of a sound design style to create a sense of dread, but it can be obnoxious and ill-fitted to early scenes of new recruits smiling on their way to war.

Movie Review: Hearts in Bondage (1936)

 

Hearts in Bondage is an old black and white film about the birth of the Ironclad warships Merrimac and Monitor and their duel at the Battle of Hampton Roads in March 1862. I believe it's in the public domain, as one can easily find it on Youtube, and at 71 minutes long it should not be a large time investment. The title might cause some head scratching. I believe it refers to the torn allegiances of the main characters. Lieutenant Kenneth Reynolds (played by Oscar winner James Dunn) and fellow officer and friend Raymond Jordan are both Virginians (northern accents notwithstanding), but the Reynolds family stays with the Union while the Jordans choose their home state. Kenneth is engaged to Raymond's sister Constance and she ultimately stays with her fiancée despite loving her family. Thus one can say the title is about people are torn apart because their hearts are bonded to separate causes; Kenneth to the Union, Raymond to the Confederacy, and Constance to her love.

Movie Review: One Man's Hero (1999)

The Mexican-American War is one of the more overlooked conflicts in America's past. If one tries to find a list of movies on it, there will be about a dozen on the Alamo and one or two on the 1846-1848 war itself. The one I found was One Man's Hero, which tells the story of the San Patricio Battalion, a group of Catholic US Army deserters who fought for the Mexicans. This was meant to be a theatrical picture, but its producer Orion was bought out by MGM, which didn't have much interest in the project and turned it into a direct-to-video release. The movie certainly looks like it was made more for TV than the theater as Orion wasn't in the best financial situation at the time.

First I should provide some historical context. The Republic of Texas desired annexation by the United State. Many in the states themselves also had their eyes on Mexico's northern territories of New Mexico and California. Sensing that Mexico was weak (wracked by internal political turmoil), President James K. Polk sought to bring about a war so that these lands could be added to the United States. He was able to antagonize Mexico into firing on troops in the disputed borderlands, providing a casus belli. The war ended with an American victory. While this expanded the nation, it also drove the political atmosphere into sectionalism as the expansion of slavery became a central and divisive issue.