@reviewTheBlu - How does it make me an ignorant fool not to rate a film? You are OBVIOUSLY an opinionated pompous little moron. I have the right not to like it, i dont like it, I thought it was boring and dragged on. I like lots of historical films, and this, compared to them was shit.
You know what is sad that southerners will never admit or seems to be in denial that the civil war never exsisted. I never heard about the 54th and how they were apart of american history for basicly for the first act of black rights in america. About how blacks ppl faught for thier freedom like the "white man". About that the war was to ambolish slavery.Well after some of my own resarch. Then I later concluded that southerners will never teach about how these blacks kicks some REBELLS ASS!!!
@Rockmangoes you are wrong, the 54th mass. got their asses handed to them at the battle of battery wagner, but they do deserve a tremendous amount of respect for the gallant charge they made even though they knew it was doomed, the white troops fought for the union of the country, and thesebrave negroe troops fought for their brothers in bondage, the 54th sure put up a fight
@johncashrocks221 Yes, but we cannot forget all the other regiments of the first and second corps of gen. Strong and Putnam aswell as the Confederates that defended the fort, all diserve respect and I hate it when someone is one sided, only respecting one side or the other but forgeting the sacrifices by both sides and what they had gone through.
Since I was little I wanted to be a pilot, I'm 15 and want to join the Airforce in the future, the bravery these men had inspired me even more. It's impossible for me to watch this movie without getting tears, Robert Gould Shaw and the rest of the men will be remembered in my heart, Rest In Peace and God Bless America.
I once passed by a Freshman classroom and heard the credits of Glory playing. I peaked in and I would say 3/4 of the students in that classroom were crying or sobbing.
To this day, I still have never seen a single dry eye during a showing of Glory, and if that doesn't prove how powerful a movie is than I need to be placed in a Asylum.
@dennistodd ... Well, as you know, we CAN reason. But when the force of reason is overwhelmed by more highly charged emotional imperatives as in 'Those are MY oil fields' or 'GOD is behind me -- I have the right to prevail', then, sure as shit, reason folds. And we turn into packs of slavering dogs and the blood starts to run...
Imagine at that time, if these non sense issues, like race,color, and biblical understandings, we educated ourselves on how we should improve the life of human beings, not just for a division of titles or division of religion. It should not take killing human beings to prove your worth, such a wrong system. These blacks,asians,hispanics or just plain HUMAN beings prove their worth just by existing and trying to better the life for each other.
All this was pointless my fellow brothers, Blacks nor any race should result in violence at what cost? freedom? are we actually free, do the bill of rights guarantee our freedoms or they just temporary rights, nothing has really changed, sadly. We still indulge war, more advanced killing weapons, this should of been a lesson, that we are all ONE and we can contribute together, instead of fighting one another. WE are all ONE.
I love this movie. They fought for a country that hated them. How sad is that? We really owe it to the African Americans who fought and died for their freedom as well as ours. This music makes me cry, I love it!
This is one of the most powerful pieces I've heard. If your soul is not affected by this then you need help. I love this CD and others by Horner. One of the best.
I had the honor and privledge of meeting two of the extras from this film who participate in an African-American brigade reenactment of the Civil War. These gentlemen ppresented a lecture at the Ohio Historical Society village in Columbus, Ohio shortly after the film came out. Facinating and informative! I look forward to the 175th Civil War anniversery activities this year to see what else I can learn about this part of our history.
I'm not sorry to admit that this music always makes me cry. This score (and this piece in particular) is fantastic. A truly wonderful film on every level.
Really great movie. It is too often overlooked when considering military-themed films. Incredibly powerful and moving soundtrack. Horner really hit a homerun with this one. It's tough not to tear up with this one.
Some people say the white Union Soldiers didn't fight to end slavery. I think many of them did. If you could have interviewed them one by one, I think most of them would look you in the eye and say they hated slavery.
hey look its someone who gets all their facts from wikipedia - less than 10 thousand U.S. troops lost their lives in BATTLE during the revolutionary war - and thanks for insulting my patriotism - im actually a U.S. Army Infantry combat vet - thats a little more than you can claim: only KNOWING people who served... you think i dont like freedom or something? im only trying to educate you and broaden your ignorant mind - 'freed' slaves were no better off even a hundred years after the CW...
I'd like to punch every pretentious asswhipe who comes on here, and tries to undermine the accomplishments of these men during the civil war, by saying it wasn't about slavery. It was. State's Rights? TO DO WHAT? OWN SLAVES. The tensions that caused the civil war were caused by slavery, and if this war hadn't been fought, rest assured the institution of slavery would not have ended until much later.
This is the movie that introduced me to James Horner. When I watched it in class, I also cried. I ran right out and got the movie (the guy at walmart sold it to me even though I was only eleven after I gave him a history lesson on the 54th Mass) and the soundtrack. I don't know how many months i fell asleep listening to it.
When I listen to this score it makes me really sad .......... for it was released for the 1989 feature film "Glory" which in & of itself was a remarkable cinema masterpiece though the point being released in 1989 - the last of the 80's soundtrack gems to close out a resplendently shining decade never to be matched in musical & cinema stature. Like the 54th Massuchussets Volunteer Infantry was saluted - I salute the 80's and all that made it a GREAT DECADE!!!
it sounds a bit like OST from enemy at the gates(exacly when Wasili arrives as a private and jumps out from military train - just before the Stalingrad panorama)
For those of you who don't already know, those beautiful voices in the soundtrack belong to the Boys Choir Of Harlem. These are kids!! Learning that, years ago, made me appreciate the music even more. It's stunning.
the last time i checked this clip was about the music james horner composed for 'glory'. so why the f**k can't you just cut the stupid and ridiculously typical discussions about your opinions of what might have happened in history and enjoy the beautiful music instead?
Without guaranteeing the vote to all her citizens the south had no right to secede.
If I arbitrarily enfranchise only those with the last name SMITH in my state....and then call for a referendum on secession, would secession be seen as the will of anyone outside those few voters luckily named SMITH?
The south's obstinance in the face of a changing world lead to the war....the North's ineffectual martial leadership(at the beginning) lead to it being such a long, protracted, bloody affair.
This movie is one of the movies i could watch everyday of my life. It makes me think of how many men sacrificed their lives for their country like the revolution for freedom. The score is so breathtaking is made me cry in my class. The ending is what really got me. It strucked my heart. James Horner is a legend when it comes to composing music.
The Civil War was not a fight for freedom, unless you're looking at it from the perspective of the Confederacy. It had very, very little to do with slavery.
uh, no, slavery was by far the main cause of the civil war and other incidents of civil strife during that time period. That's the conclusion reached by most historians.
2. Lincoln was a fucking bastard regardless and his only goal was to create a centralized state, but abolishing slavery didn't became the major focus until well after the war had begun.
@levanyzzuf wow really? really? How can you make such an idiotic statement. Of course there were other causes to the civil war ( the question of states rights and the protective tariff to name a few) but slavery was still the main cause. It was the straw that broke the camels back. Question..why did 7 states declare secession before Lincoln was inaugurated? It's because a Republican was elected president and as you should know Republicans were firmly against slavery.
Slavery was the lifeblood of the Southern economy. The fact that they couldn't expand slavery into the new territories killed them, they knew they would have to expand. Why else would the Southern states feel they had to take such a drastic action as succession? It's because they knew the Republicans wanted to do away with slavery. It's possible that war could have broken out alot sooner if it weren't for the Missouri Compromise, The Compromise of 1850, and the Kansas-Nebraska Act.
Though imo the K-N act actually made things worse it still delayed the war. It's simple if slavery hadn't been an issue there wouldn't have been a war.
The issue inducing South Carolina to succede isn't as relevant as the fact that they HAD the right to do so.All Federal forts within their boundaries were the legal property of South Carolina and they justly attacked Fort Sumter in order to reclaim what was rightfully theirs and expel political bodies that no longer had any legitimate authority.Republican leaders like Seward amd Sumner are entirely responsible for the bloodshed that ensued.
If the Republicans had respect for the Constitution,there wouldn't have been a war. It wasn't a war over slavery until the Emancipation Proclamation.Lincoln defeated the Confederacy,and while they were down, he ended slavery.Very few Republicans were actually willing to attack slavery on a constitutional basis,it was entirely political and Union tactics were vengeful and abusive.the right of the states to secede derives from the natural right of slaves to be free they're 2 sides of the same coin
And aside from all this, I find your assertion that clash over slavery = immediate war to be rather simplistic. They're were other ways to end slavery that would not have induced the Confederate response or widespread successionist sympathy. I suggest you read Lysander Spooner's Compensated Emancipation, which proposes virtually the same peaceful methods that almost all other countries followed in order to eradicate slavery. Needless to say, Unionists weren't interested in any of these ideas.
Yes states rights was also a huge issue, as I said earlier. I never said slavery was the sole cause of the war, but the straw that broke the camels back. Certainly, not all northerners wanted to abolish slavery and not all southerners were slave owners. But those in power in the north and the south for the vast majority held the previously stated beliefs. States rights is a very slippery slope. I don't believe South Carolina had the right to leave the Union.
While it is important that states do retain rights, the federal government must also have rights in order to keep the country together. There was a reason why the founding fathers got together and created the constitution that we have today. It's because our first constitution ,the Articles of Confederation, didn't work. As you recall, under the Articles of Confederation the states held most of the power and the federal government held virtually none. What happened was complete chaos.
Instead of one united country, we basically had 13 different countries. Each state with its own currency, trade agreements, etc... Countries around the world had no respect for us, it wasn't until the Constitution was ratified that things finally turned around. A state has no right to secede from the Union, now I could see the possibility of succession if there was a major abuse against the state by the government. By the tariff was not a major abuse.
*but the tariff........We could argue for all eternity on whether or not the states have a right to secede but regardless, it's the governments job to hold the nation together and that's exactly what it did. Your assertion that all the forts in South Carolina belonged to the state is void. The forts never belonged to South Carolina, they were federal forts. That means they belong to the government, in this case the government of the United States of America.
Therefore, by attacking Sumter the CSA was openly attacking the USA. We had every right to defend what was legally ours. May I remind you that many of the states threatened to secede if a Republican was elected? True Lincoln promised not to end slavery in states where it already existed. But you must remember that the president doesn't hold all the power. What the south feared the most was a Republican majority in the house, with that the Radicals could do whatever they pleased.
I still believe the slavery issue was the main reason for the beginning clash. With the fear of a Republican majority in the house the South decided to strike first to defend their very way of life. I'm sure there were plenty of other ways to end slavery that would have been peaceful, but there were also many other ways to solve the souths problems without succession but the Southerners clearly weren't interested in those ideas.
South Carolina had a legal right to secede at least according to the original tenets of the republic. Nowhere in the Constitution is there any mention of the union of the states being permanent. This was not an oversight by any means. A state's claim to the right of secession was understood and agreed to by the all ratifiers, including George Washington. Well into the 19th century, the United States was still viewed by many as an experimental confederation from which states could secede.
@flattop32355 the compensation was rather trite as I've read and not thought through very well, as it seemed rather inconsiderate of how the Southern economy operated and how it should be reconstructed and I don't much blame it for not being accepted. Spooner's plan for the abolition of the slavery is the most complete and fair proposal that I've seen on the matter.
1) For political reasons only. Lincoln himself was not anti-slavery. "If I could free all the slaves and preserve the Union I would do that. If I could free none of the slaves and preserve the Union I would do that. If I could free some slaves and leave others is place and save the Union, I would do that also." You're ignoring the fact that he didn't give a toss about state rights. The only reason Lincoln ended slavery was because he had the chance.
I really couldn't care less how much you believe African-Americans know about their own history, but if any individual is unwilling to have a reasoned discussion on the causes of the Civil War and the Republican's motives for attempting to crush the Confederacy and just cling to your national myths about Lincoln as a crusader of liberty (as so many do) then they're probably not worth the time of day to begin with.
@levanyzzuf True, except the movie focuses a lot on the black soldiers, who were indeed fighting to earn their freedom.
They certainly already deserved to be free, given that they're human. I'm only referring to the way the US operated in those days. So don't anybody reply to me with your negativity.
@levanyzzuf On the actual list of grievances that the Confederacy sent to congress the slavery issue was the second grievance. It was a very large part of the war, it was the 2nd largest contributing factor to of the war. The union was going to abolish slavery altogeather! Goodbye workforce for all and everything agricultural in the South!
@levanyzzuf On the actual list of grievances that the Confederacy sent to congress the slavery issue was the second grievance. It was a very large part of the war, it was the 2nd largest contributing factor to of the war. The union was going to abolish slavery altogeather! Goodbye workforce for all and everything agricultural in the South!
@levanyzzuf I would refer you to the "Corner Stone Speech" of the confederacy. It was made by the Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens in Savannah Georgia. It details the confederate's reasons for succession which were primariy their right to slavery. The reason they wanted 'states rights' was to protect their right to slavery. The reason they wanted to end tariffs was to lay predicate for annulment of federal anti-slave laws. Do your research fellow... :)
@JackWohar I've read it many a time in history courses. The desire to end slavery in certain states (even if slavery itself is unconstitutional - as it is) does not supercede the right of a state to secede as the manifestation of government by consent. The Northern states, in contrast, were trying to deny the Southerners that right through military force which undermines the position of the aggressor. The right of the states to secede derives from the natural right of slaves to be free.
@levanyzzuf First, to your statement, that the civil war had little to do with slavery, it had EVERY thing to do with slavery. The Union didn't stand for the freedom of slaves, all they stood for was unification. However, the confederacy stood for one thing, and one thing only. The right to profit off of a racist slave system. Regardless of why Lincoln was fighting, the duty of Americans to stop abusive slavery was enough justification for an 'invasion' (if you can call it that) of the south.
@JackWohar Yes you are right - and more people need to take college level U.S. history classes - slavery was the defining issue which caused the split. However, one might argue that slaves were treated better in the south; were they were fed, had shelter, raised their families, and were taken care of as they were looked on as 'property to be taken care of' by the south - how manny racist northerners were hiring slaves back then? and how long before blacks could actually vote.....
@bigbizable First, NO THEY WERE NOT! Again, do your research my friend! This book "the narrative of the life of frederick douglass" by the former slave himself, will change your mind on this issue. It is call Even if you refuse to accept this truth, we are talking about a precious right, the right to freedom. No matter how comfortable, slavery is slavery. Again, you keep trying to bash the north, I don't give a fig about them, I would have fought AGAINST the south!
@JackWohar sheesh calm down yes in many cases they were - F.D. was one of about...... 2 black elitists who actually had any political sway at the time - sure argue your liberal 'precious right to freedom' but that means nothing when you leave your chains in the south only to find more racism and segregation and no right to vote for another hundred years... and i was only trying to point out that many people can argue that blacks had a better life in the south at the time even without 'freedom'
@bigbizable First off, I'm a conservative/constitutionalists, I vote republican, second of all, shame on you for saying that! You blind yourself so much that you can't even look back on history with reason. Slaves were murdered and abused for decades and you have the arrogance to claim that is a 'better life'. Elitists? Shame on you again! He escaped from slavery and went to work on freeing slaves, and you have the audacity to call him elitist? Unique indeed but what he lobbied for was equality.
@JackWohar and if you want proof of my combat service send me a private message - it is public information by the way - i still cant believe you insulted my record - have you ever seen your best friends get fucked up in the humvee right in front of you? oh yeah because you never served i highly doubt that... quit hiding behind your brother who is probably a POG in the air force or something anyways.... pussy oh yeah better go look up on wikipedia what 'POG' means....
@bigbizable Last of all, your attitude towards American's freedom is a strike against the 50,000 revolutionary soldiers who died, the 120,000 dead in WW1, the 400,000 who died in WW2, currently my brother's service in defense of this country, and countless other men who have lived and died to protect your right to live, laugh and love. To think that freedom is less than comfort is an insult to all of their blood spilt. You sir shame your country, and yourself.
@JackWohar and 'last of all' you claim to be a 'constitutionalist' but you failed to educate yourself on the fact that northern AGRESSION was interfering with the states CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS TO GOVERN THEMSELVES - you better actually read and study the actual constitution before you claim to be a constitutionalist
@bigbizable Your combat experience only speaks against your disregard for freedom. If your a vet you should a)- be ashamed that you said anyone is better off without freedom, and b)- be ashamed at trying to trivialize anyone's position in the military. My brother is an intelligence officer with the USMC as is being deployed to Afghanistan in January just for the record... and my knowing vets verses being a vet doesn't impeded my ability to perceive reality.
@bigbizable My facts on the revolutionary war was from History 1301 taught by Professor Clayton Lust at a local college, I can't vouch for it cause I don't waste time on wiki-public forum, but apparently you know wiki enough to be able to cite it...
@bigbizable When any man deprives another man of his human rights, that man has abnegated his rights. When southern governments willingly deprived humans (in an official capacity) of their right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness, they abnegated their sovereignty and their right to life. When a man commits a crime he is deprived of his freedom, when a man commits murder he is deprived of his life, it was the same principle that holds sway here.
@bigbizable And for the last time, I DO NOT SUPPORT THE UNION! They were people who wanted to keep this country in one piece. I don't care about the Union, I don't care about their agenda, I am saying the south was wrong. Irregardless of the after affects of racism, slavery is not an alternative!
@bigbizable Your logic is so pour it doesn't even have a semblance of reason. Your saying that because African Americans were treated pourly after the civil war, obviously it would have been better to leave them in the hands of slave holders.
@bigbizable Open your eyes and look at the facts. It was legal in every slave state to kill your slave in discipline. You were not required to feed them. They could (and most times were) shot for trying to escape. And above all they were NOT CONSIDERED HUMAN! They were treated as property! Like cows or horses! Worse, they didn't even get the care cows and horses were afforded! The states weren't as hung up on their 'sovereignty' as you are, all they wanted sovereignty was to protect slavery
@JackWohar jesus you still dont get my point - im just trying to open up your narrow-minded field of view - and your arguments are full of contradictions like you said you would have FOUGHT for the Union and now you say you dont support them... wow... never talk to me again weirdo and intelligence MOS = POG
@levanyzzuf actually it had ALOT to do with slavery. The Missouri Compromise didn't work very well did it? The Union was in a state of emergency mostly because the newly acquired territories that were gained after the Mexican American War couldn't decide decide if they were going to be slave or free states. The South's influence only lasted if the amount of slave states expanded. There is no doubt about that. The devision between North and South was because of slavery.The South needed slavery.
@levanyzzuf How can the civil war have "very little to do with slavery" when the primary result of the war was the end to slavery? I know what you mean, the civil war wasn't started because of the slavery issue. However, the north was losing badly until slavery became the primary issue of the war.(which is the point of this film). While the civil war started out having very little to do with slavery, it ended up being all about slavery.
@kjcaldar That single comment of mine has received replies ad nauseum, and I've elaborated in detail in later comments if you're interested in reading through them further on this page.
@levanyzzuf I read a few things you wrote, and very little of it was worth reading. While the civil war didn't start because of slavery, it is ignorant to say that "it had very, very little to do with slavery." Whatever you think, by mid1863 the war was being fought to free the slaves and preserve the union. It had become the most significant issue of the war.
@kjcaldar The Union doctored up a number of causes to keep the "nation" intact, but Lincoln and his party cared little for the freedom of slaves beyond granting them liberty for the sake of political expediency - the Republicans were by no means uncompromising abolitionists and most documents around 1861 and prior to it indicate they didn't give a twaddle about blacks. Centralizing authority was their goal. My initial post was about the causes of the war itself, not the later developments.
@levanyzzuf Again that is false. Many Republicans were passionate abolitionists before the war started. (Thaddeus Stevens, Charles Sumner, John Quincy Adams).They argued against the morality of slavery, and also against the economic advantage the south had using slave labor against free labor. There were some Republican leaders who "didn't give a twaddle" about blacks. There were also some Confederate leaders who didn't believe slavery was morally right.
@kjcaldar My point is that neither side had great reasons for going to war. At the beginning of the war (while the south was winning) it seemed like they were fighting for their "second independence." After the Emancipation Proclamation, the cause of the North shifted from merely preserving the union to freeing the slaves. Which brings us back to your first statement. The Civil War had very, very much to do with slavery. And for black regiments, it was most definitely a fight for freedom.
@kjcaldar Also, it would be foolish to blame the massive bloodshed on anyone but the Republican political leaders, such as William H. Seward and Charles Sumner, who often spoke out against slavery but would not attack it on a constitutional basis, and who pursued military policies that were vengeful and abusive. Sumner's position as a forthright abolitionist is stil very much in dispute - he's seen by many historians asa bitter agitator and a shameless war profiteer.
@levanyzzuf I don't understand your point, if you even have one? Are you a member of the "Lost Cause?" I guess you're saying that the Union was to blame for the war? I am not going to argue that, but you could come up with an argument for either side. After all, it was the confederates who fired the first shots of the war! A historian has to learn to be as objective as possible (even though to be totally objective is impossible).
@levanyzzuf I would blame massive bloodshed on both sides. For example, during the last months of the war the outcome wasn't in doubt by any means. The south didn't even have a major port at that point. The confederate army continued to fight through the most bloody campaign of the war, The Overland Campaign.
@kjcaldar Indeed there were a number who were vocal opponents of slavery from the outset (Adams was dead well before the war began). The use of violence to abolish slavery was probably inevitable buy the Republicans were hypocrites for purporting to oppose slavery's expansion but refusing to take a strong, consistent moral stance against it. The main reason they employed violent tactics was not to forcibly end slavery but rather to preserve the Union by force. Lincoln made this pretty clear.
@levanyzzuf I understand Adams was dead before the civil war. That isn't the point, you claimed that Republicans didn't care about blacks before the war. Adams clearly did care about blacks. Lincoln believed that no state had the right to nullify federal law. A view shared by Washington, Jefferson, Jackson, andjust about all founding fathers. There wasn't any right for a state to secede from the federal union in the constitution. Therefore, the south was committing treason.
@levanyzzuf , what you said is true. But the average Union soldier knew little about politics, many just wanted to end slavery. I invite you to the Michigan Capital lawn where the statue of Austin Blair stands (Michigans Civil War Governor). On his statue he's quoted about his absolute hatred of slavery. Many Union soldiers died for one reason, to end slavery. Especially the ones in this movie.
Historically inaccurate in that this regiment was recruited entirely from free men of color, not escaped slaves. It would be good to see a movie made to tell the story of the two Negro divisions formed to fight in World War I, the 92nd and the 93rd, the latter going into battle as four separate regiments attached to French divisions and performing superbly under the worst possible conditions. Good troops, and real heroes.
@fokshill - I just thought it went on too long and was very slow to tell the story!! I didnt like it.
mattieb43 2 months ago
@reviewTheBlu - How does it make me an ignorant fool not to rate a film? You are OBVIOUSLY an opinionated pompous little moron. I have the right not to like it, i dont like it, I thought it was boring and dragged on. I like lots of historical films, and this, compared to them was shit.
mattieb43 2 months ago
@mattieb43 You're definitely entitled to your opinion. I disagree with you, though.
MagicEmperor 5 days ago
@bigkest666 - but you obviously know a lot about dick... fuckface.
mattieb43 2 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i just watched it, thought it was a bit crap as a film
mattieb43 5 months ago
@mattieb43 How could you say that? It was actually pretty good.
fokshill 4 months ago
@mattieb43 you don't know dick about film then, fuckface!
bigkest666 4 months ago
@mattieb43 Then you are clearly an ignorant fool!
ReviewTheBlu 2 months ago
Glory makes me want to read more on black troops during the Civil War. I already know the Buffalo soldiers kicked ass on the frontier.
Paizankidd 6 months ago
superbe bo !
Dartorji 7 months ago
Nice, but this is not the version from the original score, which I prefer.
TsugaruClan 7 months ago
You know what is sad that southerners will never admit or seems to be in denial that the civil war never exsisted. I never heard about the 54th and how they were apart of american history for basicly for the first act of black rights in america. About how blacks ppl faught for thier freedom like the "white man". About that the war was to ambolish slavery.Well after some of my own resarch. Then I later concluded that southerners will never teach about how these blacks kicks some REBELLS ASS!!!
Rockmangoes 7 months ago
@Rockmangoes you are wrong, the 54th mass. got their asses handed to them at the battle of battery wagner, but they do deserve a tremendous amount of respect for the gallant charge they made even though they knew it was doomed, the white troops fought for the union of the country, and thesebrave negroe troops fought for their brothers in bondage, the 54th sure put up a fight
johncashrocks221 7 months ago 7
@johncashrocks221 Yes, but we cannot forget all the other regiments of the first and second corps of gen. Strong and Putnam aswell as the Confederates that defended the fort, all diserve respect and I hate it when someone is one sided, only respecting one side or the other but forgeting the sacrifices by both sides and what they had gone through.
AUG351 2 weeks ago
Since I was little I wanted to be a pilot, I'm 15 and want to join the Airforce in the future, the bravery these men had inspired me even more. It's impossible for me to watch this movie without getting tears, Robert Gould Shaw and the rest of the men will be remembered in my heart, Rest In Peace and God Bless America.
s0ccer96 7 months ago 4
I once passed by a Freshman classroom and heard the credits of Glory playing. I peaked in and I would say 3/4 of the students in that classroom were crying or sobbing.
To this day, I still have never seen a single dry eye during a showing of Glory, and if that doesn't prove how powerful a movie is than I need to be placed in a Asylum.
TheMajorBertolli 7 months ago 19
@TheMajorBertolli That and Saving Private Ryan
MrCooperdog222 6 months ago
...did you ever know a time in history when you could REASON with all greedy selfish human beings.....a utopian vision?
blencathra11 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
this movie makes me cry)':
MrsReginaBieber 8 months ago
Masterpiece
blencathra11 8 months ago
we fight because we cannot reason
dennistodd 8 months ago
@dennistodd ... Well, as you know, we CAN reason. But when the force of reason is overwhelmed by more highly charged emotional imperatives as in 'Those are MY oil fields' or 'GOD is behind me -- I have the right to prevail', then, sure as shit, reason folds. And we turn into packs of slavering dogs and the blood starts to run...
verstengenericks 2 weeks ago
@dennistodd ... I agree in spirit with what you say though ;-)
verstengenericks 2 weeks ago
Imagine at that time, if these non sense issues, like race,color, and biblical understandings, we educated ourselves on how we should improve the life of human beings, not just for a division of titles or division of religion. It should not take killing human beings to prove your worth, such a wrong system. These blacks,asians,hispanics or just plain HUMAN beings prove their worth just by existing and trying to better the life for each other.
bodybuilder718 8 months ago
All this was pointless my fellow brothers, Blacks nor any race should result in violence at what cost? freedom? are we actually free, do the bill of rights guarantee our freedoms or they just temporary rights, nothing has really changed, sadly. We still indulge war, more advanced killing weapons, this should of been a lesson, that we are all ONE and we can contribute together, instead of fighting one another. WE are all ONE.
bodybuilder718 8 months ago
I love this movie. They fought for a country that hated them. How sad is that? We really owe it to the African Americans who fought and died for their freedom as well as ours. This music makes me cry, I love it!
FanaticmusicMatt 8 months ago in playlist Soundtracks 2
This is one of the most powerful pieces I've heard. If your soul is not affected by this then you need help. I love this CD and others by Horner. One of the best.
csunryder 9 months ago 2
@csunryder
I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU 100% !!!! IT HAS TITANIC BEAT IN MY BOOK ANY DAY !!!!
musicsoothesusall 8 months ago
One of the greatest music scores of all time, to one of the greatest films of all time. A masterpiece.
jojo34209 9 months ago
Freeman really is god.
RebelAdmiral 9 months ago
There are two movies that impacted my life..."The Passion of the Christ", and "Glory"...both epic, both amazing...
ladystorm61 9 months ago 2
@ladystorm61 get a life.
RebelAdmiral 9 months ago
@ladystorm61 I agree with you Lady...
rickcopy 9 months ago
I had the honor and privledge of meeting two of the extras from this film who participate in an African-American brigade reenactment of the Civil War. These gentlemen ppresented a lecture at the Ohio Historical Society village in Columbus, Ohio shortly after the film came out. Facinating and informative! I look forward to the 175th Civil War anniversery activities this year to see what else I can learn about this part of our history.
irishtaz44017 9 months ago 2
54th = Amazing
sourj234 9 months ago
I FKIN LUV DIZ MOVIE
awesomedaniel100 9 months ago
I just watched it again on TCM. Still a good & powerful film with powerful music!
holzapfelstein 10 months ago
I'm not sorry to admit that this music always makes me cry. This score (and this piece in particular) is fantastic. A truly wonderful film on every level.
ThinWhiteDude 10 months ago 2
None of us alive today can understand the emotions of those days, for us to comment on any of those past events is at best a false athority!
mrhogsbreath13 11 months ago
We all have to die but what a glory to die with brothers with faith and honour !
Respect for all freedomfighters !
rootsjack 11 months ago 3
@rootsjack Well put friend.
aponorth 10 months ago
Really great movie. It is too often overlooked when considering military-themed films. Incredibly powerful and moving soundtrack. Horner really hit a homerun with this one. It's tough not to tear up with this one.
highguy9900 11 months ago
glorious
smoshll 1 year ago
The Civil War, a truly underrated war in American history in comparison to other wars. (like WWI and WWII)
generalcircle 1 year ago
Slavery is the most evil thing created by man in world history.
illustrate100 1 year ago
Some people say the white Union Soldiers didn't fight to end slavery. I think many of them did. If you could have interviewed them one by one, I think most of them would look you in the eye and say they hated slavery.
illustrate100 1 year ago
hey look its someone who gets all their facts from wikipedia - less than 10 thousand U.S. troops lost their lives in BATTLE during the revolutionary war - and thanks for insulting my patriotism - im actually a U.S. Army Infantry combat vet - thats a little more than you can claim: only KNOWING people who served... you think i dont like freedom or something? im only trying to educate you and broaden your ignorant mind - 'freed' slaves were no better off even a hundred years after the CW...
bigbizable 1 year ago
ROBERT!! ROBEEERRRTT!!! "nigga is you an old man or an old woman, i forget?" god i love this movie.
chronicgeebs 1 year ago
Is this the same music for Backdraft?
brotherjon100 1 year ago
@brotherjon100 No, but composer James Horner returns to the well and self-plagiarizes quite often.
levanyzzuf 1 year ago
God Bless the 54th!
jfoley715 1 year ago 3
I'd like to punch every pretentious asswhipe who comes on here, and tries to undermine the accomplishments of these men during the civil war, by saying it wasn't about slavery. It was. State's Rights? TO DO WHAT? OWN SLAVES. The tensions that caused the civil war were caused by slavery, and if this war hadn't been fought, rest assured the institution of slavery would not have ended until much later.
DanteWilliamStevens 1 year ago
Mathew Broderick is usually a weak actor, but this is definitely a complete reversal of that fact. In Glory he is really, really good.
And of course, Washington and Freeman.
How can you go wrong with that?
You can't.
TheGarfuncle 1 year ago 35
@TheGarfuncle gordon freeman?
piepotatosandturtle2 9 months ago
@TheGarfuncle
THEY WERE ALL PHENOMENAL AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED !!!!!
musicsoothesusall 8 months ago
@TheGarfuncle - yep i agree. amazing film and score
Bateman666666 7 months ago
@TheGarfuncle don't forget cary elwes
Gabby5471 3 months ago
FIGHT!!! THIS IS FOR YOUR FREEDOM, MEN!!! NEVER GIVE UP, NEVER SURRENDER!!!
SuperboyConnerKent 1 year ago 26
@SuperboyConnerKent Is that a quote taken from this film or Galaxy Quest? I can't even tell.
levanyzzuf 6 months ago in playlist Great Film Music (1974 - Present)
Glory, the coolest movie I was ever forced to watch in high school.
theonlyred4 1 year ago 4
@nparlee Hello,
There is a great new book out titled: GETTYSBURG… OTHER TIMES
It is a great page-turning read and full of intrigue and revelation.
You can get your copy from my YouTube site (GETTYSBURGbook) or search Amazon or eBay.
GETTYSBURGbook 1 year ago
Give'em Hell 54!
cacrowl 1 year ago 4
This is the movie that introduced me to James Horner. When I watched it in class, I also cried. I ran right out and got the movie (the guy at walmart sold it to me even though I was only eleven after I gave him a history lesson on the 54th Mass) and the soundtrack. I don't know how many months i fell asleep listening to it.
judasishmael 1 year ago
from 4:47 to 5: 40 sounds very Star Trekish.
olentangy74 1 year ago 2
When I listen to this score it makes me really sad .......... for it was released for the 1989 feature film "Glory" which in & of itself was a remarkable cinema masterpiece though the point being released in 1989 - the last of the 80's soundtrack gems to close out a resplendently shining decade never to be matched in musical & cinema stature. Like the 54th Massuchussets Volunteer Infantry was saluted - I salute the 80's and all that made it a GREAT DECADE!!!
DetroitLove4U 1 year ago 3
it sounds a bit like OST from enemy at the gates(exacly when Wasili arrives as a private and jumps out from military train - just before the Stalingrad panorama)
mrM4rcu5 1 year ago
To one of the most courageous men in history. Col. Robert Gould Shaw. And to James Horner, one of the greatest composers of our time. Fantastic!
kjsmjs 1 year ago 2
Give`em Hell 54TH`s!!!
ThePunisher1978 1 year ago 4
Thank you for this memory.
professorcurtis 1 year ago
For those of you who don't already know, those beautiful voices in the soundtrack belong to the Boys Choir Of Harlem. These are kids!! Learning that, years ago, made me appreciate the music even more. It's stunning.
katydid26 1 year ago 2
GLORY ... Forever classic!!! :)))
PapagenoJuan 2 years ago
This Movie sends us a mesage a mesage about people fought for there Liberty and for Fredom.
BIGMASTERBIG1 2 years ago 2
back then i would have been consecrated a rebel state see i live in Texas but i care for though who lost there lives.
Darthnewton456 2 years ago 2
@Darthnewton456 Wow,thats the worst english I ever saw....do they have edumacation in Texas?
Dalbert342 1 year ago
good thing we had W.T. Sherman to kick some rebel ass! southerners are still crying about it tell this day! so put that on your cross and burn it bb!
Nonniemayrox 2 years ago
the last time i checked this clip was about the music james horner composed for 'glory'. so why the f**k can't you just cut the stupid and ridiculously typical discussions about your opinions of what might have happened in history and enjoy the beautiful music instead?
curtisstom 2 years ago 3
Comment removed
oldwhitehouse 2 years ago
Hello, do you know where I can find a mid of this ost?
Thanks
Pardon my English but I'm from Spain and not dominate
arrashid1 2 years ago
Comment removed
arrashid1 2 years ago
Without guaranteeing the vote to all her citizens the south had no right to secede.
If I arbitrarily enfranchise only those with the last name SMITH in my state....and then call for a referendum on secession, would secession be seen as the will of anyone outside those few voters luckily named SMITH?
The south's obstinance in the face of a changing world lead to the war....the North's ineffectual martial leadership(at the beginning) lead to it being such a long, protracted, bloody affair.
zaxx19 2 years ago
this audio track has slowed down accidently. right?
juleswinns 2 years ago
i like it
baxzius 2 years ago
this is not as good as ending credit music on the Glory CD.. something is different. anyone?
irish89055 2 years ago
Parts of this theme were used for Avatar by James Cameron... check it out !
Fr4nkWh1te 2 years ago
One gallant rush.
ouch161616 2 years ago
i wank to this
Bateman666666 2 years ago
This movie is one of the movies i could watch everyday of my life. It makes me think of how many men sacrificed their lives for their country like the revolution for freedom. The score is so breathtaking is made me cry in my class. The ending is what really got me. It strucked my heart. James Horner is a legend when it comes to composing music.
Gothichick3 2 years ago 28
The Civil War was not a fight for freedom, unless you're looking at it from the perspective of the Confederacy. It had very, very little to do with slavery.
levanyzzuf 2 years ago 13
@levanyzzuf THANK GOD someone else actually gets it!
Austionous 2 years ago
uh, no, slavery was by far the main cause of the civil war and other incidents of civil strife during that time period. That's the conclusion reached by most historians.
fshjshshhs 2 years ago
2. Lincoln was a fucking bastard regardless and his only goal was to create a centralized state, but abolishing slavery didn't became the major focus until well after the war had begun.
levanyzzuf 2 years ago
@levanyzzuf wow really? really? How can you make such an idiotic statement. Of course there were other causes to the civil war ( the question of states rights and the protective tariff to name a few) but slavery was still the main cause. It was the straw that broke the camels back. Question..why did 7 states declare secession before Lincoln was inaugurated? It's because a Republican was elected president and as you should know Republicans were firmly against slavery.
TheGreenlanterncorps 2 years ago
Slavery was the lifeblood of the Southern economy. The fact that they couldn't expand slavery into the new territories killed them, they knew they would have to expand. Why else would the Southern states feel they had to take such a drastic action as succession? It's because they knew the Republicans wanted to do away with slavery. It's possible that war could have broken out alot sooner if it weren't for the Missouri Compromise, The Compromise of 1850, and the Kansas-Nebraska Act.
TheGreenlanterncorps 2 years ago
Though imo the K-N act actually made things worse it still delayed the war. It's simple if slavery hadn't been an issue there wouldn't have been a war.
TheGreenlanterncorps 2 years ago
The issue inducing South Carolina to succede isn't as relevant as the fact that they HAD the right to do so.All Federal forts within their boundaries were the legal property of South Carolina and they justly attacked Fort Sumter in order to reclaim what was rightfully theirs and expel political bodies that no longer had any legitimate authority.Republican leaders like Seward amd Sumner are entirely responsible for the bloodshed that ensued.
levanyzzuf 2 years ago 2
If the Republicans had respect for the Constitution,there wouldn't have been a war. It wasn't a war over slavery until the Emancipation Proclamation.Lincoln defeated the Confederacy,and while they were down, he ended slavery.Very few Republicans were actually willing to attack slavery on a constitutional basis,it was entirely political and Union tactics were vengeful and abusive.the right of the states to secede derives from the natural right of slaves to be free they're 2 sides of the same coin
levanyzzuf 2 years ago
And aside from all this, I find your assertion that clash over slavery = immediate war to be rather simplistic. They're were other ways to end slavery that would not have induced the Confederate response or widespread successionist sympathy. I suggest you read Lysander Spooner's Compensated Emancipation, which proposes virtually the same peaceful methods that almost all other countries followed in order to eradicate slavery. Needless to say, Unionists weren't interested in any of these ideas.
levanyzzuf 2 years ago
Yes states rights was also a huge issue, as I said earlier. I never said slavery was the sole cause of the war, but the straw that broke the camels back. Certainly, not all northerners wanted to abolish slavery and not all southerners were slave owners. But those in power in the north and the south for the vast majority held the previously stated beliefs. States rights is a very slippery slope. I don't believe South Carolina had the right to leave the Union.
TheGreenlanterncorps 2 years ago
While it is important that states do retain rights, the federal government must also have rights in order to keep the country together. There was a reason why the founding fathers got together and created the constitution that we have today. It's because our first constitution ,the Articles of Confederation, didn't work. As you recall, under the Articles of Confederation the states held most of the power and the federal government held virtually none. What happened was complete chaos.
TheGreenlanterncorps 2 years ago
Instead of one united country, we basically had 13 different countries. Each state with its own currency, trade agreements, etc... Countries around the world had no respect for us, it wasn't until the Constitution was ratified that things finally turned around. A state has no right to secede from the Union, now I could see the possibility of succession if there was a major abuse against the state by the government. By the tariff was not a major abuse.
TheGreenlanterncorps 2 years ago
*but the tariff........We could argue for all eternity on whether or not the states have a right to secede but regardless, it's the governments job to hold the nation together and that's exactly what it did. Your assertion that all the forts in South Carolina belonged to the state is void. The forts never belonged to South Carolina, they were federal forts. That means they belong to the government, in this case the government of the United States of America.
TheGreenlanterncorps 2 years ago
Therefore, by attacking Sumter the CSA was openly attacking the USA. We had every right to defend what was legally ours. May I remind you that many of the states threatened to secede if a Republican was elected? True Lincoln promised not to end slavery in states where it already existed. But you must remember that the president doesn't hold all the power. What the south feared the most was a Republican majority in the house, with that the Radicals could do whatever they pleased.
TheGreenlanterncorps 2 years ago
I still believe the slavery issue was the main reason for the beginning clash. With the fear of a Republican majority in the house the South decided to strike first to defend their very way of life. I'm sure there were plenty of other ways to end slavery that would have been peaceful, but there were also many other ways to solve the souths problems without succession but the Southerners clearly weren't interested in those ideas.
TheGreenlanterncorps 2 years ago
South Carolina had a legal right to secede at least according to the original tenets of the republic. Nowhere in the Constitution is there any mention of the union of the states being permanent. This was not an oversight by any means. A state's claim to the right of secession was understood and agreed to by the all ratifiers, including George Washington. Well into the 19th century, the United States was still viewed by many as an experimental confederation from which states could secede.
levanyzzuf 2 years ago 2
On the contrary, compensation was indeed proposed, but not accepted. The planter class had its own agenda, as much as any other group.
flattop32355 2 years ago
@flattop32355 the compensation was rather trite as I've read and not thought through very well, as it seemed rather inconsiderate of how the Southern economy operated and how it should be reconstructed and I don't much blame it for not being accepted. Spooner's plan for the abolition of the slavery is the most complete and fair proposal that I've seen on the matter.
levanyzzuf 2 years ago
1) For political reasons only. Lincoln himself was not anti-slavery. "If I could free all the slaves and preserve the Union I would do that. If I could free none of the slaves and preserve the Union I would do that. If I could free some slaves and leave others is place and save the Union, I would do that also." You're ignoring the fact that he didn't give a toss about state rights. The only reason Lincoln ended slavery was because he had the chance.
levanyzzuf 2 years ago
@levanyzzuf
Ignorance is bliss for most of the south these days.
FreedomisFascism 1 year ago
@FreedomisFascism Ignorance is always a bliss lol but Southerners are known for their progressive ideas[sarcasm]
Dalbert342 1 year ago
@levanyzzuf Take your ignorant ass to school. "very, very little to do with slavery"... Jesus.
falcontom1 1 year ago
@falcontom1 I've written several research essays on the subject for American culture classes and a great many historians would agree with me.
levanyzzuf 1 year ago
@levanyzzuf that's the great thing about historians you can always find some that agree with you or perhaps one should say that you agree with
JerryKitich 1 year ago
@levanyzzuf Tell that to ANY African American and see how far that gets you!
collchris2003 1 year ago
I really couldn't care less how much you believe African-Americans know about their own history, but if any individual is unwilling to have a reasoned discussion on the causes of the Civil War and the Republican's motives for attempting to crush the Confederacy and just cling to your national myths about Lincoln as a crusader of liberty (as so many do) then they're probably not worth the time of day to begin with.
levanyzzuf 1 year ago
@levanyzzuf True, except the movie focuses a lot on the black soldiers, who were indeed fighting to earn their freedom.
They certainly already deserved to be free, given that they're human. I'm only referring to the way the US operated in those days. So don't anybody reply to me with your negativity.
theonlyred4 1 year ago
Comment removed
McihaelMcKee 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@levanyzzuf On the actual list of grievances that the Confederacy sent to congress the slavery issue was the second grievance. It was a very large part of the war, it was the 2nd largest contributing factor to of the war. The union was going to abolish slavery altogeather! Goodbye workforce for all and everything agricultural in the South!
McihaelMcKee 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@levanyzzuf On the actual list of grievances that the Confederacy sent to congress the slavery issue was the second grievance. It was a very large part of the war, it was the 2nd largest contributing factor to of the war. The union was going to abolish slavery altogeather! Goodbye workforce for all and everything agricultural in the South!
McihaelMcKee 1 year ago
@levanyzzuf I would refer you to the "Corner Stone Speech" of the confederacy. It was made by the Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens in Savannah Georgia. It details the confederate's reasons for succession which were primariy their right to slavery. The reason they wanted 'states rights' was to protect their right to slavery. The reason they wanted to end tariffs was to lay predicate for annulment of federal anti-slave laws. Do your research fellow... :)
JackWohar 1 year ago
@JackWohar I've read it many a time in history courses. The desire to end slavery in certain states (even if slavery itself is unconstitutional - as it is) does not supercede the right of a state to secede as the manifestation of government by consent. The Northern states, in contrast, were trying to deny the Southerners that right through military force which undermines the position of the aggressor. The right of the states to secede derives from the natural right of slaves to be free.
levanyzzuf 1 year ago
@levanyzzuf First, to your statement, that the civil war had little to do with slavery, it had EVERY thing to do with slavery. The Union didn't stand for the freedom of slaves, all they stood for was unification. However, the confederacy stood for one thing, and one thing only. The right to profit off of a racist slave system. Regardless of why Lincoln was fighting, the duty of Americans to stop abusive slavery was enough justification for an 'invasion' (if you can call it that) of the south.
JackWohar 1 year ago
@JackWohar Yes you are right - and more people need to take college level U.S. history classes - slavery was the defining issue which caused the split. However, one might argue that slaves were treated better in the south; were they were fed, had shelter, raised their families, and were taken care of as they were looked on as 'property to be taken care of' by the south - how manny racist northerners were hiring slaves back then? and how long before blacks could actually vote.....
bigbizable 1 year ago
@bigbizable First, NO THEY WERE NOT! Again, do your research my friend! This book "the narrative of the life of frederick douglass" by the former slave himself, will change your mind on this issue. It is call Even if you refuse to accept this truth, we are talking about a precious right, the right to freedom. No matter how comfortable, slavery is slavery. Again, you keep trying to bash the north, I don't give a fig about them, I would have fought AGAINST the south!
JackWohar 1 year ago
@JackWohar sheesh calm down yes in many cases they were - F.D. was one of about...... 2 black elitists who actually had any political sway at the time - sure argue your liberal 'precious right to freedom' but that means nothing when you leave your chains in the south only to find more racism and segregation and no right to vote for another hundred years... and i was only trying to point out that many people can argue that blacks had a better life in the south at the time even without 'freedom'
bigbizable 1 year ago
@bigbizable First off, I'm a conservative/constitutionalists, I vote republican, second of all, shame on you for saying that! You blind yourself so much that you can't even look back on history with reason. Slaves were murdered and abused for decades and you have the arrogance to claim that is a 'better life'. Elitists? Shame on you again! He escaped from slavery and went to work on freeing slaves, and you have the audacity to call him elitist? Unique indeed but what he lobbied for was equality.
JackWohar 1 year ago
@JackWohar and if you want proof of my combat service send me a private message - it is public information by the way - i still cant believe you insulted my record - have you ever seen your best friends get fucked up in the humvee right in front of you? oh yeah because you never served i highly doubt that... quit hiding behind your brother who is probably a POG in the air force or something anyways.... pussy oh yeah better go look up on wikipedia what 'POG' means....
bigbizable 1 year ago
@bigbizable Last of all, your attitude towards American's freedom is a strike against the 50,000 revolutionary soldiers who died, the 120,000 dead in WW1, the 400,000 who died in WW2, currently my brother's service in defense of this country, and countless other men who have lived and died to protect your right to live, laugh and love. To think that freedom is less than comfort is an insult to all of their blood spilt. You sir shame your country, and yourself.
JackWohar 1 year ago
@JackWohar and 'last of all' you claim to be a 'constitutionalist' but you failed to educate yourself on the fact that northern AGRESSION was interfering with the states CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS TO GOVERN THEMSELVES - you better actually read and study the actual constitution before you claim to be a constitutionalist
bigbizable 1 year ago
@bigbizable Your combat experience only speaks against your disregard for freedom. If your a vet you should a)- be ashamed that you said anyone is better off without freedom, and b)- be ashamed at trying to trivialize anyone's position in the military. My brother is an intelligence officer with the USMC as is being deployed to Afghanistan in January just for the record... and my knowing vets verses being a vet doesn't impeded my ability to perceive reality.
JackWohar 1 year ago
@bigbizable My facts on the revolutionary war was from History 1301 taught by Professor Clayton Lust at a local college, I can't vouch for it cause I don't waste time on wiki-public forum, but apparently you know wiki enough to be able to cite it...
JackWohar 1 year ago
@bigbizable When any man deprives another man of his human rights, that man has abnegated his rights. When southern governments willingly deprived humans (in an official capacity) of their right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness, they abnegated their sovereignty and their right to life. When a man commits a crime he is deprived of his freedom, when a man commits murder he is deprived of his life, it was the same principle that holds sway here.
JackWohar 1 year ago
@bigbizable And for the last time, I DO NOT SUPPORT THE UNION! They were people who wanted to keep this country in one piece. I don't care about the Union, I don't care about their agenda, I am saying the south was wrong. Irregardless of the after affects of racism, slavery is not an alternative!
JackWohar 1 year ago
@bigbizable Your logic is so pour it doesn't even have a semblance of reason. Your saying that because African Americans were treated pourly after the civil war, obviously it would have been better to leave them in the hands of slave holders.
JackWohar 1 year ago
@bigbizable Open your eyes and look at the facts. It was legal in every slave state to kill your slave in discipline. You were not required to feed them. They could (and most times were) shot for trying to escape. And above all they were NOT CONSIDERED HUMAN! They were treated as property! Like cows or horses! Worse, they didn't even get the care cows and horses were afforded! The states weren't as hung up on their 'sovereignty' as you are, all they wanted sovereignty was to protect slavery
JackWohar 1 year ago
@JackWohar jesus you still dont get my point - im just trying to open up your narrow-minded field of view - and your arguments are full of contradictions like you said you would have FOUGHT for the Union and now you say you dont support them... wow... never talk to me again weirdo and intelligence MOS = POG
bigbizable 1 year ago
@JackWohar which would help America establish the economy that would later control the world....in short, "id for walmart too"
molly43able 1 year ago
@bigbizable Btw, that book can be found on pdf online for free if you want it
JackWohar 1 year ago
@levanyzzuf actually it had ALOT to do with slavery. The Missouri Compromise didn't work very well did it? The Union was in a state of emergency mostly because the newly acquired territories that were gained after the Mexican American War couldn't decide decide if they were going to be slave or free states. The South's influence only lasted if the amount of slave states expanded. There is no doubt about that. The devision between North and South was because of slavery.The South needed slavery.
TheDavid2222 1 year ago
@levanyzzuf How can the civil war have "very little to do with slavery" when the primary result of the war was the end to slavery? I know what you mean, the civil war wasn't started because of the slavery issue. However, the north was losing badly until slavery became the primary issue of the war.(which is the point of this film). While the civil war started out having very little to do with slavery, it ended up being all about slavery.
kjcaldar 1 year ago
@kjcaldar That single comment of mine has received replies ad nauseum, and I've elaborated in detail in later comments if you're interested in reading through them further on this page.
levanyzzuf 1 year ago
@levanyzzuf I read a few things you wrote, and very little of it was worth reading. While the civil war didn't start because of slavery, it is ignorant to say that "it had very, very little to do with slavery." Whatever you think, by mid1863 the war was being fought to free the slaves and preserve the union. It had become the most significant issue of the war.
kjcaldar 1 year ago
@kjcaldar The Union doctored up a number of causes to keep the "nation" intact, but Lincoln and his party cared little for the freedom of slaves beyond granting them liberty for the sake of political expediency - the Republicans were by no means uncompromising abolitionists and most documents around 1861 and prior to it indicate they didn't give a twaddle about blacks. Centralizing authority was their goal. My initial post was about the causes of the war itself, not the later developments.
levanyzzuf 1 year ago
@levanyzzuf Again that is false. Many Republicans were passionate abolitionists before the war started. (Thaddeus Stevens, Charles Sumner, John Quincy Adams).They argued against the morality of slavery, and also against the economic advantage the south had using slave labor against free labor. There were some Republican leaders who "didn't give a twaddle" about blacks. There were also some Confederate leaders who didn't believe slavery was morally right.
kjcaldar 1 year ago
@kjcaldar My point is that neither side had great reasons for going to war. At the beginning of the war (while the south was winning) it seemed like they were fighting for their "second independence." After the Emancipation Proclamation, the cause of the North shifted from merely preserving the union to freeing the slaves. Which brings us back to your first statement. The Civil War had very, very much to do with slavery. And for black regiments, it was most definitely a fight for freedom.
kjcaldar 1 year ago
@kjcaldar Also, it would be foolish to blame the massive bloodshed on anyone but the Republican political leaders, such as William H. Seward and Charles Sumner, who often spoke out against slavery but would not attack it on a constitutional basis, and who pursued military policies that were vengeful and abusive. Sumner's position as a forthright abolitionist is stil very much in dispute - he's seen by many historians asa bitter agitator and a shameless war profiteer.
levanyzzuf 1 year ago
@levanyzzuf I don't understand your point, if you even have one? Are you a member of the "Lost Cause?" I guess you're saying that the Union was to blame for the war? I am not going to argue that, but you could come up with an argument for either side. After all, it was the confederates who fired the first shots of the war! A historian has to learn to be as objective as possible (even though to be totally objective is impossible).
kjcaldar 1 year ago
@levanyzzuf I would blame massive bloodshed on both sides. For example, during the last months of the war the outcome wasn't in doubt by any means. The south didn't even have a major port at that point. The confederate army continued to fight through the most bloody campaign of the war, The Overland Campaign.
kjcaldar 1 year ago
@kjcaldar Indeed there were a number who were vocal opponents of slavery from the outset (Adams was dead well before the war began). The use of violence to abolish slavery was probably inevitable buy the Republicans were hypocrites for purporting to oppose slavery's expansion but refusing to take a strong, consistent moral stance against it. The main reason they employed violent tactics was not to forcibly end slavery but rather to preserve the Union by force. Lincoln made this pretty clear.
levanyzzuf 1 year ago
@levanyzzuf I know Adams was dead well before the war. You said that pre-Civil War Republicans didn't care about blacks.
kjcaldar 1 year ago
@levanyzzuf I understand Adams was dead before the civil war. That isn't the point, you claimed that Republicans didn't care about blacks before the war. Adams clearly did care about blacks. Lincoln believed that no state had the right to nullify federal law. A view shared by Washington, Jefferson, Jackson, andjust about all founding fathers. There wasn't any right for a state to secede from the federal union in the constitution. Therefore, the south was committing treason.
kjcaldar 1 year ago
@levanyzzuf , what you said is true. But the average Union soldier knew little about politics, many just wanted to end slavery. I invite you to the Michigan Capital lawn where the statue of Austin Blair stands (Michigans Civil War Governor). On his statue he's quoted about his absolute hatred of slavery. Many Union soldiers died for one reason, to end slavery. Especially the ones in this movie.
illustrate100 9 months ago
@Gothichick3
kudos goth, and ditto.
casca520 2 years ago
Fantastic score one of the best pieces of music written of all times.
mandyb6422 2 years ago
hey look it's ferris bueller
jar0fdirt63 2 years ago 2
Historically inaccurate in that this regiment was recruited entirely from free men of color, not escaped slaves. It would be good to see a movie made to tell the story of the two Negro divisions formed to fight in World War I, the 92nd and the 93rd, the latter going into battle as four separate regiments attached to French divisions and performing superbly under the worst possible conditions. Good troops, and real heroes.
sjdoc 2 years ago 6
this is way too slow
ratnick 2 years ago
ANYBODY know of a better movie than this............please let ME know.
...cause I haven't seen one.
pm512 2 years ago 4
dude this movie is the best evr, i could watch it 20 thousand times and still love it
hun64597 2 years ago 5
saving private ryan
mynam3isr1chie 2 years ago
the last of the mohicans is right up there, as is Gettysburg
ging68 2 years ago
'Braveheart' and 'American beauty'
KaspergenartM 2 years ago
This film is awesome. I watched it in history class. Coolest movie I ever saw in school, particularly the fight scene in the forest.
Spartan6144 2 years ago 6
Wasnt Morgan Freeman in that Too
artygunnar 2 years ago 2
yeah
kingalberich 2 years ago
What an incredible score!
But why is it that at 3:01 I can hear the theme from the Pagemaster? Hmm... weird...
Well, it's an incredible score anyways!
ribbertmaya 2 years ago