Glory Reflection

Upon first looking at the list of movies that we would be watching this year in class a few stuck out from the rest.  Among two or three others was Glory.  Like many other movies I had heard good things about Glory but was not sure that I would feel the same way.  As it turns out, Glory is my favorite of the movies that we have seen so far.  One of the most important reasons I liked it was that unlike so many other movies, it felt like the story was the key part of the movie.  This movie was made to tell a story about the 54th and while there was some action it did not feel like it was getting in the way of the story but rather the battles served the further advance the story in a way that is uncommon in most movies today.  This movie is also for the most part anyway, pretty historically accurate which is always good.
One thing I was a little worried about was that Matthew Broderick was the story's protagonist.  This is only because I have only ever seen him as Ferris Bueller and it was a little weird for me personally at first because of the difference between the two characters.  I was pleasantly surprised and I feel like he did a good job in the role of Shaw.
I also very much enjoyed watching the relationship between the different members of the 54th change throughout the movie and noting their radically different perceptions on the current war and the 54th itself.

Throughout history there have been many martyrs who died for their country.  This is not so hard to believe as in many if not most cases it is not so much the name of the country that people will fight and die for but rather the idea behind the country.  To many people the United States are a symbol of freedom and justice and it is for those ideals that so many people are willing to fight for. 
There is no doubt that Shaw and the 54th are heroes.  Many members of the 54th gave their lives during the war.  Shaw himself knew that unlike many of his fellow officers in other situations if he was captured it meant certain death and yet he decided to remain with his soldiers.  Furthermore, Shaw volunteered the 54th to lead the charge on the fort at the end of the film even though he knew that he and many of his friends may die. 

The significance of this story lies not in that there was an African American regiment but rather that that regiment which many people including many officers looked down upon actually played a key role in the war.  The 54th proved that they were just as good if not better than the other units and that is why they were so important.

Kingdom Of Heaven

For some reason this movie seemed to be a bit different than the other two that we saw.  It was not that it was bad and the other two were good so much as it was just different.  I agree that they were shown starting with the best but they were all good.  That being said there were some things that I didn't like about the movie.  For starters like most movies there is a fair amount of historical inaccuracies and though it will probably never happen I wish they would just try to be a little more accurate.  More than almost any period in history though I am interested in warfare during the middle ages so it was kind of cool to see the weapons and tools the army had (like the Trebuchet).

I also think that Kingdom of Heaven has a lot of applications to today.  The struggle for control over the Jerusalem region is one that continues to this day with multiple factions claiming it to be their right.  To be honest I thought that the movie was either going to portray the Christian Crusaders or the Muslims in a positive yet one-sided light and was pleasantly surprised to by their focusing more on how all religions should be allowed to worship there.  I was interested in the characters as well as there were more here than in the other two movies that we saw.  Naturally I was a little disappointed to learn that that too was not very accurate.

Braveheart Reflection

When I first heard that we were going to be watching Braveheart I was not too excited.  Personally, I don't really like Mel Gibson so watching one of his movies would not have been my first choice.  Regardless, I actually ended up liking this movie.  The story was told in a way that was interesting and yet still managed to convey the basic ideas of the time period.  As usual my complaints are about the historical accuracy of the film as a whole.  One of the problems I had with gladiator was that they actually changed the way that Commodus died.  Here, they had the French Princess play a larger role than she actually did.  As for characters, I liked Wallace and Longshanks well enough though there was no character who stuck out to me as being truly incredible.  I also struggle to find any applications to today.
The idea behind the quote "Every man dies.  Not every man truly lives," is a common one.  Just because you physically survive does not mean that you have lived life to the fullest.  What Wallace was saying was that life under the British rule was not freedom and that without that freedom life was not truly worth living.  I take back what I said earlier, this does have an application to our real lives today.  In order to truly experience life and all it has to offer, we must first find and support something we are passionate about.  It can be a political, religious, social, or moral idea but as long as we have something that we would be willing to fight for.

The Gladiator Reflection

The Gladiator is one of those movies that seems like just another action movie going in, but upon truly thinking about it turns out to be a much deeper and more interesting story.  One of the greatest things about the movie is that it is set in a real historical time period (Ancient Rome) and many of the characters are actual historical figures.  That being said the story's protagonist, a gladiator who was formerly roman general, is either a combination of several real people or mostly fictional.  Ironically, it is not the fictional hero who is the most interesting but rather his enemy Commodus.  What makes Commodus such a great character is that he wants only to be loved and accepted by his people but at the same time he comes across as being nearly psychotic and homicidal.  Unlike many other tyrants though, there is nothing about him that seems to show power, in fact his story is much more about how despite being the emperor Commodus lacks any real power.  This not only hurts Commodus, but it actually breaks him causing him to do ridiculous and terrible things.  Commodus was interesting enough that after the movie was over I ended up reading a little bit more about him just to see what he was like in real life as well.  As far as the best and worst parts of the film, I would argue that in addition to the way Commodus was portrayed I was pleased that while there was enough of a plot to be entertaining it never seemed to be to slow or to be too confusing.  As for the negative aspects, I wish that they could have been a little more historically accurate.  Also, while I enjoyed the film and I think of it as being a good movie, it seemed to be just that.  There were good or even very good things about the movie but it seemed to be lacking that quality that takes a movie to the next level and makes it a truly great movie.
As for a theme of this movie, I would argue that a possible theme would be that "True power can be attained by even the lowest members of society".  This is not to say that a slave or servant has the same tools as a king, but rather that powerful people such as leaders or political thinkers can be found in every class and that it is those people who ultimately will decide the course of history.  In ancient Rome a gladiator is equal to a slave in terms of rights and privileges whereas the emperor supposedly is infallible.  Yet in the end Maximus is able to kill the emperor and emerge victorious.