With the events of the last seven years or so prominently in my head, I watchedThe Grapes of Wrath for the first time. Inspired by what I read in Bruce Spingsteen’s biography, I had to see the film that inspired him to his positions on social justice. It’s easy to see why that happened, and why this is such a classic film.
Henry Fonda stars as Tom Joad. He's just been released from prison for killing a man in self-defense. On the way home he runs into the former preacher of the church (portrayed by John Carradine) who's "lost the call." When they arrive at Joad's house, in the middle of a dust storm, they find it empty. Tom learns from a neighbor that the Company is evicting all of the tenant farmers from the land. His family is at a cousin's house, getting ready to head out to California where they think there is a better chance at work.
When they arrive in California, they find more people in the same fix as them. At first they are in a camp with others. The only work they are offered is with con artists who know they are so hungry for work many people will jump at anything, including working without knowing what the pay will be. They are clued in to how the system works. Tom twice comes to the attention of the law. The first time, his family leaves to keep him from being incarcerated again. The second time, it is Tom who leaves his family, hoping they can carve out a better life without having to worry about him and that he can work to help better working conditions for all without having to worry about the effect on his family.
Adapted from John Steinbeck’s novel of the same name, The Grapes of Wrathis faithful to the first half of the book. Steinbeck was greatly distressed by the condition of the “Okies”, those farmers who lived in the Dust Bowl that was Oklahoma in the 1930’s and between the failure of crops due to the weather and the predatory nature of banks and corporations, lost just about everything. He tried writing about them once only to put it aside, then picked it up again when commissioned by Life Magazine.
The character of Tom Joad is a sympathetic one. Incarcerated for defending himself, he doesn’t want to go back to jail but this strangles him for being able to stand up for himself again. Although his father and grandfather are still alive, he is in a sense the patriarch of the family once he returns, being the oldest of the men who are still strong enough to earn a good living. With so much extended family to take care of, it makes it a bit of a strain to transport everyone to California. The journey is harrowing as they all pile into an unbalanced truck with all of their worldly belongings. Henry Fonda stands out so much here, and his performance is magnificent. In many ways his portrayal of Joad is understated, but we see the frustration boil over at times. Complimenting him in many ways is Ma Joad (portrayed by Jane Darwell). She’s another one who puts on a brave front, but in scenes when she’s by herself, it becomes clear how all of this is tearing her apart.
The social message of the time was clear. These were not people who were lazy and didn’t want to work, or were looking for a handout. They didn’t understand how they could be thrown off of “their land” that had been in their family for generations. They didn’t understand the chronic poverty that permeated the camps that people lived in while waiting for the next migrant worker job to come along. Most of all, they didn’t understand why people would take an intense dislike to them just because they were poor, unemployed, and hadn’t had the opportunity to get as good an education as others. Ma Joad shows clearly they are good people who would share their last meal with others, why shouldn’t the rest of the world be that way.
And indeed, thinking of the last seven years or so and what I’ve witnessed, I can say I’d rather the world be filled with those like her than all the people who think the solution is as simple as “get a job.”
The production values are great. Filmed in black and white, it’s the perfect contrast for the bleakness of their environment and their prospects. I actually watched this twice as I liked it so much, but also felt a degree of sadness that in the 70+ years since the film was made, not much has changed. Or if it did change, we’ve allowed our country to take many steps back to the same standards that made this possible.
Of the special features included on the DVD, the commentary is very worth listening to, especially for the background about Zanuck and Steinbeck being polar opposites politically. Steinbeck had many reservations about how the film would be handled, but ended up pleased with the outcome. Joseph McBride (film scholar) and Susan Shillinglaw (John Steinbeck scholar) do a terrific job outlining the social setting at the time The Grapes of Wrath was made, although with the recent “recession” which caused people to lose their homes and live in their cars, it’s become quite easy to picture the setting.
The Grapes of Wrath is considered a classic and is #21 on the American Film Institute’s Top 100 Films. It’s there for a good reason. I don’t know that a film like this could ever be made again unless the hero took an Uzi to shoot up the people who stole his farm or denied him work. It should be required viewing in history classes.
SPECIAL FEATURES:
• Commentary with Joseph McBride (film scholar) and Susan Shillinglaw (John Steinbeck scholar)
• UK Prologue
• Biography: Darryl F. Zanuck 20th Century Filmmaker
• Restoration Comparison
• Theatrical Trailer
• Fox Movietone News
• Still Gallery
No comments:
Post a Comment