|
|
Post by BATouttaheck on Apr 7, 2018 4:03:20 GMT
Might as well drink that bottle of Moet Rose while watching this wonderful film.
|
|
|
|
Post by joekiddlouischama on Feb 18, 2019 11:31:55 GMT
Having just viewed To Kill a Mockingbird again in the theater, what also strikes me is how the film benefits from a lack of exposition. It never reveals how exactly the mother dies, nor does it introduce us to the jurors and have them explain their decision. The movie does not attempt to explain the racism that is obviously behind the guilty verdict, and why should it? That factor is so deeply rooted in the society that to explain it would be both superfluous and misleading (as if the jurors would ever acknowledge that influence). To Kill a Mockingbird is about race, but it is about more than any one factor. It is also about eccentricity and outcasts (one can draw a potent parallel between "Boo" Radley and Tom Robinson), about humanity and inhumanity, about tolerance and intolerance, and most of all about dignity—the fight to preserve one's own in the face of those who lack any. (The scene where Bob Ewell spits in Atticus Finch's face really stands out in that regard.) And the movie taps into some deep timeless reservoir of childhood and life's ambiguities and ironies. We are talking about a black-and-white film released fifty-seven years ago that chronicles the Jim Crow South from nearly ninety years ago, yet one does not need to be of that time and place to instinctively relate to the movie. Elmer Bernstein's score, with its mix of innocence and tragedy, optimally complements the film. Indeed, all of the movie's various elements are in perfect sync. Overall, I would rank To Kill a Mockingbird (Robert Mulligan, 1962) with The Grapes of Wrath (John Ford, 1940), It's a Wonderful Life (Frank Capra, 1946), Vertigo (Alfred Hitchcock, 1958), North by Northwest (Alfred Hitchcock, 1959), The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence (John Ford, 1962), Bonnie & Clyde (Arthur Penn, 1967), The Graduate (Mike Nichols, 1967), The Godfather (Francis Ford Coppola, 1972), and Unforgiven (Clint Eastwood, 1992) on a potential list of ten transcendent American movies—both brilliant and deeply meaningful—in the era of sound film. |
|
|
|
Post by marianne48 on Mar 10, 2019 2:07:22 GMT
I remember the local NYC TV station would play this periodically in their afternoon movie slot (it was a 90-minute time slot, so they would show it in two parts over a two-day period). Being in elementary school at the time, I found it compelling, although I had little awareness at the time of its classic status. I watched it back then because the protagonist was a little girl, and I liked her ham costume. It was only after years of rewatches that I gradually began to realize its greatness. I do have to agree, unfortunately, that the character of Dill was probably miscast. I'd assumed, before I'd read the book, that Dill was a little shifty, due to his claim that he'd once won a "Beautiful Baby Contest." I thought that this was a wild tale he'd spun to impress the Finch children, since such a goofy-looking kid would not have won such a contest.
|
|
