Rating: 
Summary: I Love This Movie!!!
Review: NOTE TO ALL REVIEWERS WHO TREAT THIS MOVIE LIKE IT WAS ANTI-CHRISTIAN: I don't want to sound like I'm anti-Christian myself (which I'm not), but doesn't EVERY movie have propaganda in it in one form or another? This movie says in the credits that it was based on the PLAY Inherit the Wind, not the Scopes Trial itself. And in the play itself, the authors write it not as pure history, but as a platform for in showing how refusing to accept (or at least respect) another's ideas, people can look like they're really narrow-minded. So back to my regular review: The acting is absolutely terrific! With the exception of some details pointed out by other reviews, I'd say that the acting is top-notch. The tension of the film keeps you glued to find out what happens. I love movies which really make you think!
Rating:
Summary: And to think, they both played Doctor Jekyll!
Review: Isn't that an interesting coincidence? It makes one wonder whether some other point should be made from that, and so I'll go ahead and do so. Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde are two radically different personalities, yet one person. So here we have creationist March versus evolutionist Tracy: very different points of view, but each character the same in their resoluteness that they will be triumphant.Enough of that! I think "Inherit the Wind" is one of the best acted movies that I have seen. You could argue that Tracy is always really the same in every movie, but it sure is a successful characterization; here it's March who is truly creating a new character for himself. Wonderful courtroom showdowns and startling ending. Get yourself a copy of the proceedings of the actual trial and compare it to what they adapted here--yes, there are many differences, but that's why you're not supposed to just see the movie version of anything, least of all history.
Rating: 
Summary: A Complete Distortion of the Scopes Trial
Review: Inherit the Wind is, at best, a shallow form of propaganda directed at Creationists and Christianity. The movie completely distorts the events of the Scopes vs. Monkey trial. The evolutionists are given every benefit of wit, intelligance, and sarcasm while the creationists are shown to be ignorant, hypocritical,and narrow minded. Though the movie has some entertainment value, it should be banned from the classroom if for no other reason than that it is completely contaminated with bias.
Rating:
Summary: Whoa..
Review: I'll admit, I'm not the biggest fan of older movies. (In fact, my idea of "old" tends to be anything pre-1980) But in the case of Inherit the Wind, I make an exception. The way the movie was shot and acted really draws you into the plot. In fact, when I was watching it, I could tell by the reactions of the people around me which side of the evolution/creation debate they were on. It takes more than your average "we shot it in two months" kind of production to do that. I have also seen the color re-make of this film, and it didn't come close. There are some things that are better just left to the people who did it first.
Rating:
Summary: A Text Book Example of Propoganda
Review: I suggest all seekers of truth purchase this movie in order to better understand the role that propoganda plays in our entertainment industry. The standard characterization on this movie as "slightly fictionalized" is an outright lie. There is nothing about this movie that is accurate. The ACLU advertised for a teacher to deliberately challange the law which had never before been prosecuted. The chamber of commerce of Dayton volunteered their town in order to bring publicity to their little hamlet. They asked the teacher if he would play the part of the accused. The teacher had never taught evolution before -- he knew nothing about the subject. The defense team was accorded great respect. As opposed to the lies of the film, the town did not greet them with a parade singing "That Old Time Religion is Good Enough for Me!" No, they through them a welcoming party!! The list of lies propogated by this film is so monumental as to be overwhelming. There are a few books on the subject. I recommend teachers of civics, science, communications, history, etc. to use this film as an entre to study disinformation, propoganda, revisionist history, etc.
Rating:
Summary: Classic Issue, Classic Actors, Classic Film
Review: Even with out the issue of evolution being taught in the schools, this film stands out because of the sight of Spencer Tracy and Fredric March going to toe to toe, trying to upstage each other. Gene Kelly as the cynical report is a nice change of pace performance. Director Stanley Kramer loves to be on his soap box, especially when he gets Tracy to front for him. Still the best filmed version to date because of his portrayal of Drummond/Darrow. March needed to tone down his somewhat buffonish charicature of Brady/Bryan, but Kramer was not going to stop him.
Rating:
Summary: inherit the wind
Review: This movie brings to light the problem of religion versus science. Actors are on a class to themselves. They each developed a role to a level of excellence. At the end of the movie the problem was not solved but yet it makes you think. In the movie what the defense is fighting for the right to think differently even though some didn't agree with it. Again, it makes you think.
Rating:
Summary: Far better than the remake
Review: This is a great movie filled with some of the best actors of the time. Some people complain that it's too slow in parts; this should only affect those of you with short attention spans. The high points of the film are the well written, directed, and spoken dialogues of Spencer Tracy (Clarence Darrow) and Fredric March (Williams Jennings Bryan), climaxing when Tracy declares March "the prophet from Nebraska." The remake, though containing some great actors (namely George C. Scott) was disappointing at best. The director cut back some of the slower, seemingly less important scenes, such as Henry Drummond's first impressions of the town and the townsfolk marching through the streets with a flaming effigy of the defendant, Bertram Cates. Fellow Kansas voters, I beg of you, watch this movie before you vote for our next BOE representatives.
Rating:
Summary: Can't wait to see the remake
Review: What an excellent classic. This movie is a great portrayal of the turning point in humanity. The fact that it was in the South only adds to the stubborness of humanity to accept change. The actors were splendid with so much enthusiam when they exploded at the foolish denial by creation witnesses. I think every classroom and parent could benefit from seeing this movie. You don't have to stop believing in any gods to have your children educated with the facts of evolution. A must see for the BOE of Kansas.
Rating:
Summary: Would love to see an updated remake
Review: This movie is great for anyone who is willing to see what teaching evolution is really about. It's to educate. The movie had a few scenes that left me cringing. "If religion is good enough for...., it's good enough for me". What a wonderful thought process to inflict on children. I also loved the signs of the protesters. Atheists burn in hell. Hell is only for christians, that's where it exists, in their minds. Evolutionists and atheists are not one in the same, that's why I'd love to see this as a remake. The Church thru the Pope has now said god created evolution. I recommend this movie to anyone who thinks evolution isn't a fact. You can still believe in whatever god you want, just let your kids get educated with truth.
| 
