Rating: 
Summary: Lord Acton is Right Again
Review: All the King's Men is a wonderful movie about the corrupting effect of politics. It is a little abrupt in its transitions and glosses over the honest man becoming a demogogue to a great extent but it is still a brave and true film in having the guts to portray a system that leaves no character unmuddied. There are no heroes in this movie. It is not just about power corrupting but also about how appealing power can be to people in its vicinity. It turns strong men into toadies and women into, well let's just say it's in the Bible and Babylon had one. The script and direction by Robert Rossen are both very effective. There are also good performances by most of the actors, particulary Broderick Crawford. The stand out, though, is the stunning portrait by Mercedes McCambridge who allows the standard character of the fast talkin' dame to seeth with anger under her sharp tongue. There is more pain and defiance when she looks in a mirror that the other actors manage throughout the entire movie. A film that is still true and still powerful. It is the portrait of someone who kept his ambition on the outside where now a politician keeps it on the inside but it is the same ambition.
Rating: 
Summary: Shelly's Evaluation
Review: All The King's Men, a film taken from an award winning novel, portrays the political life of one Louisiana resident named Willie Stark (Broderick Crawford), from the world of a young newspaper writer named Jack Burden (John Ireland). The movie covers several years of Jack Burden's life as a journalist, and his relationships with Willie Stark, Jack's family, and so-called girlfriend Anne Stanton (Joanne Dru). Jack first comes across Willie Stark at the beginning of the movie. Willie seems to be in his fifties, but had just started out in polotics. After writing an article about Willie, he befriends the man for the rest of the movie. Although Willie does not win the county seat, he does make a vow to come back with flying colors, all the while, people are considering him a joke. When the race for governor comes up, Willie has his ego built up so that he thinks he has a chance. This is where he runs into a shrewd and blunt campaign manager named Sadie Burke (Mercedes McCambridge). It's odd that Willie doesn't realize he isn't taken seriously by the "higher powers" of politics or by Sadie Burke. A couple of years have passed since he ran for teh county office, and in this, Willie and Jack have lost touch, but since his announcement of running for governor, Jack re-enters his life. Now, Jack is a part of Willie's campaign for governor, and realizes how no one takes this campaign seriously. It's only after getting Willie drunk one night and having him speak the next day, that Jack, Sadie, and the crowd realize he does have a knack for speaking. He becomes this ranting, loud man of the people that the crowd suddenly awakens to and cheers for. Due partly to the unfairness politics bring to Willie, he becomes an alcoholic. It could be that since Willie is under the influence, lashing out doesn't seem to be unappropriate; it's as if he was an angry drunk. What's interesting in this movie is that no where does the director have African Americans. They're never in the crowds or even walking down the street, and this is a southern state. There are however, plenty of "hicks" throughout the movie, and older white men. Surely, this has something to do with the people who voted at the time was made. One would think though, that blacks played a role during that time period. All during this movie, Jack keeps returning to his childhood home "Burden's Landing". This is where all his family lives and friends of that family. He may be looking for comfort here at this stretch of land, but mostly finds discomfort because of his stepfather. However, his mother is here, and he must be loyal to her. Jack brings Willie here to meet everyone during the campaign and even though Willie doesn't win the first time around, he wins the respect of everyone. This includes Jack's girlfriend Anne, her uncle, a state judge, and her brother Dr. Adam Stanton (Shepperd Strudwick). All these characters like Willie, and Anne even has an affair with him, but he ends up betraying them all in the end. At the end of the movie, Willie is gunned down by Dr. Stanton, after winning the impeachment, after he leads the judge to suicide from blackmail, and after Dr. Stanton finds out about the affair. This Willie Stark seemed to have changed many lives, especially the lives of those who lived at Burden's Landing. Willie's search for does become stonger with each coming year, that's why this movie seems so impossible in real life. Maybe that's why the director ended the movie with the death of Willie, someone who came out of no where but had enough effort to power over the state. No matter how many illegal deals he had, even in his last words, "Could have been the whole world..." Willie still would keep pressing on, disregarding the cost.
Rating:
Summary: Money and power corrupt even honest men.
Review: All the Kings Men starts off with an "honest" man, Willie Stark, running for the office of County Treasurer. He then catches the eye of the campaign manager of the candidate that is running for the Senate. The manager persuades Willie Stark to run for the Senate also, even though there is "no chance" for Willie to win. Willie has no clue that it is a set up. Willie runs for office claiming he is against all the tactics the other candidates are for that drive them to seek office, but as the movie unfolds, Willie uses these very same tactics to get what he wants. One of the obvious aspects of this movie is the actual personality of Willie. He starts out as an honest man just wanting to truly help the people. As he is influenced by power and money, however, he takes on the persona of those he dislikes the most in politics. Willie finds himself doing the same things that he finds so distasteful. There is also the irony of Willie Stark wanting to help people in political office. Throughout the movie, Willie begins putting himself first. He becomes a heavy drinker, where he did not drink before. He becomes an adulterer, when it is apparent his wife sacrificed for him and actually encouraged him and prodded him to go to the finest law school. He actually caused his own sons paralist by angering him to the point that his son agrees to play football just because the crowd was booing him. It doesn't seem to matter who Willie steps on or who he hurts to achieve his goals. Ann Stanton is another interesting character in this movie. We often see an imposing picture of her father, who appears to be the persona of the truthful person. Her brother is a doctor, who heals people. Her uncle is a judge, who strives to do what is right. Even with all of these positive influences surrounding her, she turns against her family and does what ever she feels will help Willie Stark the most. Even after her uncle commits suicide, she continues to see Willie Stark against her brothers intense displeasure. Its as if she closes her eyes to the cruel side of Willie Stark. In the end, she loses it all, even Willie Stark. Willie Stark never does really seem to get it. Even though he uses his power to step on people and even destroy them, he seems truly surprised whe Dr. Stanton shoots him. Its as if Willie, himself, is beleiving what he is telling the citizens. In conclusion, All the Kings Men show how you can take the most honest of men, with a desire to help others, and corrupt them to the point that their whole personality changes. This movie also shows how power and money can corrupt others as well. It shows us how people can see the obvious, yet close their eyes to truths, and to believe what they want to believe because they are driven by the power of greed.
Rating: 
Summary: Distressingly unfaithful adaptation of a classic novel
Review: Attention high school English students everywhere! Do NOT use this video to cram the night before the big test and expect to pass. Director Rossen throws the book in the blender, and the result resembles the novel only superficially. The plot, the thematic emphases, the names of characters and places...nothing is safe. I am made to understand that this movie is generally well-regarded, but for fans of the novel it will be a big disappointment.
Rating: 
Summary: The classic still packs a punch
Review: I'm not much for political movies and thrillers, but I was pleasantly surprised to find this old classic still packs a considerable punch. Based on the life of Huey Long, it chronicles the rise to power of an obscure but ambitious backwoods Louisiana lawyer, Willie Stark, who initially seems to stand for honesty and reform in contrast to the entrenched and corrupt political machine he is fighting, which is determined to defeat him at all costs, rightly perceiving an honest man as a threat to everything they stand for. Stark triumphs, however, and we watch as he himself takes on the trappings of official power, which he takes to like a duck to water. Stark builds new schools and colleges, hospitals for the poor, improves the roads, and seems to be everything the common man could hope for in a champion and leader. But there is a darker side to Stark, as he himself ultimately becomes assimilated by the corrupt machine he sought to topple and reform, and evidence surfaces that he has not only tolerated and even fostered corruption himself but was possibly involved in the murder of an innocent man who dared to challenge his authority. In the end, we see Stark using the same means and ends to further his power and to hold it at all costs that his enemies used against him at the very beginning of his career. The movie raises the question as to whether Stark was really any different from the corrupt cronies he replaced, and the schools and hospitals he built just monuments to his ego and arrogance, or whether he was a good man who ultimately went bad in his quest and thirst for power. The question is left open for the viewer to decide, as Stark's career comes to a sudden and tragic end during a campaign where he's fighting for his political survival after he's finally implicated in the murder of the innocent man. Broderick Crawford, John Ireland, and Mercedes McCambridge are really superb in their roles, and the movie is shot in dark, film noir style, which helps create an appropriately dark, conspiratorial mood and ambience. Overall, still a great movie and as I said, one that still packs a considerable punch and continues to be relevant today in its message about the dangers of demogogues and the abuse of raw, unchecked, political power.
Rating:
Summary: real life imitates art
Review: It astonishes me to see that the spectators of this film don't value them beyond three stars. I think that it is a rare and exceptional movie, and that if people not appreciates it is because he has the taste spoiled by the special effects and the bad screenplays of the cinema of today. But this movie is for real adults. No matter if it is in white and black: it rather seems to me that it enforces his dramatism and quality. And in Spain we have extra- cinematographical reasons to think so right now,, because there is a politic man that seems an exact copy of the governor Stark including an astonishing physical resemblance so he seems a brother of Broderick Crawford. This man is doing exactly that what Stark does at the screen, and uses identical methods. The extension of Spain is as a medium size state of America, and of course, her economic power, a toy industry compared with the USA. But the background seems very close for not to say identical. Our government seems don't know how to stop his activities, because people votes him, and if not, he buys anyone. Scarcely one week "All the King's Men" has been issued by one of the governmental spanish TV channels. I think that it has been timely and not casual. Real life is frequently unpleasant, and perhaps for that we prefer to see absurdities and evasion movies, but from time to time, it worth value to return to see good, excellent cinema. This film is one of the better, but best quality is not for all.
Rating:
Summary: Never again as good. Brodrick Crawford is another of that
Review: select group of actors who peak early in their career. In his case it is 1949, he won an Oscar, & never again got close. Eventually Crawford moved to the small screen where we,of a certain age, remember him on "Highway Patrol". But his best was better than most. His character, in All the King's Men, is Willie Stark, an idealistic, honest, populist politician bucking the system. He is also ambitious & seeing his opportunity, seizes it. His greed, lust for power & ego run amok & turn him into the very thing he had fought against only worse. He corrodes everything & everybody he touches & comes to a fitting end a 'la Huey Long, the man on which the film & presumably the book were loosely based. Highly recommended for all who like this style of political noir or junkies.
Rating:
Summary: Never again as good. Brodrick Crawford is another of that
Review: select group of actors who peak early in their career. In his case it is 1949, he won an Oscar, & never again got close. Eventually Crawford moved to the small screen where we,of a certain age, remember him on "Highway Patrol". But his best was better than most. His character, in All the King's Men, is Willie Stark, an idealistic, honest, populist politician bucking the system. He is also ambitious & seeing his opportunity, seizes it. His greed, lust for power & ego run amok & turn him into the very thing he had fought against only worse. He corrodes everything & everybody he touches & comes to a fitting end a 'la Huey Long, the man on which the film & presumably the book were loosely based. Highly recommended for all who like this style of political noir or junkies.
Rating:
Summary: The film is good, but a weak substitute for the book!
Review: Starring Broderick Crawford as Willie Stark, the charismatic politician whose story is based on the life of Huey Long, this film was nominated for seven academy awards in 1949. The book, written in 1946 by Robert Penn Warren won a Pulitzer Prize. I loved the book. I can't say as much for the video. Robert Rossen, who wrote and directed the screenplay, tried hard. But not only did he change the story to fit the confines of the screen, he kept it plot driven, thereby losing the complexity that gave the book its power. Without the beauty of the words and the layers of meaning in the story, it became the simple story of a politician's rise to power and his eventual downfall. The book was dense with meaning; the film a mere shadow. And in spite of fine acting by Broderick Crawford and Mercedes McCambridge as Stark's political aide, I found myself soon becoming bored. I was surprised that John Ireland, cast in the role of Jack Burden, the narrator and most complex of all the characters, was also nominated for an academy award. I found his acting wooden and at times I almost laughed out loud at his amateurish performance. However, even though the story was boiled down to a mere shadow of the book's plot, it still made its points about the realities of politics and the compromises that have to be made along the way. It's a good theme and is as meaningful today as it ever was. And so this video still has some worth. I therefore reluctantly give it a very mild recommendation. However, for a truly worthwhile and memorable experience - read the book!
Rating:
Summary: Dated techniques mar the overall impact of a powerful film.
Review: The 1949 film noir, "All the King's Men" is a glamorized account of famed Louisiana Governor Huey Long's life as a politician. The film was made during an era where the primary objective was to tell a story and not necessarily tell it accurately. While the film remains powerful even fifty years after its release, it is obviously dated, and not only due to the lack of technicolor. Older films are still worthwhile, enjoyable, meaningful and entertaining and aspects that "date" a film do not necessarily take away from a film's overall worth. However, certain elements seem to be more irksome than others, and this film demonstrates several of these more irksome elements. The first problem associated directly with the age of this film is vagueness created necessarily by the censorship laws governing filmmaking at the time. Much of the sex, scandal and corruption of Huey Long's administration was implied rather than overtly stated or shown. This isn't generally an irritating side of older films. Generally, the viewer knows what is going on by context clues, but the clues were too vague and the viewer was left wondering for far too long. It was difficult to ascertain, for example, exactly when Mr. Long began his intimate relationship with Ms. Burke and then suddenly he was apparently also having intimate relations with yet another woman, Ms. Stanton. It is unclear with whom he was dallying and whether or not he dallied with more than one at a time. The vagueness extended into Mr. Long's political career as well. Although this is a factually based account of a real person, it is never made clear if this is a biography or merely a loosely based account of the politician's life from the time he entered the public eye. The viewer is left confused as to his real name, although certainly not his true identity. There can be no doubt that the film is based on the political life and death of Huey Long, so why is the main character named Willie Stark? Is this more censorship? In terms of movie attendance, it seems the better choice would have been to use the real name of the flamboyant Louisiana governor and his nickname as well. Willie Stark means nothing whereas both "Huey Long" and "Kingfish" are generally widely known political names. It is also unclear that, as a politician, he evolves into anything particularly "bad" .He seems to slide from "good guy" politician to "evil incarnate" so gradually that the viewer isn't even aware that he has gone bad. The only indications of this are that the camera angles are no longer flattering, his speeches are shouted and barked, and he finally gets hauled into court for wrong-doings that seem to be of the kind politicians are supposed to be doing anyway. Aren't politicians elected to get the job done by robbing Peter to pay Paul? The viewer is on pins and needles, near the film's end, as Huey Long has Judge Stanton in his hip pocket and quite obviously knows it. He has some bit of dirt he has dug up on the good, gentle judge that will, apparently, ruin the man's career and the esteem of his family and peers. The judge shoots himself and the viewer remains on pins and needles. He must have done something horrible that he couldn't bear for anyone to discover. As far as the film is concerned, his secret is still quite safe. The fact that the only women in the film of any consequence are those the Governor slept with is just a reflection of the time period of the movie and is tolerable on that basis. The fact that no "middle class" or "working people" are represented is also not bothersome as Mr. Long's primary focus as a politician was the rural poor, the roots from whence he came. And the fact that no blacks or other "minorities" are represented in the film is again, a sign of the times during which the film was made. But the "voice over" newsreel style is a dated technique that became more annoying and distracting as the film progressed. Intended as helpful, dramatic explanation, the voice over did little else than distract the viewer from the building intensity of the events portrayed. Too often filmmakers rely on trendy techniques to enhance and the enhancement only cheapens the overall effect and quickly dates the film. This particular voice over seemed overly dramatic, hammy and obnoxious. These relatively minor distractions notwithstanding, the film is still masterful, powerful and thought-provoking. The knowledge that the story is very closely structured upon actual events adds to the impact and drama. And the black and white enhances the overall intensity of both the film and the story told. Borderick Crawford became the "Kingfish" and the supporting cast was superb. If the viewer can overlook the few annoyances associated with the age of the film, and fifty years certainly made a world of difference in terms of filmmaking, s/he will be rewarded with a political story so timeless, it seems taken almost from the front page of yesterday's newspapers. ---K.Talley
|
