Amazon.com

Elia Kazan made his directorial debut with this adaptation of Betty Smith's novel about a bright, young girl growing up in turn-of-the-century Brooklyn, trying to rise above her tenement existence. Sensitively filmed by Kazan, and graced with wonderful performances by James Dunn as the wistful, alcoholic father and Dorothy McGuire as a strong-willed mother. Peggy Ann Garner won a special Oscar for her performance. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (35)

Heartbreakingly dissapointing
I read the astonishingly true book A Tree Grows in Brooklyn. I loved it- and understood it. I expected so much from the movie- but when it was finished, I was just dissapointed. I understand that sometimes parts of books had to be changed to make a movie. And yet... it was probably the small cast of characters, and the MANY alterations. Wherer is the cruel, evil Granpa Rommely? Why do the characters talk so FAST. They need to slow down, and relax. Where's Little Tilly, or Gussie? The movie, as I can call it, is cute. I would give it 2.5 stars. But, it shows a glossed over version of Francie's life. Francie was a child who lived in a world of brutality. She went to a school (from 6-10 anyway) where the teachers were CRUEL, and DIRTY. She wore smudged clothes, ripped, and patched. She never had enough to eat. The most refreshing aspect of the book was that she was able to find magic IN SPITE or all of this. But the movie changes a mature book into a G-Rated film.I will never hear the names Francie, Neely,Sissy and Katie, and see Peggy Ann Garner, Ted Donaldson,Joan Blondell and Dorothy McGuire. I will always see Francie as a skinny, ragged looking child, with wondering eyes, and a timid smile. I will always see Neely as a scruffy, ragged kid, with a little-boy grin on his face. I will always see Sissy as a dark-haired, full-figured ''bad girl'' sensitive beauty, and I will always see Katie as a wide-eyed, unexplainable fighter.The only acotr who captured the essence of the character is James Dunn as Johnny. Now HE deserved his Oscar. They took too much out of the book to make the movie good. Where's Aunt Evy, and Uncle Wille Flitmann? More importantly WHERE'S THE EXPLAINATION OF HOW KATIE AND JOHNNY MET. They just skipped right past that part. I have always read reviews of movies I loved- and seen one person who gives a 5-star movie (atleast 5-star to me) and gives it 2-stars for not following the book, and I feel angry. But in this case- I urge anyone who loved the movie to thoroughly read the book, then watch it again. The movie COULD HAVE BEEN SO GREAT! They should have followed Francie's life until the end of the book. They should have shown Francie and Lee, her true love. A part in the book read, after Katie had heard Francie call her ''mother'' instead of ''mama'': '' Mother! Katie remembered when she had called her mother ''mother'' instead of ''mama''. She had said ''Mother'' when she had been ready to marry Johnny. When she had called her mother ''Mother'' she had finished growing up. She had never said ''mama'' again. Now Francie.... And this is just the problem. The movie never fully ''grows up''. I hope someday, someone takes the time (though it will take a long time) to make a movie TRUE TO THE BOOK.If people loved this movie, wait until they see a movie that follows the book. They will be astonished at the difference!

What a Great Film !
From the opening scene, this movie hooks you in. It is the story of a little girl, Francie Nolan, and her family. The setting is turn-of-the-century Brooklyn. This film stands up to repeated viewings, something movies seldom accomplish. The basic story line centers around Francie, an intelligent girl filled with wonder. Her father, Johnny Nolan, loves his daughter and does everything he can to support her wishes. The mother is the serious, single-layered breadwinner of the house, and is often more concerned with public perception of her family than with the family itself. Starring Dorothy McGuire, James Dunn, Peggy Ann Garner, Lloyd Nolan and Joan Blondell, it doesn't get much better than this, folks...have some tissues readily available. Elia Kazan's direction makes tear-jerkers out of certain scenes, like when Francie throws her arms around her father and proclaims "I just love you so much, Papa". Another GREAT scene is when Papa is in Francie's room, just before going to look for a job. The piano scene. The tree catching scene....and on and on. A real classic.

Faithful to the book
Even though this movie has been around for quite a while, one wonders (and worries) how faithful the movie-makers were to the book, especially since the novel made a come-back thanks to Oprah and her gang. What a relief it was to find out that "A Tree Grows" was mostly like the book. One can only hope that McCrae's "The Bark of the Dogwood" will receive similar treatment when it is made into a film--let's hope so. I highly recommend this heart-warming tale of life in Brooklyn, even if it does have its ups and downs.

Francie's World
A Tree Grows In Brooklyn is a beautiful and thoughtful book. The screen version is one of my favorite films of all time. It tells the story of Francie, a poor girl growing up in Brooklyn at the turn of the 20th century. The acting, with Peggy Ann Garner as Francie, James Dunn as her father and Joan Blondell as Francie's aunt, is superb and evocative of that bygone era. A Tree Grows in Brooklyn is a movie that can be enjoyed again and again. You never get tired of it.

The Tender Passage of Youth
Betty Smith's heartfelt and timeless novel of a young girl's passage through her youth in the Brooklyn slums was transformed by director Elia Kazan into one of the most touching and deeply felt films ever made. It has that rare ability to break your heart one moment and make you smile the next. There is a tenderness here that has rarely been captured on film. Many point to Elia Kazan's flashier films, but it was this sentimental film that was his crowning achievement. There are moments in this film when even those who never cry at the movies will be moved to tears.

Peggy Ann Garner was so wonderful as the young and sensitive Francie, the Academy gave her an Oscar for Most Promising Juvenile Performer. James Dunn garnered an Oscar also as Francie's loving father, Johnny Nolan, a singing waiter with a gift for dreaming he passes on to Francie, who wants to be a writer. Francie's papa makes their hard life worth living and Francie worships him. He understands and adores her.

But when he isn't working, Johnny is usually drunk. Everyone in their poor neighborhood knows Johnny is a good man, however, and loves and respects him. He is the one who will find a way for Francie to attend the school she dreams of, even though it is far from their home. Francie's mother is the only one who doesn't seem to see how special Johnny is.

Dorothy McGuire gives another terrific performance as Francie's hard working mother, Katie, who tries desparately not to love her boy Neely more than Francie, and fails; tries desparately not to become bitter with the charming lad she married in her youth, but can't; and tries desparately not to let her heart grow cold and hard, and fails once more.

Francie and her family may live in poverty, but Kazan takes the time to show the joy that can be found in the small things in life. For Francie, her father represents happiness and living. Joan Blondell, as Katie's sister and Francie's aunt Sissy, with her free spirit and big heart, adds to Francie's joy in life. It is one of Blondell's finest roles.

It is Peggy Ann Garner's emotional performance, however, you will always remember. She brings a sweetness and sincerity to Francie that makes her unforgettable. Purchasing this film is an opportunity to own one of the true masterpieces in American cinema. It will touch your heart and remind you what Hollywood was once capable of, and make you wonder where it all went wrong. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

East of Eden is an acknowledged classic, and the starring debut of James Dean lifts it to legendary status. John Steinbeck's novel gave director Elia Kazan a perfect Cain-and-Abel showcase for Dean's iconic screen persona, casting the brooding star as Cal, the younger of two brothers vying for the love of their Bible-thumping father (Raymond Massey) in Monterey, California, at the dawn of World War I. Massey is a lettuce farmer, striving for market domination with an ill-fated refrigeration scheme. Having discovered that his presumed-dead mother (Oscar^® winner Jo Van Fleet) is a brothel owner in nearby Salinas, Cal convinces her to finance an investment that will restore his father's lost fortune, but neither money nor the tenderness of his brother's fiancée (Julie Harris) can assuage Cal's anguished need for paternal acceptance that comes nearly too late. Kazan's oblique camera angles and Dean's tortured emoting may seem extreme by latter-day standards, but their theatrics make East of Eden a timeless tale of family secrets and hard-won affection. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (41)

DEEP & HAUNTING.
I first watched this movie on television when I was about 16, because I wondered what all the fuss was about James Dean. I soon found out: he was so unbelievably natural in his acting technique that the audience is captivated by his brilliance. This was Dean's film debut and he burst like a thunderclap in the public's ears, not to mention staid Hollywood, which came to both fear and admire the handsome, rebellious youth. In this haunting John Steinbeck tale, Dean is the neurotic half of twin sons belonging to Bible - reading lettuce farmer Raymond Massey, whose vast acreage stretches through the rich Salinas Valley in California. Aron (Davalos, in another powerful debut) is the well-adjusted upstanding son whose normal relationship with his girlfriend and his diligent pursuit of continuing his father's legacy is admired by the patriarch. Cal is very different from his brother and the troublesome youth mistakenly believes his father doesn't love him. A haunting scene has Dean introduce Davalos to their supposedly dead mother. The boys were brain-washed by their father into believing their mother Kate was some sort of angel: the truthful realisation that she's a financially successful Madam who operates a whorehouse in Monterey causes Davalos to become deeply traumatised. Many people will feel empathy for BOTH brothers during this powerful scene: it shows us that Cal is, if anything, REAL while his brother is somewhat sheltered and idealistic in comparison. The performances are all splendidly colourful and absorbing: Dean is unforgettable as Cal - for whom the audience feels empathy - Julie Harris is fine as Abra (she succumbs to Cal's raw sexuality) and Jo Van Fleet is excellent as the tough yet essentially tender-hearted tubercular Kate who likes her boy Cal because he "has sense" as she believes she does. Raymond Massey is fine as the puritanical father, Adam. Burl Ives is memorable as Sam: he quotes the Biblical passage which includes the picture's title. Some critical snobs say that the film was over-directed by Kazan but it made Dean an over-night sensation who acted with a unique naturalistic style and died a legend at the tender age of 24.

James Dean's Best Performance
Although this may be the least known of Dean's three major films, I think this is by far his best performance and the one that most fully explores his talent. Dean stars as the troubled son of Raymond Massey, always trying to please his father, but without much success. Richard Davalos is Dean's brother, and he has his father's love and the love of a sensitive young girl played by Julie Harris. The boys are named Cal and Aaron, which reminds us of Cain and Abel, and so does their relationship. Dean gives one of those raw, emotional performances that is sometimes almost uncomfortable to watch it is so real. The rest of the cast is also excellent, with Jo Van Fleet giving an edgy portrayal of the boys "lost" mother. The struggle for approval and the feeling of not fitting in is one that we can all appreciate, and it is sensitively and dramatically presented. The Steinbeck story is a classic, and in the hands of director Elia Kazan and his terrific cast, so is the movie.

Wonderful acting by James Dean and Jo Van Fleet.
East of Eden is a great, sprawling American novel by nobel prize winning author John Steinbeck. The film East of Eden, directed by Elia Kazan, dramatizes only a small part of the magnificent book. However, what the film does, it does exceptionally well, thanks to the riveting performances of James Dean and academy award winner Jo Van Fleet.

Much has been written about Dean as an actor and what is certainly true is that when he is on screen, you can't take your eyes off him. As young Cal Trask, Dean vies for the attention and love of his father, Adam, Raymond Massesy, with his twin brother Aaron, Richard Davalos. Cal is a loser, no matter what he does, and Dean portrays sensitively the conflict Cal feels as he grows to manhood unloved and uncared for.

The rivalry between Cal and Aaron for their father's love as well as the affections of Abra, Aaron's girlfriend played by Julie Harris, generates much of the action and dramatic tension of the film. All Cal's gifts are rejected by his father, in contrast to Aaron, whose presents are appreciated and valued.

Like Cain in the Bible, Cal has a dark side which he thinks comes from his mother Kate, who abandoned him at birth and whom he has discovered runs a brothel in Salinas, California, a short train ride from the Trask ranch. Cal introduces himself to Kate, played to perfection by Jo Van Fleet, first to try to learn about himself, who he is and why he experiences his inner rage and frustration. Later he will borrow money from her to invest in order to help his bankrupt father. Cal's investment in bean futures, just prior to America's entry in World War I, pays off, but his father rejects his money in a confrontation which moves us toward the dramatic conclusion of the film.

The scenes with Dean and Van Fleet are the highlight of the film and a treasure of American movie making. Both actors are electric with Dean drawing from his inner uncertainty and fire and Van Fleet, the consumate professional, using all her skills and intelligence. They approach one another gingerly, each testing the response of the other, not trusting themselves and their own emotions, and finally becoming frustrated with their inablility to connect with one another. These scenes are wonderful to watch. We should not expect a happy ending and we don't get it.

East of Eden, released in 1955, justly takes its place in a small list of fine American films, not just because of the great performances of James Dean and Jo Van Fleet, but also because it dramatizes timeless themes in a most convincing fashion. Those viewers who love the film and like to read will almost certainly enjoy the novel on which the film is based.

It's only a matter of time....
Given the nature and extent of Oprah Winfrey's influence, it is only a matter of time before this film -- based on the Steinbeck novel of which she is so fond -- is available in a DVD format. Let's all hope that the special features are worthy of our patience and forbearance in the meanwhile. It has been almost 50 years since this film first appeared, in the same year during which Rebel Without a Cause was also released. Both feature James Dean. I have often wondered to what extent his unique and abundant talents as an actor would have developed, had he not perished in a car accident immediately after the filming of Giant had been completed. Of course, we will never know. His was a compelling presence in each of only three films and especially so in East of Eden in the role of Cal Trask.

The basic story is derived from the Biblical account of Cain and Abel. Adam Trask (Raymond Massey) has two sons, both of whom he presumably loves. However, he favors Aron (Dick Davalos) because he (unlike Cal) never says or does anything to irritate him. Aron is "the good son," complete with a girlfriend Abra (Julie Harris) whom his father obviously adores. Of course, Cal feels resentment toward both his father and brother. He desperately wants his father's love. (Later in the film, he even tries to buy it with profits he earns from investments enriched by World War One.) Under Elia Kazan's brilliant direction, tensions build relentlessly to what seems certain to be a tragic conclusion. Feeling rejected by his father, Cal seeks out his mother who left her husband and sons years ago. Kate Trask (Jo Van Fleet) now owns and manages a brothel in another town nearby and has become wealthy. Cal climbs aboard a freight train so that he can visit her frequently. Over time, they develop mutual respect and affection. Finally the climatic moment occurs and then....

The acting throughout the cast (with one exception) is outstanding. Van Fleet received an Academy Award for best actress in a supporting role and Dean was also nominated for the award as best actor in a leading role. Burl Ives and Albert Dekker are noteworthy in their supporting roles. However, Julie Harris (age 30 at that time) seems to me miscast as the teenage Abra. As for Massey, he does the best he can with the role of Adam Trask, recycling elements of his earlier portrayal of John Brown in Sante Fe Trail. Most of Steinbeck's fiction is set in the Monterey area, as is East of Eden. Kazan and his cinematographer, Ted D. McCord, took full advantage of that uncommonly lovely area when shooting various exteriors.

Having seen what can be done to enhance the clarity of image and sound in other classic films such as The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938), I eagerly await the DVD version of East of Eden. Hopefully, its "special features" will also be special.

James Dean's Greatest Film
Alright its about time that the DVD for this movie came out. The movie itself I thought was incredible well made. The story was beautiful and some of the scenes were perfectly staged.
And of course there's James Dean. This is his best film. "Rebel Without a Cause" was good but over-done and a little rediculous at times, and Dean wasn't in "Giant" enough to warrent it being his best work.
All in all a great movie and the DVD needs to come out. ... Read more

Reviews (12)

Good ideas, bad form
Pinky shows the conflicted views of a black woman passing as white. We see her search for some identity while she is torn between the world of blacks and her heritage and the world of whites, those who persecute her ancestors.However; the film was a bit dull. There was an overall lack of action, and the ending was abrupt and poorly constructed. The ideas behind the movie were good, but the plot was almost too simple, and her internal conflict was resolved too quickly. They also neglected to show her lasting emotions for Tom, and it is unrealistic to think that she could drop contact with Tom so quickly and recover so well.

Pinky was a landmark film
And "Pinky" came 10 years before "Imitation of Life."

The criticism of casting "lily-white Jeanne Crain" for the part of Pinky is quite unjust.

I was born and raised in the South and and I saw nothing unbelievable in casting Ms. Crain in this part. Genetics - skin color, eye color and other physical characteristics are capable of being quite capricious.

The fact that this film was banned in the South should tell us something about the power in this movie "Pinky."

The movie itself was a wee bit over-acted as old dramatic flicks sometimes are, but I really enjoyed it. A lot of substance in the message - about how to define what we really are and how to define what makes a family and the power of unconditional love to heal and to save.

But my favorite character was Ethel Waters (the Aunt who raises Pinky). She was an incredible actress and completely believable in this role. Humble, gentle, self-sacrificing and ever-loving - while enduring her thankless jobs as nursemaid to a grouch and washwoman who worked for pennies - her part stole the show.

The white Negro and the concept of freedom
To be Negro does not always mean to be black, nor a black skin need remain black any more, nowadays...

Elia Kazan's irreverent and pervasive humour marks skin colour as a matter of the person's spiritual choice, between the world and one's own self-the spirit of temptation is again a character test ...

A natural white Negro is pressed (tempted) to forget (lose) oneself , stay on the better part of the world, reserved for "whites", and avoid the pains of conflict -- the same way professionals (not only actors) assume roles, wear new faces, cut new teeth and confront the lights with broad, lying smiles, thus becoming "images"...

The tragedy is that in one's quest to avoid pain, sometimes will suffer deep, and weep more, inside a persona encrusted on person and soul...

Human rights of a white Negro.

But in this film we follow a naturally white Negro girl who returns home (a town in the South), now a graduate nurse. She is angry, --- and her education allows her enough freedom to express her anger articulately --- for the social predicament in which she has to re-lapse, as a poor Negro woman, despite her brilliant education.
But, because of her rampant anger and her acquired quick reflexes to the challenges she faces, she fails to see other, fundamental aspects of life, that transcend the race-difference concept through which she experiences life, so painfully. This counts as a failure to communicate with her grandmother and friends. ("Nobody hates you, Pinky!")

This is one main theme of the story: Concepts, as the title of the film itself, ("Pinky") which is the name of the heroine, true to the reality of her skin colour, which can fit either of two races.
So, a white woman (as Pinky is taken for on appearance) is pressingly offered two white males' unsolicited patronage to exit the territory she is not supposed to walk about alone, in the Negro neighbourhood, for fear of molestation by the blacks. But when Pinky says she is in her very neighbourhood, there immediately arises the threat and violence of molestation by the white "protectors"-- the end concept being that woman is the Negro of the world, in any case...

These two women figures, the white mistress and her black faithful servant have evolved closely together, despite their colour, their class and even their educational differences. They seem different , but their spirit is revealed to be kindred.

They both care for Pinky, and they succeed to help in her spiritual development in their way.

As the grand mother says,"When you grow so old there is no such thing as a place you have to keep», you move to a unity that has no colour or class concept to keep people apart. So the old teacher, to whom Pinky near forcibly becomes a nurse, bequeaths her estate to her-to compensate her for her service-or/and to give her a reason to fight, an outlet for her anger-or/and to make a place for her in her own world , which she was so tempted to abandon, along with a part of her own self...

Pinky addresses the best in the lawyer who will defend her case in court. And though the trial is seen as preoccupied with the white peoples' view, the judge finally finds for the defendant, and admonishes the town folks who would not tolerate a Negro with substantial property among them.

Justice is done "but the community issues have not been served".

Now that her anger has been atoned, Pinky will answer the question what she really wants to do. She will not marry nor follow away the Yankee doctor she thought she loved, because she will not abandon the "black" part of her soul.

She stays, turns the house she inherited to a nurse school, thus finding her purpose of life.

These are the three main characters of the film, Pinky, the angry white Negro woman, her grandmother, the illiterate voluminous negro Mother who, by serving others and by the pains of her love, has earned wisdom; and the frail, brittle yet imperative white teacher, who little by little has earned the wisdom of the essential, to know the truth.

There are many lesser but memorable characters in the narrative:

The loving fiancé, who is ready to make big sacrifices for his love, Patricia, even when he discovers that she is Pinky, a Negro. He is a big-city man, ready to move away from "home", to another state, to avoid gossip about the "dark background" of his woman; there they can both "lose themselves" among an indifferent crowd, who need not know them...

Educated member of the community, the lawyer, a southern gentleman with a deep sence of honour, loyalty and duty, who makes sure Pinky receives a fair trial, and finally full justice, although he doubts if other matters of the community have been served by this confrontation.

There is also the vulgar and greedy, ripe yet dumb "belle", who would have inherited, who makes a spectacular point of putting Pinky in her place, of a coloured woman, in case she had forgotten or anyone else had not noticed...

There is the pathetic Negro clever dick, who "lives by his brains", serving the powerful and oppressing the needy.

Most comical is the scene of the arrest, by two policemen, who haste to protect a lady (Pinky) from the blacks that mistreat her. But when they are told that Pinky is black herself, their attitude becomes equally violent to all, regardless of sex...

As vivacity and functionality of a society is not just a matter of a corpus of legislation on oh Human Rights, but these qualities are measured by their fruits, the alleviation of pain and the incorporation of more individuality, we can reconsider the Yankee externality in comparison with the southern holistic interest in the person, when this is achieved of course, as in this story.

Kazan in this film must have had a hilarious ball, by miss- arranging all social preoccupations and certainties, north and south, to add at the end that people need love as they also need the law.

An elaborate, well articulated with real issues and dilemmas film by the genius director Elia Kazan, whose every film is a host of critical social matters, demanding philosophical examination.

Accept who you are...
I love the fact that when she came back home that she didn't hide her heritage. Pinky, who called herself Patricia when 'passing' as white. Came back to her hometown to see her grandmother and a patient, (who is her grandmother's employer) tells her to accept who she is. And that the black side of the town needed medical attention,and schooling young,black women to
become nurses also.

TO THINE OWN SELF BE TRUE...
This is a landmark film, as it tackled issues that were considered to be taboo at the time. Race hate, miscegenation, and passing for white are some of its themes. Unlike "Imitation of Life (1934), which in its own fashion dealt with the themes of passing for white and the unequal opportunities afforded blacks, this is not a sentimental tearjerker of a movie. Rather, there is an undercurrent of anger and righteousness that permeates it, and rightly so. It is a hard edged, no holds barred type of film. There is nothing sentimental about it.

Controversial in its time, the film is about a young bi-racial woman known as "Pinky" (Jeanne Crain), sent up north by her southern granny (Ethel Waters), so that she could receive an education. While up North, she begins passing for white inadvertently, as that is how she is apparently perceived, and makes no move to correct that perception. She studies and works hard, becoming a nurse. She then meets white Dr. Thomas Adams (William Lundigan), and they fall head over heels in love. He has no idea, however, of her background and knows her as "Patricia" not "Pinky".

Pinky, leaving him behind, returns home to the South one last time to confront her past and her personal demons. She ends up meeting bigotry head on, as down South where Pinky is known she is treated as blacks are treated, and does not like it one bit. It hardens her resolve all the more to return North and continue passing for white. She would like nothing better than to put as much distance as is possible between herself and her racial heritage. Helping out her grandmother, however, she ends up playing nurse to Miss Em (Ethel Barrymore), a crotchety, crusty, and ill eighty year old former plantation owner who has come down on hard times.

When Miss Em dies, she wills her estate to Pinky, creating a controversy that rocks the town when the will is challenged by distant relatives, the Wooleys. They are outraged and claim that the "colored girl" used undue influence over the elderly Miss Em. This galvanizes Pinky to stand up for her rights, enduring a mockery of a trial. Moreover, when Dr. Adams comes looking for her, Pinky finds herself taking a position with respect to their relationship that is a revelation to herself.

This is a film that at the time was highly controversial, due to its themes. It was a film that was certainly daring for its times. Why they cast a white woman for the part of a biracial character may seem puzzling to those of us in the twenty first century. I presume that this casting was mandated because there were love scenes between Pinky and her fiance, Dr. Adams, and this type of scene would have been forbidden in those days, if the actress cast for the part of Pinky were other than white. While a bi-racial woman was cast for the role of Peola, the woman who passed for white, in "Imitation of Life" in 1934, it was a safe bet to do so, as she had no love scenes with which to contend. Notwithstanding the casting of Jeanne Crain in the role of Pinky, this film was cutting edge stuff in 1949.

Wonderful performances are given by the entire cast. Ethel Waters, Jeanne Crain, and Ethel Barrymore all received Academy Award nominations for their roles in this film, though none of them won. While Jeanne Crain's casting was a stretch for her as an actress, she did give it her all, letting the viewer sense Pinky's discomfort and angst over the racial divide. Ethel Waters is superb as the hard working, humble soul who did the best that she could for her beloved Pinky. As the imperious Miss Em, Ethel Barrymore was perfectly cast and gives a superlative performance, imbuing the character with a humanity that a lesser actress may not have. All in all, this is a movie that lovers of classic films should enjoy and one that should be in any serious movie lover's collection. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Marlon Brando's famous "I coulda been a contenda" speech is such a warhorse by now that a lot of people probably feel they've seen this picture already, even if they haven't. And many of those who have seen it may have forgotten how flat-out thrilling it is. For all its great dramatic and cinematic qualities, and its fiery social criticism, Elia Kazan's On the Waterfront is also one of the most gripping melodramas of political corruption and individual heroism ever made in the United States, a five-star gut-grabber. Shot on location around the docks of Hoboken, New Jersey, in the mid-1950s, it tells the fact-based story of a longshoreman (Brando's Terry Malloy) who is blackballed and savagely beaten for informing against the mobsters who have taken over his union and sold it out to the bosses. (Karl Malden has a more conventional stalwart-hero role, as an idealistic priest who nurtures Terry's pangs of conscience.) Lee J. Cobb, who created the role of Willy Loman in Death of Salesman under Kazan's direction on Broadway, makes a formidable foe as a greedy union leader. --David Chute ... Read more

Reviews (106)

AFI top 100-8 Oscars -Best Picture 1954-Best Actor Brando!!
With the famous quote: "I could-ha been a contend-ha. I could have been somebody!!"
AFI (American Film Institute) voted "On the Waterfront" into the top 100 films in the last 100 years. Winner of 8 Oscars including the "BIG 3" - Picture, Director-Elia Kazan and Actor-Marlon Brando. This Remastered Sight and Sound DVD gives us an outstanding Full-Screen Black & White Classic presentation. Fantastic cast - Marlon Brando, Lee J. Cobb, Rod Steiger, Karl Malden And Eva Marie Saint (first starring role).
Shot on location "On the Waterfront" in New York / New Jersey during the winter time. Actually done outside on location!! This added to the realism of the rough neighborhoods surrounding the waterfront.
In Summary: Terry Malloy (Brando) an ex boxer tries to fit into the longshoreman union "On the Waterfront". Treated as a patsy by Union Leader crook (Cobb) and protected by his brother (Steiger) Union strong arm. He is set up in a union troublemakers death. The sister (Saint)of the slain troublemaker and Priest (Malden) try to befriend Terry (Brando) into betraying the corrupt union boss and turning states evidence.
A brilliant cast performs flawlessly (especially the famous "Contender Scene between Brando & Steiger")and shows us the rough, crude world of the waterfront of the 1950's. This DVD is a remastered Black & White picture and sound presented in a Full Screen format. Many extras including "Contender" explain and reveal many background facts regarding this Classic Film.
This movie shows us what was happening "ON THE WATERFRONT".

The quintessential Brando performance...
Marlon Brando's performance alone justifies watching this movie. Without mentioning any of On the Waterfront's other merits, it could be given 5 stars simply because of his brilliant interpretation of his role as Terry Malloy, the confused and inarticulate former prize-fighter. In addition to Brando's performance, On the Waterfront features great performances from the other actors, a compelling and realitic situation, and some really moving scenes and speeches.

In On the Waterfront, Terry Malloy (Marlon Brando) moves from an apathetic, cynical bum to a fighter who stands up for what he believes in. At first, in order to get work, Malloy cooperates with the corrupt union (it really is more like a gang) that runs things in the waterfront area. Although the union has murdered several people, the police cannot break it up because nobody has the courage to stand up and testify against it. But by the end, through the guidance of a passionate priest and the beautiful, idealistic daughter of his murdered friend (Eva Marie Saint, who gives an excellent, Oscar winning performance in her first movie), Malloy finds the courage to testify against the union's boss, Johnny Friendly.

Admittedly, the film does have its faults - the soundtrack, for instance, is overdone, and sometimes the director, Elia Kazan, gives the impression that he is trying to make certain scenes very deep (which strangely enough takes away from them). Overall, however, On the Waterfront is a great film - a classic in the true meaning of the word. Again, it is worth seeing for Brando's performance alone!

I LOVE THIS FILM
It is unfortunate that it took Brando's death for me to realize the acting genuis he was. In this movie he brought forth such a vulnerability that you wanted to root for him. His acting is brilliant, I can understand why he won an Oscar for this performance. I now know what true acting genius is, it was Brando. Highly recommend this movie.

Somewhat dated but still compelling classic drama
I recently re-watched Elia Kazan's ON THE WATERFRONT in honor of its late star, Marlon Brando. His performance as Terry Malloy is often considered one of his greatest (and he won an Oscar for it to back it up), and there is no doubt that this is a performance of spontaneity and great emotional realism that must have awed a generation of filmgoers who watched him. He truly brings his character---a former boxing champ tortured by pangs of conscience as well as disappointment---to authentic life in a way that is somewhat heightened yet always convincingly down-to-earth.

As for the film surrounding this great performance, it has inevitably lost some of its power since it made a splash in the '50s (during the height of McCarthyism, and during which Kazan testified before the House Un-American Activities Committee and named names), but it still offers an emotionally compelling experience overall. If sometimes Budd Schulberg's screenplay seems a tad too overwrought (particularly in the final scene, too overtly symbolic), Kazan and his cast never allow it disintegrate into tiresome preachiness. If Brando's performance can be said to be "extraordinary" (and it is certainly something to watch), the other actors are hardly upstaged. I don't know if Eva Marie Saint really deserved an Oscar for her performance here, but perhaps that has more to do with her more conventional character than with her performance, which is good enough. Karl Malden, as the activist Father Barry, fares better: he is convincingly noble and impassioned in his role as, arguably, Malloy's conscience. And Lee J. Cobb is also good as the corrupt Johnny Friendly: while the script does not necessarily develop human sides to the character, Cobb admirably makes him convincing nevertheless rather than merely a one-note snarling villain.

Despite its topical origins---this film is often seen as Kazan's justification for testifying at the HUAC---the plot still resonates pretty strongly today. I mean, who wouldn't feel the same internal dilemma in the same kind of situations that Malloy gets into in this film? Feeling like you should do your duty as a citizen in the face of great corruption, and yet afraid of what might happen to you if you do? I think everyone can at least understand Malloy's tortured conscience in this movie---maybe, other than Kazan himself, Marlon Brando understood it most of all---and perhaps that is why, despite some of its more dated elements, this film continues to endure. Notwithstanding its political background, ON THE WATERFRONT remains a gripping drama to this day.

Greatness Never Flags
When director Elia Kazan unveiled ON THE WATERFRONT in 1954, both critics and the public agreed that this was a special film. This is a rare enough phenomenom and repeated viewings over the decades indicate that this film truly deserves to be labeled with that often overused 'great' tagline. Part of the reason why the audiences of the 50s loved OTW was not just the superlative acting of Marlon Brando as Terry Molloy, Eva Marie Saint as Edie or Rod Steiger as Terry's conflicted brother Charley, but rather the very feel and sound of the Hoboken waterfront were faifthfully recreated to the extent that they formed a tonal subtext. Have you noticed that OTW is not a quiet movie? In nearly every scene, one can hear the raucus shriek of railroad cars and ship clanghorns dolefully reminding us that sound can be used to place the actors both spatially and aurally. Remember the scene when Terry tries to explain to Edie his own role in the murder of her brother? As soon as he opens his mouth, a ship's whistle begins to shriek so his words are drowned out. We may not be able to hear, but the look of Edie's face tells us that she heard.

It is too easy to toss around memorable quotes of which OTW abounds: the "I coulda been a contenda" speech, for example. But this film is not great because of them. Rather, OTW is great because it does what all great movies manage to do: to engage us in the fate of its stars. When Brando is beaten to a pulp by Johnny Friendly's (Lee J. Cobb) thugs and has to stagger to reach the warf to report to work and thus break the stranglehold of the crooked union boss on the workers, we can feel each agonized step that Brando takes. It is only the great movies that allow us to feel pain like that. ... Read more

Reviews (43)

Not just a Chick Flick!
I hope no one in Hollywood will attempt to remake this movie because it can't be done. I don't think any actors can duplicate the emotional realism and "connection" to the audience that Warren Beatty and Natalie Wood so effectively conveyed. I think this movie is far superior to any film adaptations of "Romeo and Juliet."

I mean, I'm the straight guy raised on Sci-Fi, and I practically wept when this movie ended. It's that real. In a way it's not possible to remake this film given the, er, "relaxed" social norms of today. Most young people watching this film will probably just shrug and say, "so what's the big deal?"

SITG is a snapshot of another era, yet all (or most) of us can relate to the question: "what if?" or "what might have been" when we look back at growing up and our love lives, no matter what era you grew up in. This film is not representative of my generation, neither with regard to the era in which it was filmed nor the era it depicts, yet I was transfixed by it. If you can relate to that kind of experience then this film will touch you like no other film.

SITG helped launch Warren Beatty's career. Natalie Wood was, of course, already a star but this was arguably one of her most sensational performances. I always felt she sort of overdid her performances a bit--eye and facial movements seemed over exaggerated, etc., but physically and emotionally she still owns the screen. Many have already pointed out that her tragic death was foreshadowed in the scene in the bathtub and at the waterfall (and the boat on/from which she died was named, yep, you guessed it).

I actually like Pat Hingle's (Commissioner Gordon from the Batman films) over the top performance as Ace Stamper: "You want that? You got it boy! I'll get it for you! This world is your oyster!" He's not so much a character as a characature--in this case he's the emotional polar opposite of Jim Backus as the father in "Rebel Without A Cause."

Complex, raw, brilliantly acted. Leaves you with many questions. When Deanie hugs Bud Jr you almost know that she's thinking "what if?" while projecting her love to a pure and innocent child. I just can't believe that encounter was the end and the two of them said goodbye forever. The film begs for a sequel yet no sequel can do it justice. It can and should stand alone.

A Genuine Masterpiece, Art Sometimes Imitates Life to a T
Opinions on this movie and its message are as varied as the backgrounds of the people who've seen it. Though the story took place back in the roaring 20's, I was growing up with very much the same parental and social pressures in the early 80's, so I identify strongly with this movie. Bud Stamper (Warren Beatty) and Deanie Loomis (Natalie Wood) are two teenagers madly in love during the roaring 20's in smalltown Kansas. They are so emotionally and physically overwrought that it's all they can do to keep from experiencing full-blown intimacy. They don't dare, because their parents, peers, and neighbors know everything that goes on and, what they don't, they manage to find out somehow. The social repercussions can be disastrous.

Deanie comes from a poor family, and her mother is an overbearing woman who corners her about her relations with Bud, because "no nice girl" has provocative feelings for a man--not even after marriage. Deanie's guilt and frustration can be seen in the way she hugs her pillow and lays suggestively alone in her room, then goes to blow kisses to her photos of Bud above her dresser and follows this with prayer.

Bud is a high school football hero, the son of a rich oil baron who wants him to go off to college and excel in business. All Bud want's is to run his father's ranch and be happily married to Deanie. His father won't hear a word he says, and also gives him bad advice as to how to deal with his pent-up physical desires toward Deanie by having a tryst with the town tramp.

This is a costly mistake, as it makes Bud physically ill, and Deanie, pushed over the edge by having to read Wordsworth's poem about the end of love, begins to go through the stages of a mental breakdown. The words tell her something she doesn't want to hear, and the fact that everyone in school is talking about Bud's infidelity only makes it worse for her.

The signs that Deanie isn't well are very apparent, but her stubborn and overbearing mother (Audrey Christie) keeps denying that something is wrong, even after Deanie's shocking outburst in the bathroom. Her mother badgers her so much about her purity that Deanie finally snaps when asked, "Did he spoil you?" Deanie begins to scream to the delight of her nosey neighbors that she's as pure and virginal as the day she was born and runs to her bedroom naked, screaming that she hates her mother. This is what leads Deanie to the climax of her final cave-in.

Bud's sister Ginny is the town trollup, but she is more sympathetic than despicable once you see what a selfish and domineering man Ace Stamper (Pat Hingle) is. It's very obvious, before losing control, that the repressed Deanie is fascinated by Bud's uninhibited flapper sister, and it shows in her deteriorating behavior. Deanie cuts off her hair and puts on a slinky red flapper dress as she sings a song she heard Ginny warble, and goes to the school dance with a friend of Bud's to show him she can be worldly too.

Her plans for a reunion are ruined by the ultimate rejection Bud gives her after turning a cold shoulder to her even before his romp with Juanita, and she would be successful in trying to drown herself in the town falls if not for the local villagers pulling her out in time.

Deanie is placed in an institution and Bud goes off to college, intentionally flunking out, and he takes up with a girl whose parents own a pizza place. The stock market crash of '29 hits hard, and it's not until Bud's father jumps out a hotel window that he can finally be at peace and do what he wants--except for being with Deanie.

Two and a half years have gone by, and Deanie is ready to go home after her time in the institution. She's engaged to a fellow patient who is going to be a doctor, but her psychiatrist urges her to see Bud once more for closure before she weds. Her mother is against this and tries to convince her friends not to indulge her, lying that Deanie was upstairs crying in hysterics. For once, her father takes her side and tells the girls where they can find him.

The end is pivotal to the film, and it shows how much more Deanie has grown up than Bud. Peace at last, and the hope of going on to something new. This film is a tragic love story, but it's also a phoenix rising from the ashes. It's powerful and mellowdramatic, but this is the genius of Elia Kazan's direction. Most of the film is seen through Deanie's eyes, from her young, misty-eyed idealism to her adult realizations that her hero is nothing but an overgrown boy with burdens he's brought on himself. Even the way they're dressed speaks volumes about the changes each of them has made.

This film is terribly moving, and if you grew up in the same repressive climate, you will get a lot out of it. Even if you haven't, this is such a beautiful and perfectly done account of so many people's reality, distorted a bit because most people see things in their own way. One particular performance to pay attention to is Barbara Loden as Bud's irrepressible sister Ginny. There is more to this character than a lot of people are giving significance to, and Loden turns out a highly impressive performance. I urge you to add this video to your library as it is more than worth your time, and make sure you have a kleenex handy. Something tells me you're going to need it.

A little too soapy ...
I like Natalie Wood, and her performance here is outstanding, but I found this film to be a little over-the-top and mirrored soap operas in some ways. First, the whole psychosexual drama, (or overdrama). Second, the fact that NONE of the parents in the film listened to their teenagers. When Deanie's mom talks to her, she doesn't give her a chance to confide any of her own feelings about Bud. Mom just says, "Don't do this, don't do that, and be good little girl." Even worse, Bud's dad just talks and talks, totally oblivious to what Bud wants out of life. The parents are what drive these two teens crazy, not their hormones.

I must say that I was pleased with the ending though. (Spoiler ahead). I halfway expected for Deanie and Bud to get together at the end of the film somehow, but Elia Kazan didn't wrap it up with a little bow at the end. A point in his favor. I like the close with Natalie repeating the lines from Wordsworth's poem in her head too. That's a powerful reminder that she has grown up, she is mentally stable, and she's ready to move on with her life.

Glory in the Flower
Splendor in The Grass, Directed by the late Elis Kazan is undoubtly something most of us who look at love and life idealistically have all gone through. Based in rural Southeast Kansas in 1928, this passonate love story about two young lovers who are troubled by the sexual urges they have for one another and the sexual represson of this age. Warren Beatty makes his film debute as "Bud" Natalie Woods's character "Deanie" love interest. "Bud" is torn between his love and sexually desire toward "Deanie" and his father who is pressuring him into attending Yale to get his degree. "Deanie" as a young "good girl" is urged by her mother to not let a boy "spoil" her. Reluctantly, "Bud" agrees to his fathers wishes and breaks his relationship off with "Deanie" sending her into a "psychopathic" spin. The lesson to be learned is that life will go on no matter how much heart break you suffer, "What Though nothing can bring back the hour of splendor in the grass." Absolutely a wonderful love story with a surprise ending. I found both Warren and Natalie's preformance at such a young age exciting, knowing what outstanding preformers they grew up to be. Bring your girlfriends and watch this movie!!!

The Perils of Puberty
The quotation from Wordsworth's poem from which William Inge derived the title of his screenplay (for which he received an Academy Award) offers an insight into the tendency of young people to ignore or minimize the importance of certain decisions they make which can have significant long-term impact on their adult lives. This is essentially a sad movie in several respects as Wilma Dean Loomis (Natalie Wood) and Bud Stamper (Warren Beatty) struggle without much success to establish a stable relationship while in high school. Both are goaded (driven?) by parents who set ambitious goals for them which frustrate and confuse them. By nature, most adolescents live day-to-day, measuring their happiness in terms of immediate and sustainable social acceptance. For them, tomorrow will somehow take care of itself. Bud seems to live an unexamined life whereas, early on, Wilma seems emotionally vulnerable to self-doubt. Bud is content to get along by going along whereas Wilma becomes increasingly more dependent on carefree Bud. As directed by Elia Kazan, most of the main characters in this film are (to varying degrees) dysfunctional. As a result, communication between and among them is seldom successful. This is especially true of the relationship between Bud and his father (Pat Hingle), perhaps most evident while Bud struggles with his life at Yale.

While seeing Splendor in the Grass again recently, I was much less sympathetic with Wilma and Bud than when I first saw it decades ago. Oh sure, that is partly explained by my current age and all of my life experiences as a father and (now) a grandfather. But I also now think that the film (because of Inge's script and Kazan's use of it) too often substitutes melodrama for drama. There is almost no personal development by Bud throughout the film. Wilma recognizes that after seeing him for probably the last time. In contrast, she seems to have learned a number of important life lessons (albeit at a substantial cost) and now possesses -- as the film ends -- a worldly wisdom which Bud will never obtain. This is a brilliantly crafted soap opera. Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, it was immensely popular because the emotional world it explores was then so accessible and because that world was presented so simplistically. My guess (only a guess) is that most of today's teenagers will find this film to be quaint. A few may find it endearing. For me, it retains some of its charm but not much else. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

More timely now, perhaps, than when it was first released in 1957, Elia Kazan's overheated political melodrama explores the dangerous manipulative power of pop culture. It exposes the underside of Capra-corn populism, as exemplified in the optimistic fable of grassroots punditry Meet John Doe. In Kazan's account, scripted by Budd Schulberg, the common-man pontificator (Andy Griffith) is no Gary Cooper-style aw-shucks paragon. Promoted to national fame as a folksy TV idol by radio producer Patricia Neal, Griffith's Larry "Lonesome" Rhodes turns out to be a megalomaniacal rat bastard. The film turns apocalyptic as Rhodes exploits his power to sway the masses, helping to elect a reactionary presidential candidate. The parodies of television commercials and opinion polling were cutting edge in their day (Face in the Crowd was the Network of the Eisenhower era), and there are some startling, near-documentary sequences shot on location in Arkansas. An extraordinary supporting cast (led by Walter Matthau and Lee Remick) helps keep the energy level high, even when the satire turns shrill and unpersuasive in the final reel. There's an interesting parallel in Tim Robbins's snide pseudodocumentary Bob Roberts: both these pictures have almost as much contempt for the lemmings in the audience as for the manipulative monsters who herd them over the cliff. --David Chute ... Read more

Reviews (36)

The Dark Side of Mayberry
A Face in the Crowd, director Elia Kazan's criminally underrated 1956 political melodrama, tells the all-too plausible story of Lonsome Rhodes. Discovered by a local reporter (Patricia Neal) while spending time in a jail cell for vagrancy, Rhodes (Andy Griffith) is a drifter whose folsky charisma quickly makes him an instant celebrity. Soon, Rhodes has taken Neal as his lover and has his own television show where he gives out his home-spun opinions to a charmed nation. However, Rhodes is hardly the benevelolent country bumpkin that he presents himself to be. Instead, he is a power hungry meglomaniac who uses his fame to promote a fascist political organization. Much as he seduces a niave nation, he seduces a teenage cheerleader (Lee Remick) into being his bride. By the time that Neal and cynical television writer Walter Matthau come to realize the monster they've helped unleash on the world, it may indeed be too late.

If this film was too easily dismissed when released, it has become all the more plausible and relavent in recent years. Certainly, the current popularity of talk radio can be seen as a fulfilment of the film's prophecy. However, a more disturbing parallel can be made between Rhodes and the recent emergence of several political leaders whose popularity has been based less on their abilities and more on the "straight-talking" personalities that they skillfully display to a public disillusioned with "politics-as-usual." (Ross Perot and Jesse Ventura being just two of the more obvious examples.)

Best known for working with certifiably great actors like Marlon Brando and James Dean, Elia Kazan assembled a cast for A Face in the Crowd that may appear unlikely at first. Who could ever imagine a dark political drama starring Walter Matthau and Andy Griffith -- two seemingly polar opposites best known for their comedic efforts? However, it is a risk that plays off beautifully. Matthau's urban glumness stands in perfect contrast to Griffith's country-corn routine and both are such relaxing presences that even the most sophisticated of viewers will find it hard not to be drawn into a false sense of security that makes the film's ultimate revelations all the more disturbing.

A Face in the Crowd was Andy Griffith's first film and he gives an amazing performance that will surprise anyone who knows Griffith only as the sheriff of Mayberry. While still displaying his own unique charisma, Griffith also doesn't shy away from revealing -- subtly but surely -- that Lonesome Rhodes is a truly evil man. What's now forgotten is that even as Sherif Andy Taylor, Griffith's performance had a certain edge. If the people surrounding him were funny, Taylor was always a no-nonsense authoritarian who luckily had a good sense of humor. In his performance as Rhodes, Griffith gives us a portrait of Andy Taylor without the sense of humor or the grounding-influence of family. Its an amazing, all-too realistic performance that makes one wonder what Griffith could have accomplished if he'd continued to explore that edge.

Though Griffith dominates the film, the supporting cast is also strong. Along with the aforementioned Matthau, Patricia Neal gives a strong performance and brings both a subtle class snobbery and a repressed sensuality to her role. Her scenes later in the film, when she is forced to confront what she has set loose on the world, are devastating. Though her role is tiny, Lee Remick is both sexy and sympathetic as Griffith's child bride. Interestingly, Kazan doesn't present her character as a total innocent. Perhaps much like the film's America, if Remick is seduced and abused Rhodes, it is a seduction and degregation that she, at least partially, seems to desire.

After naming names during the red scare, Kazan often seemed to be drifting. Shunned by Hollywood, Kazan's films soon became obsessed with justifying his own actions. His last two great films -- On the Waterfront and a Face in the Crowd -- both deal with the McCarthyism of the 1950s. If Waterfront was Kazan's justification for informing, A Face in the Crowd is Kazan's attack on the men who perpatrated the Red Scare. Rhodes becomes Kazan's horrific imagining of Joseph McCarthy. It as if after justifying his own choice to name names, Kazan now wanted to make sure it was understood that he was still opposed to the excesses of the times. All-in-all, its a self-centered way to view the power of cinema. However, personal motivations aside, Kazan's need to justify himself produced at least two great films. On the Waterfront is an acknowledged classic. A Face in the Crowd deserves to be.

Timeless Message
Seeing this film once was enough for me. Andy Griffith is completely obnoxious. He laughed, screamed and hollered so much it got on my nerves. Maybe a character like that could become a huge success with the public in the 1950s, but I don't believe he could now.

Aside from that, this movie has a message that may seem old to us now, but is timeless nonetheless. Lonesome Rhodes is discovered in a local jail. His hokey, aw-shucks, down home manner of speaking turns him into a national icon. He has tremendous influence. He brings a lady onto his television show whose house has just burned down, and the money starts pouring in. Haven't we all heard this type of situation before?

The later part of the movie Rhodes was advising a politician on how to get votes. I couldn't help but think of Bill Clinton. In fact, Lonesome Rhodes reminded me of Bill Clinton during this part of the movie. Mr. Manipulation.

I haven't given away the ending. See it for yourself.

Everyone should see this.
There are so many truths--hidden and not hidden in this extraordinary film about a guy who is truly a "nothing" becoming powerful enough to influence a presidential election.

The way he manipulates the public will remind you of Bill Clinton. The fact that he's a complete zero will remind you of George W. Bush.

This is really trivia in a movie this important but what a revelation that Andy Griffith started his career as a brilliant actor! What a shame he spent the rest of his career at the level of a Don Knotts or a Jerry VanDyke. The next time I see an actor who is truly awful I'll consider that maybe the right part just hasn't come along.

A Great Movie, But It's Not Just About Him
This is a great movie with incredible performances by Andy Griffith, Patricia Neal, Walter Matthau, Tony Franciosa, and Lee Remick. It's over the top at times but that's okay because it makes it all the more frightening. Don't be fooled, however. This isn't just about Lonesome Rhodes. This about Beany, the Patricia Neal character (hope that's the right name). It's about a priviledged young woman who is mersmerized by a man who she perceives to be "his own man," and how seductive that perception is. When she's forced to see who he has become, she realizes she made this monster, she created him, she imbued him with qualities he never really possessed, and she nurtured him. He had no real definition when they met, beyond her fantasy of him. And at the end of the movie he still has no definition beyond his power to persuade. He has no idea what the senators and politicians are even talking about. But he knows he's powerful, and that power has been intoxicating to HER for a long time. And that power becomes very, very dangerous. But she gave him that power and she is devastated when she realizes she's the only one with the power to take it all away. This movie is about sex, desire, warped perception, delusions of all kinds, and the danger of manipulation. Don't be too sexist or you'll miss what's happening with the female lead in this classic story.

Griffith proves to be a true actor
The movie, A Face in the Crowd, was one of the best movies I've ever seen. I cannot believe that Andy Griffith did not get nominated for an Academy Award for his performance. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Looking for a benchmark in movie acting? Breakthrough performances don't come much more electrifying than Marlon Brando's animalistic turn as Stanley Kowalski in A Streetcar Named Desire. Sweaty, brutish, mumbling, yet with the balanced grace of a prizefighter, Brando storms through the role--a role he had originated in the Broadway production of Tennessee Williams's celebrated play. Stanley and his wife, Stella (as in Brando's oft-mimicked line, "Hey, Stellaaaaaa!"), are the earthy couple in New Orleans's French Quarter whose lives are upended by the arrival of Stella's sister, Blanche DuBois (Vivien Leigh). Blanche, a disturbed, lyrical, faded Southern belle, is immediately drawn into a battle of wills with Stanley, beautifully captured in the differing styles of the two actors. This extraordinarily fine adaptation won acting Oscars for Leigh, Kim Hunter (as Stella), and Karl Malden (as Blanche's clueless suitor), but not for Brando. Although it had already been considerably cleaned up from the daringly adult stage play, director Elia Kazan was forced to trim a few of the franker scenes he had shot. In 1993, Streetcar was rereleased in a "director's cut" that restored these moments, deepening a film that had already secured its place as an essential American work. --Robert Horton ... Read more

Reviews (82)

the Wicked versus the Tender
Shortly after Blanche Dubois (played by Vivien Leigh) moves in with her sister Stella for temporary shelter, Stella's husband (Stanley, played by Marlon Brando) begins to suspect that Blanche is a fallen woman who's on the run and masquerading as a respectable lady. Stanley then decides he'll stop at nothing to destroy Blanche's hopes for a normal life. What happens in this movie will have you glued to the screen from start to finish. ASND has realistic , powerful acting from Leigh, Brando, Malden and Hunter .......This film makes my Top 5 Movies of All Time. If you consider yourself a "tender" person (as opposed to wicked/ruthless) then do yourself a favor and watch ASND. It's a primal reminder that the Gentle/Tender should always be watchful of their archenemy, the Wicked! It's no wonder ASND won so many Oscars. Blanche is a highly demanding role for any actress and Vivien Leigh steps up to the plate and hits a grand slam with her perfect performance ...and yes, Leigh won the Oscar for Best Actress. Even more amazing is the fact that Leigh is from the U.K. and Blanche is pure Mississippi ex-plantation debutante

AFI's Great Love Stories: #67 A Streetcar Named Desire
In "A Streetcar Named Desire" Marlon Brando as Stanley Kowalski gives what is clearly the best acting performance not to win an Academy Award (he lost to Humphrey Bogart in "The African Queen"). Vivien Leigh as Blanche DuBois, Kim Hunter as Stella Kowalski, and Karl Malden as Mitch all won in their respective acting categories. Years later, with "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" this same thing happened, with both of the ladies winning that time around.

Tennessee Williams' play is one of the major works in American drama, especially after the Second World War, winner of the Pulitzer Prize for drama in 1947 (with Jessica Tandy as Blanche the only cast change from the film; although I should point out Leigh opened the play in England on stage). Although Brando's performance is riveting, representing the new "modern" method of acting at its best, the play is really about the mental and moral disintegration of Blanche, a neurotic former Southern belle whose genteel illusions are no match for the brutish realities of her brother-in-law, Stanley. The fact that Hollywood changed the ending to reflect conventional morality remains one of the great sins in movie history, but I have always thought the fact Brando's legendary stage performance was essentially preserved on film offsets that in the final judgment. Leigh's performance is often seen as an extension of the Scarlett O'Hara role that made her famous, but of course now we know her personal life was as tortured as the character she was playing.

I heard an argument once that "A Streetcar Named Desire" was, at least on some level, a reponsible by Tennessee Williams to Eugene O'Neill's play "The Iceman Cometh" (then again, I have heard the same argument made, more forcefully to be sure, regarding Edward Albee's "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?"). O'Neill's classic play deals with the human need for illusion and hope as necessary weapons against despair. If you are teaching American drama in the 20th century, then using these plays in any combination you might like could be quite provocative for your students.

Personal aside: I was in New Orleans once and actually saw the bus named "Desire," which had replaced the city streetcars. There was certainly an odd little moment.

Most significant line: It does not seem right to talk about romantic lines with any of these characters, but there is a line that is one of the greatest character epitaphs ever. Of course, this is at the end where Blanches says to the doctor, "Whoever you are, I have always depended upon the kindness of strangers." I have usually found that at some point in a play there is a line that defines the character so well it could serve as their epitaph. This line is as clear an example of what I am talking about as you could ever hope to find.

If you like "A Streetcar Named Desire," then check out these other films on the AFI's list of 100 Greatest Love Stories: #48 "Last Tango in Paris" and #89 "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" Why? The former give you Brando in another sick love relationship and the latter is the other great American drama on this list.

some of the best the screen has ever seen
Vivien Leigh, well-known for her portrayal of Scarlett O'Hara in 1939's "Gone With the Wind", plays Blanche, a Southern belle as fragile as Scarlett is strong. In a way, Blanche is what Scarlett would have become if she had watched her mother die. "Death is very pretty compared to dying," she tells her sister Stella, who only came home for the funeral.

Stella is pregnant and married to Stanley (the inimitable Brando) who both abhors and is fascinated by his sister-in-law Blanche (and not just in a platonic manner.) Blanche in turn is interested in meeting new gentleman callers, as her great love once killed himself (as she tells us in one of the most riveting scenes in movie history.) Interesting note: the delivery boy she flirts with is Mickey Kuhn, who once played Leigh's nephew Beau in GWTW.

Blanche is so fragile that she has no choice but to break. Unfortunately, others hurry her down that path. Perhaps the worst thing one can do, it seems, is depend on the kindness of strangers.

Brando at his finest
With obvious rekindled interest because of the recent death of Marlon Brando, this "one of a kind" film is making a deserved comback. Always thought to be a classic, the comparisons to Brando's acting then, and what we get now from most stars makes this film even more intense. Vivien Leigh digs deep for her emotional performance, and she's miles ahead of anything she did in Gone With the Wind. The rest of the cast is superb also.

Intense and Sexy
This is a perfect date movie. It is intense, sexy, and packed with intellectual and emotional whallop. The actors are interesting and beautiful to look at, and the subject matter is mature and provoacative. It is the perfect setup for getting to know someone better, and a great warm-up for intimate activities to follow, or for super-intense action like you get when you put into practice the teachings of the "New Sex Now" dvd.

God bless you Marlon, you were a true subtle hunk! ... Read more

Reviews (15)

A romatic yet cynical look at the nature of 'Revolution'.
I really enjoyed this film directed by Elia Kazan with a screenplay by John Steinbeck (his only credited screenplay). Their vision of the Revolution is at once both impossibly romantic as well as bitterly cynical. The romance lies in the pure-hearted desire of Emiliano Zapata to bring justice and land reform to 'the people'. The cynicism is expressed in the constant betrayal and manipulation of the Revolution by men who are either weak, self-seeking, or who have absolutely no commitment to justice or to 'the people. Then there is the character of Fernando, deliciously played by Joseph Wiseman, the professional revolutionary who will never be satisfied with the attainment of objectives but only in incessant foment and agitation (in real life, Kazan detested doctrinaire Stalinists). Brando gives a brooding performance as the illiterate Zapata who inwardly burns at his inability to read. Anthony Quinn won an Oscar as Zapata's older brother, Eufemio. Virtually all of the characters in 'Viva Zapata' are ground down by the realities of constant struggle of revolution. We are not to have illusions about the nature of Revolutions. And yet, Kazan and Steinbeck still leave us room to believe that the ideals of revolutionary struggle in themselves can be endowed with nobility and worthiness. The cinematography by Joe MacDonald is tasteful as is the music score by Alex North.

Viva Kazan!!
A great film directed by Elia Kazan, written by John Steinbeck and scored by Alex North. These are the ingredients of a great film. Brando plays the brooding Zapata in fine style. Joseph Wiseman a standout as a corrupt revolutionary and Alan Reed as Villa.

Anthony Quinn shows us all how to win an Oscar when your screen time is so little. Quinn, as Zapata,s, brother takes the viewer to another world of acting a role, his performance is a knockout.

Louis Gilbert has a soul for the times..and this is a good chance to see " Margo" in one of her later films.Quinn,s execution scene is one of the best two minutes put on film in a very long time. No video collection should be without this film.

Visually opulent in Black a White CP

Revoulationary spirit lives on
I've read the screenplay by John Steinbeck and recently watched this movie again and I have some problems with it. The casting was not the best but I guess names sell movies. I know all the reviews are glowing 5 stars but I was less than convinced that Brando was Zapata. First of all that wimpy mustache has got to go. The real Zapata had a mustache for the ages. On the other hand the actor who played Porfirio Diaz at least looked a bit like him.Brandos terrible "Mexican accent" made me cringe throughout the movie. I know everyone says his acting was great but his crediblity was damaged right out the gate for me. If a movie is in English just speak English. Is the "Mexican accent" supposed to make it more authentic? I don't think so. Anthony Quinn would have probably made a better Zapata but instead he was relegated to the supporting actors role. Anthony Quinn, who spoke with such fervor and eloquence throughout the movie stole many of the scenes. The script by Steinbeck was much better and the movie adaption was loosely followed and often out of sequence. These personal observations aside I did think it was a good movie. The film is a romanticized version of Zapata(and Pancho Villa)and is full of interesting cinematography. One of my favorite scenes is when Zapata is brought into an ambush and later his lifeless body is left in town for display. As the dead Zapata lies in the plaza beneath him the water is flowing out of a pipe; the symbolism of water as the basis of life continues to flow, meanwhile the dialogue centers around how the man is not dead but will continue to live in the hearts and minds of the people. There are many memorable moments in this classic movie that compensate for the poor but prosperous Hollywood casting. All in all it is worth seeing again and could serve well in a film study class.

Amazon has lost it here
This is a CD of the movie soundtrack and all that are posted below are movie reviews.

A huge fresco of Mexican Revolution.
Actually it was this film that triggered my interest on the Mexican Revolution. I've seen it many times and always found new details to take into account. As I read more and more on the subject my appreciation of this movie increases.
It presents the viewer with a big fresco of the Revolution that convulsed that country for more than ten years.
I admire the strange capacity of the film to show condensed in each scene, many key issues of why and how the Revolution exploded and continue growing along the years, with an immitigable fire.
The first shot, showing a very accurate characterization of President Porfirio Diaz (Fay Roope), gives an inkling of the type of ruler he was. Francisco Madero's (Harold Gordon) personality and idealistic naïveté is also depicted with very few strokes. Huerta's (Frank Silvera) wickedness and treachery too. Above all Emiliano Zapata's figure impersonated by an inspired Marlon Brando stands with an epic height. His ideals, stubbornness, charisma and internal sorrows leading him to the final sacrifice, are shown convincingly. A special mention must be done of Anthony Quinn's superb performance, that entitled him to win the Oscar. He not only has the physique du role, but an internal conviction to give flesh to Eufemio, Zapata's brother, a semi cultured and brave centaur, product of his times and environment. Josefa (Jean Peters) the fiancée and later wife of Emiliano shows all the traits of a high middle class woman romantically requested by a rural hero. The scene played with Brando in the church's atrium is wonderful. The only character that gives a discordant note is the fictional Fernando, representing an addict to revolution for revolution in itself.
The black and white photography is very beautiful. Steinbeck's screenplay has a solid internal coherence that shows along the film.
A Classic not diminished by the more than fifty years passed. ... Read more

Reviews (12)

An Absorbing Study of Anti-Semitism
"Gentleman's Agreement" tells the story of a Gentile writer (Gregory Peck) who poses as a Jew in order to get a good 'angle' on the issue of anti-semitism in Post WWII American society. His method proves almost too effective and causes problems for his young son, played by a very young Dean Stockwell, and in his relationship with a young woman (Dorothy McGuire), who finds out that she's not as liberal as she thought. Peck and McGuire are fine in their leading roles, but the film gains great depth from its outstanding supporting cast. This includes Anne Revere as Peck's no-nonsense mother, Albert Dekker as a tough, plain-speaking magazine boss, Celeste Holm as a fashion writer with a keen insight into human foibles, and Sam Jaffe in a memorable cameo as a distinguished scientist with a sharp sense of humor. The most compelling of the supporting performances, however, is that given by the great John Garfield. He plays Peck's life-long friend, who has just returned from war-time service in Europe. His role is actually not much more than a cameo, but his performance is the soul of the film. With painful clarity, he tutors his old friend in what it's like to be Jewish in a way that comes from his own lifetime of experience. He's not bitter or strident. On the contrary, he relates his advice and anecdotal evidence to Peck in a way that is heart-felt, insightful, and matter-of-fact. "Gentleman's Agreement" may not be the definitive treatment of this important social issue, but I think the film holds up very well after more than a half-century. The picture won Academy Awards for best director (Elia Kazan), best picture, and supporting actress Celeste Holm. It's not a perfect film, but its heart is definitely in the right place. This picture can be a rewarding experience for movie fans who appreciate fine acting and serious story-telling.

Stuffy Oscar Winner gets same transfer second time around!
In "Gentleman's Agreement" Gregory Peck stars as Philip Green/Greenberg, a reporter impersonating a Jew in order to gain first hand knowledge into anti-Semitism. At first, snubs seem quite subtle and harmless. But as the film progresses the seething underbelly of dissension against the Jewish faith begins to rear its ugly head. Dorothy McGuire costars as Kathy, his waspish girlfriend who struggles with her own built-in anti-Semitism. John Garfield offers a startling and poignant cameo as Dave Goldberg, while Celeste Holm turns in another fine performance as Anne Dettrey, the only cast member seemingly untouched by prejudice. The film also costars Anne Revere, as Philip's mother, and Dean Stockwell as his son. Despite excellent source material from the novel by Laura Z. Hobson, and the directorial reigns handed over to one of Hollywood's best, Eli Kazan, the resulting film is heavy-handed and tiresome in spots. The plot never quite surpasses its very theatrical staging and the performances, particularly McGuire's are stiff and uninspiring.

Fox already released this title as a movie only disc, without the making-of featurette. Now, as part of its Studio Series "Gentlemen's Agreement" continues to suffer from digital anomalies which plagued the original transfer. However, whereas the old transfer seemed to falter during the latter half with excessive film grain and shimmering of fine details, it is the first hour or so of this re-release that is riddled with edge effects, aliasing, pixelization and digital grit. As far as extras are concerned, this DVD offers little more than a brief back story featurette, audio commentary and theatrical trailer.

Superb DVD presentation of classic film
Kudos to Fox Home Entertainment for a very satisfying DVD presentation of "Gentleman's Agreement," the 1947 Best Picture Academy Award winner. The film itself is deserving of all of the accolades it received, both upon its initial release, and in all the years since.

I'm assuming that most of the people considering a purchase of the DVD have already seen the movie, so I'd like to focus here on the incisive commentary by Richard Schickel, long-time film critic for Time magazine. Stars June Havoc and Celeste Holm are also heard on the track, recorded separately, and while their remarks are interesting, this is Schickel's showcase, and he runs with it.

As it happened, I wound up listening to this commentary over the course of three nights. This kind of gradual exposure allowed me to really absorb Schickel's observations.

The critic is no sycophantic fan of "Gentleman's Agreement." While he admires its aims, and much of its execution (primarily the achievements of director Elia Kazan), he has some reservations about the script, and some of the acting.

He demonstrates a complete understanding of the conventions of 1940s studio filmmaking, but doesn't always accept the necessity that "Gentleman's Agreement" had to adhere to those norms. I didn't always agree with Schickel's criticisms of the film, but they certainly made me think, and I never found them off-putting.

Schickel wisely underscores the contribution of John Garfield, whose training in The Group Theater gave him a more realistic acting style than anyone else in the film. "Garfield seems to be acting in an entirely different movie," Schickel says, and it is not a criticism. The Garfield performance leads on a direct path to Marlon Brando's Stanley Kowalski in "A Streetcar Named Desire," also directed by Kazan, and Schickel makes this clear. It is at this point that he makes the single most fascinating statement in the entire commentary, which I won't spoil for you here. Suffice it to say that it's something that may strike you as intuitive, but put into this context, becomes something of a revelation.

I've seen Web-based reviews of this DVD that criticize Schickel for doing too much plot summary. I disagree; he doesn't merely give a blow-by-blow account of what's hapening. He mentions plot points, but goes on to offer an opinion about how well the moment is conveyed, or about what real-life parallels the film is touching upon, or something else that is valuable to the viewer.

DVD commentaries just don't get much better than this.

The other extras on the disc, among them an AMC backstory presentation and a selection of 1947 newsreels, are nice additions.

An interesting look at anti-semitism
Winning the best picture Oscar for 1947 comes the story of a journalist who poses as a jewish man for six months to find out how deep anti-semitism runs in New York City. When the film came out, it was considered controversial. I say more power to the film and was glad it was made. However, keep in mind the film is over 55 years old and while the issue of racism is valid even today in some parts of the country, it comes across as somewhat outdated. The saving grace is the script. It manages to inform without pontificating and really hits on a surprising amount of aspects. Example of a great exchange:
"Why, some of my best friends are jewish"
"And some of your best friends are methodist also. But you don't make a point of saying that, do you?"

The romance between the two leads is strained and the chemistry works better when thay are odds with each other. This is the first time I've seen a movie with Dorothy McGuire and while I'm sure she is good in other films, she comes acroos as wooden here. Particularly in contrast to Celeste Holm, who eats up the screen.

I also liked the back story behind the movie. There is an interesting AMC featurette included on the special edition. It very informative and the story of what happened to actor John Garfield is tragic. While this film does not resonate as a "classic" it is a very enjoyable, watchable film. Those collecting Oscar pics or who want a relativley tame film (by todays standards) about the aspects of racism could do worse.

Groundbreaking Look At Prejudice
Elia Kazan's 1947 film Gentleman's Agreement is the story of a journalist who is employed to write a series of articles on the scourge of anti-Semitism in America. The journalist, Phil Green, is played by Gregory Peck and in order to get his information first hand, he poses as Jew. He encounters all forms of prejudice and his blooming romance with the niece of his publisher takes a hit. Kathy (Dorothy McGuire) insists that she harbors no ant-Semitic feelings finds that through her association with Green, that such prejudices bubble underneath the surface. John Garfield gives a standout performance as Green's lifelong friend, Dave Goldman, who has experience prejudice his whole life and has learned to be philosophical about man's failings, but still is willing to fight against blind ignorance as noted in a gripping scene where he is denied a room in a swanky hotel by an unbearable snooty desk clerk who refuses to admit the reason he won't give Dave a room is that he is Jewish even though it is obviously apparent that is the reason why. Celeste Holm won the Best Supporting Actress award for her role as a fashion writer and socialite who is attracted to Green and heavily pursues him. The film was ground-breaking at the time of its release as it was the first Hollywood movie to tackle anti-Semitism head-on. Prior to World War II, it was an unspoken rule that anti-Semitism could only be hinted at even if a film like The Life of Emile Zola was about it. But over the years, the film has lost a lot of its power and it isn't aided by the fact that many of the characters are stock profiles that exude a one-dimensional feel. Despite that fact, it still is an important film and one that can still teach a lesson as well as entertain. Mr. Kazan won the first of his two Best Directing Oscars and the film won Best Picture in 1947. ... Read more