Reviews & Ratings for
The Grapes of Wrath More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 16 of 25:

[11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25]

Index

242 reviews in total

---

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
The Great American Novel, 13 June 2008

Author: Martin Bradley (MOscarbradley@aol.com) from Derry, Ireland

Often cited as a prime example of 'The Great American Novel', John Stienbeck's "The Grapes of Wrath" was hailed more for tackling unpalatable political truths at a time when the nation as a whole would rather have buried its head in the sand, than for its literary merits, though they are many. In filming the book in 1940 producer Darryl F Zanuck and director John Ford pulled no punches; even seventy years on this extraordinary film still has the power to shock as American moves ever closer to the possibility of recession: it is just as relevant today as it ever was.

It's about the Great Depression, essentially about the Oakies forced off their land, initially by nature itself, thereafter by the banks which took over their share-holdings, and about their migration to California. It's a bleak, harrowing film with no real happy ending. Speeches by Tom Joad and his mother about 'how he'll be there when ever there is a fight so hungry people can eat' or about how 'they can't lick us 'cause we're the people' may have the whiff of optimism but 'not licking us' isn't quite the same as putting bread on the table. Consequently, the film's success has largely been critical and while Ford and Jane Darwell won Oscars the film itself was overlooked in favour of "Rebecca", (an oversight rectified the following year when Ford's far inferior "How Green Was My Valley" won Best Picture).

In the hands of a lesser director it is unlikely the film would have been quite so grim. It's certainly not flawless; there is a penchant for Fordian sentimentality and the characters of Grandpa and Grandma never rise above caricature, but it's still remarkably faithful to Stienbeck's original and thanks, in the main, to Gregg Toland's superb black and white cinematography a good deal of it has the look of a documentary.

It is also very well acted. John Qualen's Muley is a beautifully etched study in despair and John Carradine has one of his best roles as 'The Preacher' who finds himself in the unlikely role of a union leader. At the centre, of course, are two great performances. Henry Fonda brings his gangly, liberal integrity to the part of Tom Joad which fits him like a glove while Darwell's stoic, Mother Courge of a Ma Joad rises above the sentimentality and the penchant for caricature into the realms of the truly tragic.

---

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
one of the most unsentimental films of the 'Golden Age' of Hollywood, possibly Ford's best, 5 April 2008

Author: MisterWhiplash from United States

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

For a motion-picture made in 1940, this one gets the depression probably more on-target than I have seen in any American work (Bound for Glory might be a short bit behind). This is due to two factors, one a little more obvious than the other. Steinbeck's book (still, sadly, unread by me, though other works like the Pearl are amazing on their own) is called the definitive account of the poverty-stricken mid-American experience in the depression, and it probably is. It allows for a very literary sensibility to form about such an American family like the Joads, who are the kind of folk that you'd think, if there wasn't immediate cynicism to be had with the like, politicians would be addressing first and foremost in speeches as the 'working man' and 'American family'. Sadly ironic then that the film had controversy for depicting some of California as corrupt, and that years later there would be charges on John Ford and Steinbeck of being un-American/communist for their respective work. Steibeck knew what he was doing, that's the short of it.

The second part is that Ford and David O. Selznick had such faith and dedication to the material in making it so straightforward that none of the possible melodramatic fat would be noticeable. This is so pure a work of American familial drama that any sense of sentimentality seems to be stripped away (as opposed to sentiment, there is a difference, as also noted by Scorsese re: Paths of Glory). Considering the cast, such as stars Henry Fonda and John Carradine- plus the quietly scene-stealing performance of Jane Darwell- it almost has the feel here and there of (pre) neo-realism, at least as far as Hollywood could take it. There's such a matter-of-factness to the turns that are taken with the Joads on their journey across the southwest to California- the bulldozers, Tom coming home after killing a man, the deaths of grandpa and grandma (the latter just in time to see California), and the subsequent trials and tribulations of working on near slave wages, that it builds the drama unexpectedly. You want the Joads to keep on going because they've earned the emotional investment honestly.

Only towards the very end, perhaps, does a tinge of the alleged communist &/or socialist stuff leak in, but it's not without some reason. By the time Tom Joad (Fonda) has gone through what's happened, his eyes have grown more empathetic than ever for those around him. His final speech, however full of the low-key gusto that calls out for attention, is effective because of what it means for the character, not even so much for the society at large. What's preceded this spirit for the working man has been very simple, the kind of style that many fans of the movies love Ford's work. It's a road movie essentially, and the story keeps on moving along to point after point that hits home what the Joads, and for that matter other families who've ventured out to California, have to deal with. And while there are some scenes where Ford and his DP Greg Toland move the story along in some stylistic flourishes (i.e. the montage of signs and roads, and the bulldozers in the flashback), the script doesn't allot for any time to take any more breathing room than necessary.

And as far as an adaptation- even without reading the book- it's quite wonderful, particularly where one can see that a scene or a moment that probably had profundity in the wording is given an equal amount of emotional weight by what isn't said (the example I'd give is before the Joads leave Oklahoma, the night before, as Ma is in the house by herself, the somber accordion music in the background, as she looks at old pieces of memories and throwing them bit by bit into the fire- all around it's a masterful scene). And on top of there being a sense of truth in the source to screen (with, of course, the necessary cuts and omissions for 1940 production code standards), the performances are golden. Fonda was rarely better, exemplifying all that was good naturally to him as a persona into his character (this and 12 Angry Men his quintessential socially conscious 'Average-joe' performances); Darwell, as mentioned, takes up the screen in her role of a career; Carradine skates between being truly dramatic and campy, and comes off as, simply, intense.

It's a gripping saga, and it may even surprise those who are expecting it to be an 'old-fashioned' tale of dust-bowl suffering during the depression. It is actually old-fashioned, in the most honorable way a picture from the period can be. A++

---

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
one for the ages, 21 November 2006

Author: tsf-1962 from United States

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

At first glance John Ford, a life-long conservative Republican, might seem an odd choice to direct the film of one of the most famous social protest novels in American history. The assignment was a success because Ford approached the novel more from the viewpoint of its human drama than its ideology. There simply isn't a more beautiful black and white film in the American canon. Gregg Toland's cinematography is exquisite; it's no wonder he went on to shoot "Citizen Kane" and "The Best Years of Our Lives." Except for the fact that it uses well-known stars instead of non-professional actors, "The Grapes of Wrath" has in embryonic form all the stylistic hallmarks of Italian neorealism. Henry Fonda gives the performance of his life as Tom Joad, and Jane Darwell won a well-deserved Oscar for her portrayal of Ma Joad, the eternally stoic earth mother who keeps the family together in the face of insurmountable odds. My favorite character, though, is the renegade preacher, Jim Casy, played by John Carradine at the height of his acting career before his eventual slide into grade-Z horror and exploitation movies. The film's depiction of the persecution and oppression the Oakies faced in their epic trek to California is especially relevant in connection with the plight of undocumented workers in present-day America.

---

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Starkly realistic..., 16 May 2006

Author: Jem Odewahn from Australia

...Well, as starkly realistic as Hollywood could get in the 1940's.

Ford's adaptation of Steinbeck's amazing social novel is terrific. The atmosphere of the source material is brilliantly maintained. The thing that impressed me most was that the film wasn't glossed over in the Hollywood studio-style. Yes, there are some omissions in the plot to comply with the Hayes Code, but it's still very dark and realistic. The hungry children rummaging through the waste piles for a sliver of food is shockingly compelling, as are the machines sent out to destroy the farmer's houses, crushing them easily as the onlookers watch in disbelief. It feels authentic.

Henry Fonda is perfectly cast as Tom Joad, the hero of the tale. Fonda's underplaying and sense of the 'everyman' suit his character perfectly. The supporting cast are terrific, and they are not glossed-over, either. Jane Darwell appears to have just jumped off the pages of Steinbeck's epic as Ma Joad. So many families made the journey from the Mid-West to California, the land of supposed 'milk and honey' (which the Joad's find out is not true), but the Joad's struggle feels very personal to us.

Very depressing in content- I had to watch this film in portions simply because it overwhelmed my emotions so completely. But the Great Depression was an awful event in America's history, and it's portrayed so accurately here. Students should watch this at school to realize how lucky they've got it now, and how dangerous it would be to fall into a recession once again (it would be different now, but still have the same effect on morale). This is draining to watch, but ultimately uplifting. Ford's direction is always convincing; Steinbeck's great work is in fine hands. The black-and-white photography emphasises the bleakness and realism.

10/10.

---

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
political drama, 21 July 2005

Author: RanchoTuVu from Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico

Evicted from there land in Oklahoma, victimized by the double whammy of the Dust Bowl and the Great Depression, the Joad family loads up their dilapidated truck and makes the journey to California, joining thousands of others in the westward migration, seeking work as pickers in the California groves. John Ford doesn't let us forget what it's like to be destitute as the film details the belittling attitudes they endure at every stop along the way, eating away at whatever pride they have left. And when the torturous journey claims the life of Noah Joad (Frank Sully), the eldest of the family, his haunting and memorable burial along the side of the road provides one of the film's most riveting scenes. Clear social and economic distinctions, police brutality, Red baiting, blatant injustice, and the glimmer of hope offered by the New Deal are all mixed up to make this epic saga of an American family.

---

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
An epic of the 1930's, 31 March 2003
Author: JSanicki

As a film of the 1940's, the Grapes of Wrath does a wonderful thing. It shows us humanity in only the way that someone like John Ford could show it. Primarily known as a director of westerns, Ford helms this project with all the love and care you'd expect from someone entrusted with such a great and beloved work of American Literature.

Even seen as a bit dated, the film harkens back to a time in American History when the government was literally throwing people off their land just so they (the government) could have more and more room for agriculture and farming purposes. So, the Joad family like millions of other families in the midst of the Great Depression flees to California. They do this simply because they believe that work, not to mention a better life will be found there. However, once they arrive in California the Joads begin to see just how wrong they were with so many of their assumptions.

This has to be the definitive Henry Fonda film. Fonda plays Tom Joad with sort of an everyman type of quality. However, Fonda lost the Best Actor Oscar to James Stewart in The Philadelphia Story. The Grapes of Wrath received two statuettes that year, Best Supporting Actress for Jane Darwell's iconic portrayal of Ma Joad, the undeviating strength at the core of the Joad clan and Best Director for John Ford (his second Oscar after 1935's The Informer). The Grapes of Wrath was also nominated in the categories of Best Original Screenplay, Best Film Editing and Best Sound Recording, losing in all three instances. The film lost Best Picture to Alfred Hitchcock's Rebecca.

All in all, this is an important piece in a director's legacy of great films. John Ford would follow The Grapes of Wrath with Oscar wins for both 1941's How Green Was My Valley and 1952's The Quiet Man, not to mention what I consider his greatest film ever, 1956's The Searchers with John Wayne.

My rating: 2 and a half stars

---

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
A work of art, 19 February 2002

Author: John Langbein (medrjel) from Dixie, USA

Yes, it's a book I think we all had to read in a High school English class, but that doesn't mean it's bad.

This movie was used in a sociology class I took in college, and I instantly fell in love with it. It's a great story, with a great cast. It's a bit dated in it's style, but it really overcomes it's shortcomings. Check it out!

---

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
The Film that Launched Henry Fonda, 26 October 2001
Author: jyoung-11

It was Fonda's alliance with John Ford that enabled him to kick start his career in superstardom status. John Ford, as he did with John Wayne, seemed to lift Fonda's career to another level by documenting the story of the American west on screen. It's not surprising that Fonda, Wayne, and even James Stewart paid a tribute to him in a documentary in the 60's.

---

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
in certain situations poverty and laziness go hand in hand - GRAPES OF WRATH IS NOT ONE OF THEM!, 3 May 2000
Author: L W Findley (bfindley)

Henry Fonda at his absolute best as paroled "Young Tom Joad" 60 years ago. A classic. A classic tale of the American style caste system - the wealthy attempting to remain so. And the masses driven from Oklahoma to what is believed to be a "Promised Land" in search of greener pastures. Yet finding only continued class struggle more so than was EVER to be found in Oklahoma. As stated - poverty and laziness being automatically synonymous.

ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE! I would highly recommend "Grapes of Wrath" for those who are inclined to believe so.

---

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Stunning, 14 July 1999
Author: billf-3 from bay area, california

The leitmotifs in both the cinematography and the film score are second to none. For a nonfictional depiction of this era, see _The Plow that Broke the Plains_, 1936, a USDA documentary which attempted to explain the Dustbowl to its embattled victims. Even more than _Triumph of the Will_, it served as THE model for American documentary filmmakers for several decades thereafter.

---

---

Page 16 of 25:

[11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25]

Add another review

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Plot synopsis	Ratings
Awards	Newsgroup reviews	External reviews
Parents Guide	Plot keywords	Main details
Your user reviews	Your vote history