The Prize Winner of Defiance, Ohio (2005) User Reviews

The 2 hours just ZIPPED by

[konover · 8/10 · 22 September 2005]

I went into a screening of this film cold. I didn't know anything about it except that it starred Julianne Moore. I walked by a poster of the film on the way into the theater and was horrified, thinking it was going to be a chick flick.

Well, folks. When I go into a theater and I can't take my eyes off the screen and the movie goes by without me ever even checking my watch, I know I've seen a good movie.

Moore plays a woman with 10 children. Although her husband works as a machinist, she basically provides for the family by winning all sorts of contests for all kinds of big prizes, including big cash prizes. The woman is a master of winning these things. It's the one thing that's keeping her family together. She's definitely the hero and the one person everyone looks up to. Definitely an inspiration. I don't want to spoil anything, so I'll stop at that, but I will say that Moore does a great job with her role.

Moore's husband in the movie, played by Woody Harrelson with emotional conviction and healthy dose of humanity, has a drinking problem and is a big source of tension inside the household. To the movie's credit, it doesn't paint the father as the typical one-note, evil, hateful,abusive, drunken father. There's a real character in there who loves his wife and kids and the movie does its best to portray him as fairly as possible despite his drinking problem and fits of rage.

The movie does bring out strong emotions from its audience, not quite a tear-jerker but close. It's not the sort of movie I would watch again and again because it's not my type of film, but I was glad for having seen it.

There's good acting, good pacing, a good story and possibly most important of all, it is told in an entertaining, gripping fashion. I wouldn't be surprised to find out if there is an Academy Award nomination in store for Julianne Moore and Woody Harrelson.

At the end of the movie, there was a nice round of applause from the audience. I told one lady, "Wow, the two hours just went..." and I snapped my fingers. She said, "It just zipped by." I also heard several different people talking as I left the theater, "Did you like it?" "Yeah, it was great."

Go see it.

how can you not love Julianne Moore?

[jknight-17 · 8/10 · 29 September 2005]

Contesting, a trend popular in the 1950's and 60's, is now all but forgotten. Women across the country used their wit and wordplay to win thousands of dollars by writing slogans for companies to promote their products. Julianne Moore stars in "The Prize Winner of Defiance, Ohio," as Evelyn Ryan, one such contester who uses her talents to keep her family fed despite their abject poverty. The film co-stars Woody Harrelson as Evelyn's husband Kelly Ryan, a man struggling with alcoholism and his ill-begotten fate as a factory worker. Unlike most, Evelyn is not just an occasional contest winner. Her knack for jingle writer provides for her family of twelve and her winning is proportional to her families needs. Throughout the course of the film, her role as breadwinner creates friction between she and her husband, which Evelyn (Moore) manages with incredible grace and constant optimism. Indeed, Moore is radiant in this role and perfectly cast. Harrelson's performance is equally engaging and his moments of depression and rage are the ideal compliment to Moore's steady courage. Oscar Nominee Laura Dern gives an notable performance as a member of the Affadaisies, a group of contesting mothers which Evelyn befriends. Dern is quirky and lovable, despite her very small role.

"Prize Winner" is adapted from a book of the same name, a real life account of Evelyn Ryan's life. The book is authored by Ryan's daughter Terry, who appears in the film and is also re-incarnated as her younger self in the character Tuff, played with strength by Ellary Porterfield who makes her feature film debut. Terry Ryan admits thats her book's "intent was to bring her mother back to life..." and certainly the film is also a vehicle for this. Thankfully, and unexpectedly, the movie does not suffer from over sentimentalization, thanks to brilliant script adaptation and direction on the part of Jane Anderson who, although lacking feature film experience, creates honest and captivating scenes that beautifully depict the Ryan's family life. Anderson is so expert at using symbols within the film to shape an audiences opinion of the characters, it is barely perceptible on the first viewing. The film is beautifully layered with symbols of motherhood and Catholicism, none of which are so obvious as to interfere with the lighthearted moments that make the film captivating. Anderson deftly transitions from the high points of the family's success to the terrible depths of their despair, capturing the audience as they share in the Ryan's joys and sorrows. Anderson's hard work in showing the families dynamic is most evident however in the cohesiveness of the Ryan children, all of whom look like a potential genetic pairing between Moore and Harrelson, and all of whom seemed enthusiastic about their work in the film. when asked what he learned from his more experienced co-stars, Robert Clarke, who plays the Ryan's oldest son Dick, mentioned Harrelson's multitude of approaches to a scene and Moore's constant professionalism. Ellory Potterfield (Tuff) commented that for her, working with Moore emphasized that "there is no acting, only reacting."

Writers, Directors, and child stars aside, it is Julianne Moore who brings the role of Evelyn to life and real humanity to the film. "She was an extraordinary woman who lived an ordinary life," Moore said of the real life Ryan at the movie's premier in Manhattan, "I think anyone can relate to trying to raise a family." The Prizewinner also bears the distinct mark of Producer Robert Zemeckis, and this film is moderately reminiscent of the Academy Award winning Zemeckis feature, "Forest Gump." As seen in Gump, Zemeckis is fond of the triumphant underdog, the everyman who perseveres thanks to their unique outlook. Zemeckis's initial reaction to the book was that "it seemed like an almost impossible but wonderful story...it was Evelyn's unshakable optimism and her love of life- the spiritual quality that allowed her to get through a life of hardships."

While Prizewinner is certainly not a new take on the BO-flick , the film relies heavily on it's more than capable cast and is a very sensitive portrayal of what must have been a remarkable woman. Although there are a points at which the storytelling is inefficient, and the exposition clunky, (at points it borders on downright awkward) I left the theater feeling as the though the movie could have told more stories of the Ryan's. I wanted to know more of their lives, and it was that fascination with the characters and events of the film that left me satisfied. The film is as pithy and poignant as one of Evelyn's jingles. Ultimately, Julianne Moore's stoic portrayal of Evelyn is so breathtaking and passionate that any audience member left unmoved should check their pulse.

Inspirational

[POSTPRODUCTIONPRINCESS · 8/10 · 19 September 2005]

Julianne Moore was excellent in her role of Evelyn Ryan. The movie is inspirational and thought provoking for women everywhere. A great family story. Woody Harrelson was perfectly cast as her alcoholic husband. He portrayed his character Kelly Ryan with just enough intensity and a touch of humor to not take the spotlight away from Julianne's character. The movie was taken from the book by the same name. It was written by Terry Ryan the daughter of Evelyn Ryan. You can sense the genuine connection between each character. Definitely see this one you will not regret it. There is none of that over the top Hollywood glitz and effects just a great story and excellent acting.

Near perfection

[winkwi · 26 August 2006]

I am an enormous fan of Julianne Moore (ok she should not have done that Hannibal movie, but whose perfect?) and added this flick to my Netflix queue based on that. What a delightful surprise this movie turned out to be.

The story of a struggling mother, her ten children and her boozy, irresponsible husband is a charming, memorable and moving film.

The family is broke and the kids keep coming and Dad isn't bringing home much, and has a strong taste for the drink, what options does a busy mother have? She can't get a job. Married women didn't work back then and with ten children, how could she? Evelyn Ryan, Julianne's character, finds a solution: contesting. Back in the 50's contests were all the rage and if you could write a jingle, had strong alliteration skills, you could be a winner! Never preachy and without a note of false 'triumph' the film is quietly elegant and packs a punch teaching us more about the role of women in that era, the Catholic Church, and dealing with adversity than a dozen Lifetime message movies of the weeks.

Where on earth did this movie hide? If I recall correctly it barely played and was limited to the Art House circuit. Where was the Miramax style campaign that could have easily turned this into a mainstream box office sensation? Was someone asleep at the wheel?

something for baby boomers

[blanche-2 · 7/10 · 13 September 2013]

The Prize Winner of Defiance, Ohio, is based on the true story of Evelyn Ryan, a mother of ten in Defiance, Ohio, who supported her family of 12 by writing winning jingles for contests.

Julianne Moore is Evelyn, a unflappable mother who somehow keeps her cool raising her ten children and dealing with a drunken husband "Kelly" (Woody Harrelson), a machinist who spends all his money on booze. Her pastor advises her to make a better home for him. Thanks, father. Sober, Kelly is a sweet enough man, if ineffectual. Drunk he resents that it is she who supplies what money and food they have and has put a roof over their heads and he becomes violent - not towards her or the children, but by breaking and throwing things. This scares the kids. Once, a near tragedy is avoided when, during one of his tirades, Evelyn falls and the milk bottles break. One more inch and that would have been it for her.

When she wins $5,000 (she had multiple entries using her kids' names, a common practice - one entry per name), she and her husband (Woody Harrelson) purchase a house, but only he signs the mortgage.

Very much, the point made in this film is that things were different for women in the '50s. Evelyn was a clever woman who had a bright future as a newspaperwoman, but she gave it all up for marriage and family. On TV, we see Queen for a Day and Miss America saying she wouldn't vote for a female president because women are "too emotional." The acting is good all around, with Moore the perfect '50s housewife - maybe too perfect - how any woman could hold it together given her life is beyond me. Only a few times do we see her break down and be anything but calm and cheerful. Harrelson is excellent as a weak man who, despite his unhappiness, can't get his act together to give her enough money for the milkman.

Supposedly the film is very close to the book, written by one of the daughters. The vintage elements are wonderful; one really feels as if it is the '50s, with the typewriter, the black and white TV, the old cars, the clothes (some of which belonged to the real Evelyn Ryan).

Very good.

It IS a Prize Winner!

[Butch R · 9/10 · 3 December 2005]

This is one of those films lost in the "tracking" gutter of film marketing. In other words, it was not registering with the public so it got a very small release, and a very small audience. This is a shame because it is a "thinking person's Cheaper by the Dozen". It is a very fine movie that leaves you teared up at the end without a contrived plot. It is a true story with real people and they have real faults-yet they bring out the great and wonderful joys of life found by a woman in what most would consider a terrible circumstance.

If you see one film on sheer recommendation this year, this is the film to see. I own a movie theatre in Kansas City and I am playing the film. We had 7 for the matinée that I sat in on one Saturday afternoon-I emailed my customers on Monday and implored them to see this wonderful film. The next Saturday I had 116 for the matinée! It goes on and on and I hope that it will be one of those undiscovered gems for many people this year.

Eternally Half-Full

[ferguson-6 · 7/10 · 16 October 2005]

Greetings again from the darkness. It definitely helps to understand before viewing this film that the screenplay and source material were written by Terry "Tuff" Ryan, one of the kids in the family. It is really a tribute to Terry's mother, Evelyn, played remarkably well by Julianne Moore.

Evelyn Ryan was a devoted mother, eternal optimist and pillar of silent strength during the 50's and 60's when men were supposed to be the breadwinners and mothers the perfect homemakers. To "help" support her family and keep intact some portion of her own being, Ms. Ryan excelled at contesting by writing jingles and advertising slogans for products. The timing of her victories appear almost heaven sent. One can't help but notice the Catholic overtures throughout the story, including a clueless priest with "breath like daddy's". We do get a true understanding for the strength of this woman and how she passed it along to her 10 children. Family means everything to her.

Woody Harrelson plays the alcoholic dad and he attempts to capture the pressure of being the provider for a much too large family on a machinists wages. Of course the money doesn't go as far after buying a six pack and a pint after work everyday. Even though the film has many aspects of a play, I never had the feeling that Harrelson wasn't acting. He never became Kelly Ryan. He was always Woody Harrelson with bad hair and glasses and a beer belly prosthesis. His violent outbursts and follow-up pleads for mercy all lacked a sense of feeling and this really prevented the film from taking the next step for me.

Expect Julianne Moore to receive Oscar consideration and I really enjoyed Ellary Porterfield (as teenage Tuff). Watch for SNL's Nora Dunn as one of the Girl jingle singers. The movie is not great, but the subject matter is. I will definitely read the book and have director Jane Anderson to thank for that.

THE PRIZE WINNER OF DEFIANCE, OHIO is a great American film.

[screenwriter-14 · 8/10 · 2 October 2005]

Julianne Moore delivers a performance that captures the essence of the American homemaker in the 1950's. Her strength of character and her intelligence which she utilizes to help clothe and feed her family and keep them together virtually anchors the film.

The cast, writing and locations enhance THE PRIZE WINNER, and create an air of authenticity on the screen which moves the story forward. The children, in all their ages, help produce such a powerful film and form the foundation for Julianne Moore's motivation to provide and take care of her family.

Woody Harrelson is tremendous, and visually watching his anger and pain explode at times in the film, makes the audience take note of what it must have meant for a father to fail as a breadwinner in the 1950's.

THE PRIZE WINNER takes you back to that time in American history when the thought of winning and capturing "The American Dream" was one you could accomplish with hard work and talent. Julianne Moore makes the film all the more powerful with her portrayal of an American mother who will use her brains and determination to keep her family together. This film is one of the best to come along in 2005.

The story is a heart grabbing prize winner ten times over

[inkblot11 · 7/10 · 29 August 2006]

Evelyn Ryan (Julianne Moore) is an Ohio mother with a large family and an alcoholic husband named Kelly (Woody Harrelson). Set in the fifties, Evelyn watches helplessly as her husband drinks away the family's funds. No one offers any help, including the church, as Evelyn's despair remains constant. A talented writer, Evelyn turns to the only recourse she has. She enters contest after contest in hopes of winning cash and prizes for her family. She wins a good deal of them, despite the staggering odds. At one point, she is allowed to fill a shopping cart with food to feed her needy family. But, most importantly, she raises her children with zest and care and turns them into truly fine human beings. Near the end of the story, a crisis involving Kelly nearly does them in. What will be the outcome? This wonderful story is a winner in any media. The book was outstanding and the movie follows closely behind. Julianne Moore is wonderful as the saintly woman, seething inside, who saves her family time and again. Harrelson is absolutely outstanding as Kelly, a complex man who seems both to love and loathe his wife and family. The fifties setting and costumes are nicely realized. Do you want to watch an inspirational movie about a lady who never gives up? This is a perfect choice for every occasion.

The luck of the Irish!

[jotix100 · 8/10 · 21 October 2005]

We were reluctant to see this film, but since it was the only choice at the time, we took a gamble that paid off in unexpected ways. First of all, this is a charming film that will win even skeptics, like myself. Director Jane Anderson's adaptation of Terry Ryan's book is a sunny portrayal of a woman who in spite of the monetary problems she suffered most of her life, was a winning individual because of the love she had for everyone, even for the husband, that on the surface, didn't appreciate her.

The story of Evelyn Ryan, an amazing woman from Ohio, comes to lie on the screen in the way the superb Julianne Moore portrays her. Evelyn was going places before she got married; she showed such promise, but her marriage to Kelly Ryan transforms her into a woman that has to perform wonders in order to keep her ten children, fed, clothed and educated. She did a wonderful job with all of them! Evelyn Ryan's talent for winning all kinds of prizes in those contests during the early age of television provides the family with a lot of material things and cash to keep them afloat. While Kelly is spending the money in liquor, Evelyn has to plead with the milkman to extend her credit. Having a strong will and a positive attitude toward life, Evelyn seems to typify that adage, "When life gives you lemons, make lemonade".

Julianne Moore, one of our best actress is perfect as Evelyn Ryan. The film is the surprise it is because of the charisma Ms. Moore, under the direction of Ms. Anderson, gives to the film. Woody Harrelson, as Kelly, is fine as well in conveying the man who seems to have let life defeat him and will not do anything about it. Laura Dern is only seen in a a few scenes, but as always, she is a welcome presence in anything she plays. Ellary Porterfield plays Tuff as different stages of the girl's life.

This is a life affirming film and a tribute to Evelyn Ryan, a woman that in spite of the hard times always found solace in the great family she brought to the world.

could be hard to take

[ematerso · 6/10 · 4 March 2006]

For adults who have been brought up in the kind of household the Ryans lived in, this could be kind of an uncomfortable movie to watch. I think Julianne Moore was terribly miscast and the characterization of Evelyn Ryan is all but unbelievable. She is just too good to be true. The oldest daughter and Julianne looked like they could have switched places. Plus I found that character also unbelievable. The oldest daughter in such a large family would have been a much more visible personality, unless somehow mentally deficient, which I first believed to be the case, until she goes to nursing school. Evelyn Ryan as depicted by Julienne Moore is about a size 8 after having had 10 children and in one scene (the only one showing her actually upset) is sitting with her knees up under her chin! Plus her hair always looks like it has just been coiffed, which probably it had been. Someone like Kathy Bates would have been much better in this role. Nonetheless it was fun to see what great success Evelyn had with her jingles. The kids were all good and the costumes, sets very true to the time. This would also be a good movie for younger adults to recognize just what it was to be a woman in those years. . . and a Catholic one to boot.

Captured The Era/True to the Book

[DANDEE · 10/10 · 30 September 2005]

Don't mean to be too exuberant, BUT this was a heart-warming movie. Woody Harrelson is perfect in his pathetic role as loser. (Consider "Palmetto" and "The Money Train.") He is a winner at this type of role. Yet, in his portrayal of this father of a large family and the husband of a "stand by your man" and "look to the sunny side of life" woman. Woody manages to evoke our pity and makes us reach for understanding. A terrific supporting role.

Julianne Moore, the star of the movie, is the heroine, the mainstay who keeps everything together. Never been out of her little town of Defiance, Ohio(it's real, look it up!) until one of her daughters drives her to Goshen, Indiana. What an adventure! 100 miles from home. A different state, even though its hard to tell. This daughter is the story teller, the author of the best selling book that became a movie. She captures the 1950s, the silly excitement of writing a catchy commercial phrase, and the heroism and humor of a large family growing up in an era long gone.

It will not be a blockbuster. Opening night, which we wouldn't have missed, was in a large, mostly vacant theatre. Everyone clapped their approval at the close. I'm guessing that most of us had read the book before going.

If you're one of those who haven't read the book, don't worry about it. The movie is like a "To Kill A Mockingbird," in that it captures the book beautifully. (Doesn't deny you the pleasure that comes from reading the book; but let's you in on the wonder of it all.) I have a feeling this movie will fade from view within a few weeks. It may also be one of those movies that ends up in the Academy Awards for best screenplay, best supporting actor, best actress. So, don't let it slip away without YOUR seeing it tomorrow or next weekend. These are the kind of movies, and the caliber of performances that are so rewarding you really need to give it a look see. (Then, buy the book!)

"I just have to sit down and have myself a happy cry!"

[moonspinner55 · 5/10 · 3 May 2015]

In the early 1960s, a small town wife and mother of 10, facing hard times, wins a slogan contest and buys her family a new home, but that doesn't ease the volatile nature of her deeply troubled, resentful husband. Julianne Moore is well-cast as real-life perennial contest winner Evelyn Ryan, yet this adaptation of Terry Ryan's memoir is episodic and thinly-conceived, and doesn't allow Moore anything to play but sunshiny perseverance and hopeful determination (which isn't enough to build a tangible character on). Moore's 'cute' narration--often played directly to the camera--sticks out as an artifice, while Woody Harrelson's dark presence as unhappy Mr. Ryan is the movie equivalent of a flat tire. At one point, after a violent situation has resulted in Moore having to go to the hospital, she and Harrelson have a sensual reconciliation in the bathroom that gives off creepy vibes (this perky lady suddenly becomes a masochist). The film's art direction and design are accurate, and Julianne's true grit is admirable, but the story just isn't gripping on a dramatic level. ** from ****

Complete this Jingle with your Life

[tedg · 1 January 2007]

Well, in the past couple years, we've seen all sorts of explicit experiments in visiting the movie past. Some of these are simply through emulation: using old story and acting conventions, perhaps even old cameras, sets film stock and so on. Others visit the past in more clever and indirect ways. "Goodnight and Good Luck" was a thoroughly modern picture set fifty years ago and wearing that era like a costume. Gosh, now that I think, there are too many to list, each interesting in what they choose to use from the past and how they use them as objects or environments.

Now this. Here's a case where the movie is a strange disappointment if you watch movies for the story as the direct carrier of its intent. Its confused beyond what the normal viewer can tolerate and where the filmmaker intends ambiguity and tension we get the impression the film is a failure. But it isn't; it is wholly realized, its just that the message is conveyed on the telephone wires next to the track instead of on the train.

The story: a woman has ten kids and a husband who is a mean drunk. She's completely on her own; her priest (she's Catholic, obviously) and the local police buddy up to her husband against her. She's bright so she enters contests — a previously popular advertising gimmick — and wins enough to save her family (always at the very last moment) from certain disaster. The woman is played by Julianne Moore, and superficially she creates a woman who is defiantly happy no matter what. No matter what, even after negotiating charity from the milkman, then having her lousy spouse push her down breaking all the milk and seriously cutting her. Smiles still — to the hospital and back.

So if you stick with the story, defiance is in her attitude and the prize is this sainthood granted her by her children, one of whom writes the thing.

The narrative experiment and happy, happy gloss is established well before we know she's cursed by what feminists would rebel against. And its that narrative structure that you will find interesting.

Julianne's character is the narrator. Often, she looks directly at the camera and speaks to us. Sometimes, she is on screen twice; once as the narrator and again oblivious to the fact she is being spoken about.

This notion is extended by a gimmick. Her contests mostly are posed on TeeVee shows and there's a lot of overlap in several different ways between TeeVee space and narrator space. That narrator space gets pretty big; One example: our narrator explains how contests are judged. She sits on an envelope and flies to New York, following the entry. Another: she wins a sandwich slogan contest and the sandwich literally comes out of the screen with three dancing women in pastel dresses (like that of our heroine). They commingle with the narrator-TeeVee-contest space which by that time we've accepted as her private refuge from reality.

Later, the house becomes populated not with actors playing the ten children, but the actual children themselves, now grown of course. In this sequence we see the daughter who wrote the book take her mom's typewriter.

Its scads more sophisticated than say, what Woody Allen did in "Purple Rose of Cairo." But it reads.

And it works — if you allow it — because Julianne knows how to place two persons in one role, what I call folded acting; two skins one hers and one ours.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.

Charming, but sad, realistic movie

[emilym-45550 · 7/10 · 26 October 2015]

Definitely a tug-at-your-heartstrings kind of movie. Based out of the 1960's, a woman deals with the struggles of being a stay-at-home wife to an alcoholic, a mother of ten children, and never having enough money to pay the bills and have food on the table. She begins entering contests (which were apparently very common in that time period), and to attest her writing abilities, winning them. The contests put food on the table, pay the mortgage, and buy the milk (often). Through the ups and downs of child rearing, her tumultuous marriage, and her winnings - this movie makes you truly feel like you understand their struggle. It never ceases to amaze what women went through in that era. Amazing woman, great movie. Would recommend.

See this movie

[katyaohagan · 8/10 · 16 June 2006]

I felt the need to sign up and review a movie for the first time, just so there would be more written about this lovely little movie. This is a real gem that seems to have slipped through the net, which is a real pity. I had no expectations and knew nothing about it when I stumbled upon it, and I have been trying to persuade all of my friends to see it since then.

It's one of those rare family movies that really feels authentic. There's nothing hokey here, and no obvious, cheesy dialog. The little directorial flourishes are sweet and unobtrusive and flow naturally with the story, which although sometimes whimsically told, has a deeply moving center.

Julianne Moore deftly handles an extremely tricky role. She manages to convey the complexities in a character that on the surface, and in lesser hands, could read as drippy and one-dimensional. Instead as we see this woman's challenging life play out, we respect her more and more, and truly feel invested in what becomes of her remarkable spirit.

All in all, a wonderful surprise, beautifully executed. See it.

a real complex marriage

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 18 December 2015]

Evelyn (Julianne Moore) and Kelly Ryan (Woody Harrelson) struggle to survive raising ten kids. Evelyn spends all her energy entering every contest multiple times. Kelly is an abusive angry violent drunk. The better she does, the angrier he becomes. It's a chauvinist world where Evelyn has no options and no help from the authorities. Dortha Schaefer (Laura Dern) leads a group of fellow contest enthusiasts and soul mates.

This is great at painting life in a certain era. Moore and Harrelson form an interesting pair. It's not a simple marriage that is all bad or all good. It's an extreme mix bag. Ellary Porterfield is a compelling Tuff. The light whimsical tone does not always fit and a less fluffy tone could deliver the tougher drama better.

Another small beauty

[CJClark1064 · 9/10 · 29 December 2005]

This one came to me in the form of an Academy screener so it's eligible for Oscars - but I had never heard of it - nor read anything about it. So, it's a true sleeper. It's not perfect, but it's a really lovely movie nevertheless and deserves to be better known - certainly by Oscar voters who otherwise might give it a miss. If you are an Academy voter reading this please don't disregard this movie - once again it proves that so many of the smaller American films are the really good ones - small budgets give the director/writers a much better chance, and to have producers looking after you (like Steve Starkey & Robert Zemeckis in this case) is enormously helpful - but one fears that the distributors have decided to bury this gem.....come on guys, give it the chance it needs.

A Genial Film Carried by Moore's Marvelous Performance

[evanston_dad · 7/10 · 9 October 2006]

Julianne Moore is a wonderful actress. In "The Prize Winner of Defiance, Ohio," she gets no big showy scenes, no moments where she acknowledges her own talent by ACTING. There are no breakdowns, crack ups, manias or histrionics. The movie goes down easy and, once the DVD player has been turned off, is just as easy to forget.

But I woke up the morning after having watched this movie thinking about Julianne Moore (and no, not in THAT way). I realized that this disarmingly unshowy performance had a powerful impact on me; through an accumulation of small, quiet moments and carefully crafted acting choices, Moore creates a full-bodied, rich and entirely satisfying character out of material that threatens at every step to descend into irretrievable schmaltz. It's a small miracle of acting.

Unfortunately, Woody Harrelson does not fare as well. His blustery, childish and pathetic father is believable only about 50% of the time. The movie is almost ridiculously one sided, and it's only Moore's expert and disciplined handling of her role that prevents the mother from coming across as too good to be true.

The material is gooey and sentimental, but it's surprisingly less sentimental than I feared it would be. And anyway, sentiment like this I can forgive, since I'm bound to be a slobbery sentimental mess about my own parents some day too.

Grade: B+

Loved Prize Winner

[earlypearly · 10/10 · 5 November 2005]

I saw this Movie and it takes you back to the days before women really had domestic rights. It is not only about a strong and bright woman's struggle to keep her family fed and together it is about why woman started standing up and demanding fair treatment. This is a must see for all. The acting is exceptional. I liked the magic between Julianne Moore and Ellary Porterfield. She is one to watch. A star in the making. Woody was also very good. He played the simple, powerless husband to a tee. That had to be a very hard part to play. Lets get this movie out in full circulation so others can appreciate this excellent show.

Sweet, but very light movie

[tex-42 · 7/10 · 17 March 2006]

Julianne Moore seems almost permanently stuck in the 1950s. However, she literally is the one reason to see this film. As per usual, her performance is wonderful. She plays Evelyn Ryan, a real life woman, who had a talent for winning jingle contests during the 1950s and 1960s. This talent literally kept her family from losing their home.

Some darker themes are explored in the movie, such as Evelyn's husband's drinking problem, free spending ways that leave the family nearly bankrupt and occasional physical abuse. After watching the movie one has to wonder why in the world she stayed with him after all the heartache he put her through. No reason is really given, except that Evelyn was apparently the most tolerant and patient woman in the world.

The only real flaw with the movie is the ending. There really is no reason to see the real Ryan children, and while it must have been a nice treat for them to be in a movie, it really adds nothing to the story.

Hard to believe...but it's all true

[ssweet-3 · 8/10 · 30 September 2005]

If you haven't read the book, at least go see the movie; that will inspire you to read the book! If any of you movie goers are avid readers, you know you are always a bit disappointed when Hollywood has its way with the written word. This neat little movie is no exception. I guess it is difficult to be unbiased since I live in Defiance, Ohio, and grew up with the Ryan kids. We love all the positive publicity that has come from this movie. There are many of us Defiance-ites that truly, absolutely, fanatically love this town. Then there are others that hate it; but I digress... This movie is one of those human interest, true-to-life, feel good movies. There's no "f" word every other line, no frontal nudity, no murders, etc. It's a movie that the family can enjoy together. And, as strange as it may seem in the movie when Evelyn miraculously wins a prize every time her family is in financial difficulty, it absolutely happened that way. I'm not sure I enjoyed the screenplay all that much, but I think most people will be tolerate it. The "asides" the character of Evelyn gives by talking directly to the audience, to me, were somewhat disconcerting, but I guess the director, Jane Anderson, decided to give more information through asides rather than have a narrator. The movie does tend to rely too heavily on the relationship between Evelyn and her husband, Kelly, because the book is 98 % about Evelyn, her love for her family, her talent for contesting, and Terry's (the author) love for her mother. Terry (Tuff)has contracted brain cancer and is not in the best of shape. Visit "The Prize Winner of Defiance Ohio" website to learn more about Terry. Considering the content of this movie and the condition of the world today, I think most of you movie goers will enjoy a 98-minute "escape" from the real world as you are transported back to the '50s. Whether you lived in the '50s or wished you did, you will enjoy the flavor the movie gives to the era. And, one last thought, if you enjoyed the movie, and haven't read the book, you might want to run to your nearest library and pick up a copy. You might be disappointed in the movie, but you certainly won't be disappointed in the book. Long live Defiance!

Setimental Bio Pic Crossed With Feminist Satire

[noralee · 6/10 · 22 October 2005]

"The Prize Winner of Defiance, Ohio" seems like the third in Julianna Moore's period Desperate Housewife trilogy, after "Far From Heaven" and "The Hours." Like those, this film shows the dark side of 1950's pre-feminist suburbia, but with an oddly optimistic spin, as the film veers from satire to feminist expose to sentimental nostalgia.

Baby boomer writer/director Jane Anderson captures the look of the 1950's much more accurately than most period films, which tend to be more influenced by "Grease" and "Happy Days" than reality. It's a pleasure to see a realistically messy house, lawn and piles of laundry. She lays on a bit thickly, but accurately, the pressures a pre-"Feminine Mystique" mother faced. First, there's the traps of those pre-pill ten kids and not having learned to drive a car. There's the pressure from the bank manager not to co-sign the mortgage to own her house with her husband, even though she had obtained the money for the down payment. There's the pressure from the cops and the family priest to put up with her alcoholic husband's rages, as they share drinks with him.

The opening production design promises more satire than it delivers, as Moore's Evelyn Ryan talks to the camera and enthusiastically chants jingles. The dark side of the endless consumerism pushed by the TV commercials is only hinted at with a brief excerpt or recreation of several shows or ads (the credits didn't seem to include acknowledgments for the various TV programs and commercials so the accuracy wasn't clear as some morph into real time seeming announcers and singers). Notably included is that font of maudlin macabre "Queen for A Day," that I used to run home from elementary school to catch, which saluted the most pathetic housewives by having them compete with tales of misery via the Applause Meter for a washing machine, or as shown here a wheel chair as it was a bathetic predecessor to today's "reality" helping shows. This sets the ironic stage for how Ryan as a determined cock-eyed optimist turned these relentlessly upbeat symbols on their ear to support her family through volumes of prize-winning doggerel.

Every now and then the film breaks through the difficulty of being based on a memoir by her daughter Terry who can only look back as a child and try to reveal what the adult was feeling. At one point the mother protests that she's "not a saint" as a few tart comments finally come out of her mouth and Moore powerfully shows us her emotions, such as her silent frustration as she's continually thwarted in her efforts to find time to even join with other women contesters, in a sort of pre-consciousness-raising women's group solidarity, though the touch of the endlessly cheerful contestant in the iron lung again veers towards satire. (As someone who was obsessed with couponing and successfully qualifying for freebies when I quit work to be home with babies, I absolutely sympathize with the pre-internet thrill of finding like-minded mothers.)

As a modern day female Pangloss, Moore only gets to show moments of doubt and pain and I actually sympathized with her husband for his criticism that she was "too happy." Woody Harrelson, as something of the villain of the piece, has to veer wildly from frustration to drunk to pitiful supplicant for forgiveness to emasculated breadloser, and he manages to stay amiable throughout to show why his wife and kids would keep forgiving him.

While her winning percentage symbolizes just how incredibly lucky the mother was, the ending loses any sense of social commentary and just gives way to unvarnished bio pic sentimentality, as "Schindler's List" style we see the successful adults and parents the kids became and what happened to each.

The child actors are wonderfully natural and their rapport with Moore is lovely.

The film is accurate in showing that what is thought of as "the Fifties' continued through 1963, with the costumes (especially the glasses and ladies' gloves, though I was a bit surprised that Moore never seemed to wear the same dress twice) and production design.

But the John Frizzell score and meager non-jingle music selections weren't very evocative and seemed mired in the earlier years of the story

Martyr Mom and Drunken Dad: Perky & Wholesome? Not.

[Danusha_Goska · 3/10 · 16 January 2008]

"The Prize Winner of Defiance, Ohio," made me sick to my stomach. Literally. The whole time I was watching it, my stomach churned. I kept watching it because I wanted to see how an alleged comedy would handle its very serious subject matter: alcoholism and domestic abuse.

"Prize Winner" was advertised as a perky, wholesome entertainment. The opening title sequence is cuteness squared. Happy and sunny, late fifties / early sixties fonts, music, dresses, hairstyles, eyeglasses and make-up evoke that era's suburbia with warmth and accuracy. The costumes and set design alone deserve three stars.

The rest of the movie is painful. It depicts a profoundly dysfunctional family. Evelyn Ryan is the mother of ten. A gifted writer, she wins contest prizes in, for those days, huge sums -- sums large enough, in one case, to purchase a modest home.

Kelly Ryan, her husband, is a drunk. Kelly is verbally abusive. He also comes close to being physically abusive. He destroys family belongings. He squanders the family's money so badly that Evelyn must humiliate herself, repeatedly, in front of the milkman. The milkman is evil personified. He's more like Dracula than the deliverer of a wholesome product.

Evelyn, in response to her abusive husband, is a passive aggressive doormat. She never even learns to drive. She hands over complete financial control to Kelly.

The movie wants us to believe that Evelyn is a martyr and a saint and a role model and a gift to humanity and the very best mom her kids ever could have been blessed with. The movie also wants us to believe that Evelyn had to do everything exactly the way she did it. She had to marry a man who was a shiftless drunk; she had to have ten kids by him though she couldn't feed those kids; she had no choice when he became violent.

The Catholic church made Evelyn do it. Male police officers made Evelyn do it. The fifties made Evelyn do it. Evelyn had no free will.

There's a scene where Evelyn is so without funds that she has to feed her children food full of insects. When the children complain, she says, "Those are not insects. Those are spices." The point is not to blame Evelyn Ryan. The point is that the movie lies to the viewer as much as Evelyn lies to her kids when she feeds them insects.

Evelyn married a shiftless drunk, she had ten kids by him, and she handed all power over to him because she wanted to. Evelyn participated in creating a tense home environment every bit as much as her husband. The Catholic church, the police and the 1950s didn't make Evelyn do anything.

A movie that told the truth about a woman who fed her own children bugs would not make that woman out to be a blameless martyr, and her husband out to be a complete monster. A movie that told the truth would explore the psychology of a woman who is attracted to alcoholics, and attracted to the martyr role that the wife of an alcoholic often plays.

This movie didn't do that. Rather, it played with fire -- took up very painful themes -- and tried to convince the audience that these themes were all fun, wholesome, and sweet. Result? In this viewer, a churning stomach.

Superb movie, based on a true story, written by one of the children.

[TxMike · 22 March 2006]

The beginning of the movie is set in the 1950s and 1960s, a time I am very familiar with. I grew up then and finished school. The movie very accurately depicted that period. It was a time when women were still mostly in the background, raising children and cooking meals, and to challenge the husband was rarely done.

Julianne Moore is Evelyn Ryan, somewhat a saint of a mother who raised 10 children while her husband Kelly (Woody Harrelson) with a low self-image exhausted the family income via booze. They often had no money to pay the milk man, but Evelyn always seemed to find some joy in the moment. And she never admonished Kelly for his drinking.

Evelyn's great talent was winning various contests. And not just the local ones, sometimes even big national ones worth thousands of dollars. Many times it was these winnings which enabled them to stay in their home.

One of the children was 'Tuff' Ryan, one of the girls, who grew up to be the author of the book this movie is based on. In fact, all of the 10 children grew up to make something of themselves. In a key scene Evelyn tells Tuff that she has a wonderful mind and can accomplish anything she wants. Since Tuff is the author, we must assume its accuracy. But beyond that, I can relate. It was 1961 and one of my teachers told be just about the same thing and I recall that it changed my whole outlook. It was the first time anyone had told me that, and the first time I believed I could accomplish anything I set my mind to. We never know when the words we speak to children will have that same effect. Or, the opposite with ill-chosen words.

We saw this on DVD. Near the end, a scene includes the real Ryan children, all in their 40s and 50s. And we see the mom character (Moore) sitting next to the real Tuff, and kissing her on the cheek. A superb ending for a wonderful movie of an inspiring story.