Benefit
Bluelighter
Considered by most to be John Ford’s best film, The Grapes of Wrath is consistently rated as one of the best films ever. Henry Fonda gives a superbly nuanced performance as Tom Joad, the road-weary ex-con who eventually blossoms into a poster boy for social reform. He is plain speaking and never overacts; yet his onscreen presence is gripping and commands your attention. The soft-spoken ex-preacher Casey was also very well acted.
The film paints a bleak picture of an Oakie family migrating to California during the Dustbowl. They are lured to California to find it is oversaturated with other Oakies searching for work. As such, employers are able to cut wages to a level that is actually below subsistence. The workers are forced to live in squalor and poverty while the farmers dictate extremely low wages. Local law enforcement terrorizes the camps with impunity.
The Joad family, originally consisting of 12 members but gradually reduced to 7 by the end of the film, is the focal point of the story, which benefits immensely from the strength of John Steinbeck’s brilliant novel (written the year before). The film has two major strains: showcasing the plight of migrant workers, and suggesting the need for social reform. The movie’s political message is watered down a bit, but is clearly pro-labor and Tom Joad eventually transcends the localized family unit and comes to embody the social conscience of the nation. Socialism and communism are not explicitly pushed, but the capacity of organized labor for protecting basic human rights is well articulated. Casey is ultimately killed for his involvement in a labor strike, which opens Tom’s eyes to the inequity of the current social apparatus.
The film avoids Steinbeck’s ending which has Rose of Sharon giving birth to a stillborn baby and then using her breast milk to feed a starving man, taking away somewhat from the notion of a universal paradigm that transcends individualism. This theme was stressed in the novel but not as much in the film, though it is heavily touched on in Fonda's ending speech. Ford’s ending is injected with a Hollywoodized note of hope, as the family heads forward in search of more work and Ma Joad gives a speech about the superior moral quality of their ambitions. The book’s ending is much darker and superior. The message is that reform hinges upon the cohesion of the family as the basic social unit, and the potential for organized labor to demand fair wages and a reasonable standard of living.
John Ford’s film features many location shots of highways and rugged, sparse, endless natural landscapes stretching off into the horizon. Gifted cinematographer Greg Toland, who would go on to work with Welles in Citizen Kane two years later, shot the film in a very natural style. Several scenes resonate with Caravaggio-style lighting. This film would have looked really great in real color, but probably not in Technicolor. It is a very well made film that rides the strength of Steinbeck’s source material, and set the benchmark very high for the Hollywood "social issues" film.
The film paints a bleak picture of an Oakie family migrating to California during the Dustbowl. They are lured to California to find it is oversaturated with other Oakies searching for work. As such, employers are able to cut wages to a level that is actually below subsistence. The workers are forced to live in squalor and poverty while the farmers dictate extremely low wages. Local law enforcement terrorizes the camps with impunity.
The Joad family, originally consisting of 12 members but gradually reduced to 7 by the end of the film, is the focal point of the story, which benefits immensely from the strength of John Steinbeck’s brilliant novel (written the year before). The film has two major strains: showcasing the plight of migrant workers, and suggesting the need for social reform. The movie’s political message is watered down a bit, but is clearly pro-labor and Tom Joad eventually transcends the localized family unit and comes to embody the social conscience of the nation. Socialism and communism are not explicitly pushed, but the capacity of organized labor for protecting basic human rights is well articulated. Casey is ultimately killed for his involvement in a labor strike, which opens Tom’s eyes to the inequity of the current social apparatus.
The film avoids Steinbeck’s ending which has Rose of Sharon giving birth to a stillborn baby and then using her breast milk to feed a starving man, taking away somewhat from the notion of a universal paradigm that transcends individualism. This theme was stressed in the novel but not as much in the film, though it is heavily touched on in Fonda's ending speech. Ford’s ending is injected with a Hollywoodized note of hope, as the family heads forward in search of more work and Ma Joad gives a speech about the superior moral quality of their ambitions. The book’s ending is much darker and superior. The message is that reform hinges upon the cohesion of the family as the basic social unit, and the potential for organized labor to demand fair wages and a reasonable standard of living.
John Ford’s film features many location shots of highways and rugged, sparse, endless natural landscapes stretching off into the horizon. Gifted cinematographer Greg Toland, who would go on to work with Welles in Citizen Kane two years later, shot the film in a very natural style. Several scenes resonate with Caravaggio-style lighting. This film would have looked really great in real color, but probably not in Technicolor. It is a very well made film that rides the strength of Steinbeck’s source material, and set the benchmark very high for the Hollywood "social issues" film.
Last edited:
