Amazon.com essential video

One of the first Hollywood films to deal openly with white racism toward Japanese Americans during World War II, this drama directed by 1950s action maestro John Sturges (The Great Escape) stars Spencer Tracy as a one-armed stranger named MacReedy, who arrives in the tiny town of Black Rock on a hot day in 1945. Seeking a hotel room and the whereabouts of an ethnic Japanese farmer named Komoko, MacReedy runs smack into a wall of hostility that escalates into serious threats. In time it becomes apparent that Komoko has been murdered by a local, racist chieftain, Reno Smith (Robert Ryan), who also plans on dispensing with MacReedy. Tracy's hero is forced to fight his way past Smith's goons (among them Ernest Borgnine and Lee Marvin) and sundry allies (Anne Francis) to keep alive, setting the stage for memorable suspense crisply orchestrated by Sturges. Casting is the film's principal strength, however: Tracy, the indispensable icon of integrity, and Ryan, the indispensable noir image of spiritual blight, are as creatively unlikely a pairing as Sturges's shotgun marriage of Yul Brynner and Steve McQueen in The Magnificent Seven. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (30)

Solid "Rock"
This is a thrilling suspense film from start to finish.Though set apparently in post World War II Arizona the film has the feel of a traditional western.One could draw parallels to another classic western, "High Noon", in that the film's protagonist MacCreedy (Spencer Tracy) is confronted with sociopathic bullies and has difficulty enlisting the aid of the few people of good will in Black Rock.Whereas "High Noon" was considered a metaphor for McCarthyism, "Bad Day at Black Rock" tackles the theme of racism, in this case the prejudice that was prevalent at the time against Americans of Japanese descent.John Sturges crafts such an effective tale that you don't feel you are being preached to.Tracy is solid as the one-armed inquisitor.The supporting cast is all first-rate with Robert Ryan, Ernest Borgnine, and Lee Marvin especially good as the creepy heavies.Great Technicolor and tremendous use of widescreen on display here.Andre Previn contributes an effective score.

Audio track for french language - discusting
The english audio track is good, but as far as the french track it's not worth a penny, noise on the track are so loud; My French friends we're so disappointed.
I think WB is producing full sh.. DVD and have no respect for customer. They don't do quality testing on DVD products...
It's an excellent movie, but not the right compagny to produce a DVD...

Excellent!
Spencer Tracy as the mysterious man in black. What is he doing in a small middle of nowhere desert town? It's film noir in color! It's absolutely fascinating and when it's ended, one has to see it over again because it's almost a perfect movie. There are no wasted shots. And the music score by Andre Previn is a perfect compliment to this widescreen thriller. It has Ernest Borgnine, Lee Marvin, and Robert Ryan at their nastiest!! It's great!!

Tracy at his best
Tracy portrays a one-armed man who arrived in a small town only
to discover it is hiding things.Led by Robert Ryan he is stonewalled in discovering the truth but eventually does. This
film also features Lee Marvin and Ernest Borgnine in supporting
roles.This is a perfect film to watch Tracy.He appears to be
doing nothing but is absolutely wonderful.Anne Francis is very
good also.This is one of Tracy's finest efforts and the dvd
release is most welcome.

Myfavourite film
This is a really good thriller Weston.The cast is wonderful all first class performers especially Tracy and Ryan. It has been around in the pan form. It will be great in wide screen with a good sound track.I can't recommend it enough. ... Read more

Reviews (30)

Star-Studded Recounting of Legendary Nazi Trials
This star-studded film vividly captures the characters on all 3 sides of the spectrum: The accused, the victims, and the international tribunal judging the perpetrators of unspeakable atrocities against fellow human beings. It is shocking to see how many of the people responsible for the gruesome deaths of millions justified their actions.

After hearing witnesses who often were tortured, mamed by sadistic doctors, and had their loved ones murdered, I can not grasp the fact that the majority of those on trial were released after serving minimal prison terms. Some of them are still among us, while millions of victims lie in their graves at the hands of an evil minority!

Stellar performances by an International cast. Most noteworthy are Montgomery Clift and Judy Garland as testifying victims, Maximilian Schell as Prosecutor (Oscar Winner), Marlene Dietrich as wife of a defendant, and an elderly Spencer Tracy, trying to make sense of it all.

Effective use of B&W photography, first rate sets and costumes, along with many other production values, make this a timeless Classic. Although considerd over-long by some, I recommend this film to be shown to high school classes as a reminder that these things happened in a not so distant past.*****

SCHELL, TRACY, GARLAND, LANCASTER, CLIFT & WIDMARK GREAT!
This is a superb film by Stanley Kramer with an unbelievably great cast at the height of their craft. Each of the legendary actors were at the top of their performances in the reinactment of the Judge's Trial at Nuremberg. The world was tired of the Nuremberg trials. This one was a mopping up operation. Against a backdrop of an escalating Cold War with the Soviet Union, the selling out of justice by prominent Nazi judges serving the Third Reich is put on trial. Spencer Tracey plays Judge Dan Haywood, a retired Maine circuit court judge brought out of mothballs to serve as the chief justice. Amazingly, the usual action actor Burt Lancaster plays the top Nazi judge who at first does not recognize the Nuremberg tribunal's authority to judge him. For some mysterious reason, critics over the years failed to acknowledge the tremendous acting job he did in convincingly carrying off what was perhaps this film's most dynamic character change. However, my personal favorite was Maximillian Schell whose quintessential Germanic Hans Rolfe, the defense attorney released the full range of this incredible actor's virtuosity. For this he deservedly won an Academy Award Oscar.

One thousand words are not enough to celebrate this timeless film: Judy Garland (in perhaps her last film role) delivers a heartbreaking middle aging Irene Hoffman, reliving her experiences of Nazi cruelty on the witness stand; once again. However, not very good was the young Canadian actor, William Shatner playing Army Captain Byers, the aide de camp to Judge Haywood (Tracy). [The Starship Enterprise didn't seem to improve Shatner's skills any.] Richard Widmark (the moody, hostile prosecutor) and Montgomery Clift [who begged for the role he was willing to play without pay!] were excellent. Clift plays a slightly retarded German laborer, sterilized by Nazi doctors because of his mental slowness. This is among the very best films made by Kramer in the decade of the 1960s. Amazingly, it was released one year after INHERIT THE WIND, another Tracy-Kramer classic!

MASTERPIECE
What happens when Stanley Kramer teams Tracy, Dietrich, Garland, Schell, Clift, Lancaster and Widmark in a drama based on the trials in pos-war Nuremberg??? It`s vintage Hollywood; still 1 IF not THE BEST about the horrors from World War II ..... The film should be in every school-library across the world

MASTERPIECE
What happens when Stanley Kraner teams Tracy, Dietrich, Garland, Schell, Clift, Lancaster and Widmark in a drama based on the trials in pos-war Nuremberg??? It`s vintage Hollywood; still 1 IF not THE BEST about the horrors from World War II ..... The film should be in every school-library across the world

Wooooooooow
Ok, you`ll get Garland, Dietrich, Clift, Tracy, Widmark & Schell - the production headed by Stanley Kramer.... the result is pure Hollywood vintage combined with horrors from the 2nd World War??? But indeed; it is a masterpiece.... It should be in every school-library all over the world:-) ... Read more

Reviews (35)

The one Tracy-Heburn movie where she gets the upper hand
This 1957 film directed by Walter Lang was the eighth of the nine Tracy-Hepburn films and their first in color. Based on the play by William Marchant (which had starred Shirley Booth on Broadway), Katharine Hepburn plays Bunny Watson, a reference librarian who works for a television network. Bunny becomes quite concerned when she learns that the new computer being installed by Spencer Tracy's Richard Sumner is supposed to put her and the rest of her staff out of work. Gig Young has his standard role as the nice guy who ends up losing the girl in the end, while Joan Blondell, Dina Merrill and Sue Randall make up the rest of Bunny's brainy staff.

In terms of pairing Tracy and Hepburn "Desk Set" is certainly unique because it is the only film where she gets the upper hand at the end and he gets the comeuppance. Tracy is really nothing more than a misunderstood villain; his new toy is suppose to help the girls in the reference library not replace them. But none of this really matters because in the end it is clear than the women are a lot smarter than the machine (although they do get the baseball trivia answer wrong). The one priceless scene in the film is a roof top lunch between Tracy and Hepburn. He just has a few simple questions for her that turn out to be brainteasers, and Hepburn's character disposes of each and every challenge with an ease grace and guileless naiveté that is quite charming, while Tracy sinks lower and lower as she beats him at every turn. The rest of the film is fairly pedestrian as we wait for the expected happy endings for the computer and romantic plot lines.

After receiving Academy Award nominations for her work in "Summertime" and "The Rainmaker," Hepburn had made a film with Bob Hope that was totally butchered, the astonishingly unfunny film "The Iron Petticoat," and "Desk Set." It would be another two years before she made another film, although Spencer Tracy's failing health was as much if not more of a contributing factor as the sudden drop off in the quality of her films. Hepburn would turn to the stage and perform Shakespeare and then return to the screen with four consecutive Oscar nominated roles. Consequently, in retrospect, "Desk Set" clearly defines the end of a period in Hepburn's career. You can not help but look at the next two decades of her film career, where virtually every film is based on a play by a great dramatist (Tennessee Williams's "Suddenly Last Summer," Eugene O'Neill's "Long Day's Journey Into Night," Euripides's "Trojan Women," Edward Albee's "A Delicate Balance") and not think that this was very much a conscious effort by Hepburn in the wake of this particular fluff piece.

IT'S ABOUT TIME!!!!!
I've been waiting for this DVD forever because I love this movie but can't stand the pan-and-scan version. I just saw this mentioned on Turner Classic Movies, cried out "Yes! Yes!" and immediately came to Amazon to see if they have it. I am so glad they do! And in honor of this great movie finally being released in all of it's widescreen glory, I am cut and pasting my review for the video version here below:

"Like Floating Island...Delicious!"

The smart dialogue, the gorgeous fashion, the way you want to kick Gig Young in the teeth...I wish more modern comedy could be this clever. (My two favorite scenes are the rooftop lunch quiz and the rainy evening misunderstanding. As usual you never think Tracy is acting, he's so real. And Hepburn's Miss Watson (her name a inside-joke nod to the founder of IBM -Thomas J. Watson) is a character you root for to blow off egotistical beau Mike. Another bonus is the Sumners snooty EMIRAC assistant, Miss Warringer-whose come-uppance couldn't be better. I want a brown coat like Bunny's!

Thank goodness this is finally out on DVD and WIDESCREEN! It's completely enjoyable now without the distractions of pan and scan!

Tracy and Hepburn Forever!

The one Tracy & Hepburn match where she gets the upper hand
This 1957 film directed by Walter Lang was the eighth of the nine Tracy-Hepburn films and their first in color. Based on the play by William Marchant (which had starred Shirley Booth on Broadway), Katharine Hepburn plays Bunny Watson, a reference librarian who works for a television network. Bunny becomes quite concerned when she learns that the new computer being installed by Spencer Tracy's Richard Sumner is supposed to put her and the rest of her staff out of work. Gig Young has his standard role as the nice guy who ends up losing the girl in the end, while Joan Blondell, Dina Merrill and Sue Randall make up the rest of Bunny's brainy staff.

In terms of pairing Tracy and Hepburn "Desk Set" is certainly unique because it is the only film where she gets the upper hand at the end and he gets the comeuppance. Tracy is really nothing more than a misunderstood villain; his new toy is suppose to help the girls in the reference library not replace them. But none of this really matters because in the end it is clear than the women are a lot smarter than the machine (although they do get the baseball trivia answer wrong). The one priceless scene in the film is a roof top lunch between Tracy and Hepburn. He just has a few simple questions for her that turn out to be brainteasers, and Hepburn's character disposes of each and every challenge with an ease grace and guileless naiveté that is quite charming, while Tracy sinks lower and lower as she beats him at every turn. The rest of the film is fairly pedestrian as we wait for the expected happy endings for the computer and romantic plot lines.

After receiving Academy Award nominations for her work in "Summertime" and "The Rainmaker," Hepburn had made a film with Bob Hope that was totally butchered, the astonishingly unfunny film "The Iron Petticoat," and "Desk Set." It would be another two years before she made another film, although Spencer Tracy's failing health was as much if not more of a contributing factor as the sudden drop off in the quality of her films. Hepburn would turn to the stage and perform Shakespeare and then return to the screen with four consecutive Oscar nominated roles. Consequently, in retrospect, "Desk Set" clearly defines the end of a period in Hepburn's career. You can not help but look at the next two decades of her film career, where virtually every film is based on a play by a great dramatist (Tennessee Williams's "Suddenly Last Summer," Eugene O'Neill's "Long Day's Journey Into Night," Euripides's "Trojan Women," Edward Albee's "A Delicate Balance") and not think that this was very much a conscious effort by Hepburn in the wake of this particular fluff piece.

TRACY/HEPBURN MAGIC STRANGELY ABSENT!
This is one of Kate and Spencer's later efforts - post MGM, pre-"Guess Who's Coming To Dinner" and it generally lacks in the chemistry that most of thier work at MGM had in spades. Tracy's a method's engineer who's assigned to make the daily operation of a television station more efficient. Of course he's bound to butt heads with researcher, Bunny Watson (Hepburn). Unlike most Tracy/Hepburn movies, in which their love for one another is never in question, on this occasion,Gig Young is inexplicably and needlessly thrown into the mix as Bunny's boyfriend. But it's the old Hepburn/Tracy's stardust and magic that keeps this otherwise deadly boring film afloat.
TRANSFER: Desk Set is at last presented in its original Cinemascope 2:35:1 aspect ratio and it is anamorphically enhanced to take full advantage of 16:9 displays. Although colors can be rich, vibrant and bold, flesh tones have an uncanny pasty look in certain scenes and a reddish/pinkish overcast in others. There are instances where dirt, film grain and age related artifacts crop up throughout this print. Also, black levels tend to be weak in certain scenes. There's a hint of edge enhancement and some pixelization but the print is generally smooth looking. The audio, as with all Cinemascope films of the period, is vintage stereo and presented at a reasonable listening level.
Extras: Fox is genuinely inconsistent in the extra content they provide for their "Studio Series" titles. If you recall, "The Day The Earth Stood Still" contained a 70 min. documentary while "The Inn of The Sixth Happiness" contained only an audio commentary track. On this occasion we get an audio commentary and some truncated movietones junk that is short, boring and generally slapped together as an afterthought. Not what I would expect from any series dubbed, "Studio Series".
BOTTOM LINE: If you're a die hard Tracy/Hepburn fan than this is a must have. But it's not one of their best or even one of their mediocre. It's just big on...well, being big and short, unfortunately, on entertainment!

We get set up with Desk Set at last!
"A large market exists in the U.S. for classic movies on DVD. There can really be no excuse for withholding America's rightful cinematic history when Europe and Asia is already enjoying it!" That comes from another reviewer on these pages, and I second that emotion.

I'll go even further than that review and say that Desk Set is the BEST film with Spence and Kate. And don't forget the great Gig Young doing his perfect second banana routine, which has already delighted us in so many other films. They didn't hide behind so many physical gags or the safer facade of black and white. Instead they acted out the script in glorious full color widescreen and stereo, no less.

And did Fox drop the ball in giving us the proper widescreen version of this classic? No, they did not! The studio came through for us (which is more than we can usually say about studios) and put it out in widescreen! And they even added some actress commentary for good measure. Yes, it's been a long 9-year wait, since DVDs first came out in 1995, but it's here now, at least.

And what a great modern plot Desk Set has: an independent woman (instead of a cloying playtoy), a job for that woman as a research expert, (instead of the usual secretary trying to date her boss), a strong leading man but one with a sense of humor (instead of the usual he-man tough guy). And all smack in the middle of the early revolution of COMPUTERS!

The man vs. machine concepts in this film will reverberate down through the ages. Plus it has a great romantic plot, too. This film has everything! Many people say they love to see a well-restored 1957 Chevy, but I'll take this well-restored 1957 Desky instead! ... Read more

Reviews (60)

Don't monkey around with religion
This film is based on the play by Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee about the 1925, Scopes Monkey Trial. It is tricky to keep the differences between this play and the real trial apart in one's mind. Spencer Tracy (Henry Drummond) and Fredric March (Matthew Harrison Brady) spar over the legality of teaching of evolution in Tennessee. This combination is guaranteed to keep you glued to your seat. In this movie Scopes, while teaching evolution to a high-school biology class is arrested and placed in jail.

Some time the other characters get lost in the shuffle yet one other will show through. That is Gene Kelley who plays E. K. Hornbeck who reports the trial.

I will not give a blow by blow of the trail but to say it gets rather heated and is broken up with several adjournments with time to reflect on what was said and going to be said.

If you are interested in the real thing then read Scopes Autobiography "Center of the Storm."

Pr 11:29... "HE WHO TROUBLES HIS OWN HOUSE WILL INHERIT THE WIND."

"Sit down, Sampson, you're about to get a haircut"
Although Inherit the Wind was made in 1960 about a trial in 1920, it retains a surprising amount of bite.

In the film, based on the stage play of the same name, in turn based on the famous Scopes Monkey Trial, a biology teacher is jailed for teaching evolution. This sets up the film's centerpiece: a courtroom battle between famed attorneys, portrayed by acting heavyweights Spencer Tracy and Frederic March.

Gene Kelly is surprisingly good in a non-dancing role, and gets the best lines as the cynical journalist from Baltimore ("Sit down, Sampson, you're about to get a haircut," he says to the teacher when his girlfriend is called to testify).

Directed by the great Stanley Kramer, the film works well on a number of levels: comedy, courtroom drama, and commentary on religion's place in society.

A unforgettable tour de force and superb script!
This film is a triumph against the intolerance and the dark sides of the reason. The dreams of the reason produce monsters.
The generated legal battle between a Mathew Brady the hard fan religious and politician and Henry Drummond an opened mind lawyer about the Darwin ideas , keep full intensity all the film.
This historical process lets you thinking about the imaginary circunstance about what would the destiny of USA if Brady would have been President?
Spencer Tracy and Frederic March are like the alpha and the omega in this match . One timeless classic film in any age.
Don't even doubt it. This film is for you and for a wide target in the social spectre.
A must and a winner movie!

Incredibly Boring at Best
This movie is terrible. When people make a movie, you assume they would try to make it entertaining at the very Least. Don't waste your time viewing this film. It lasts way too long and you'll be happy when its over. Even if you do like the movie, it has a terrible ending. Hardly any of the conflicts are solved, and you're left with a feeling of disgust. That is only if you manage to make it through the entire movie. The songs in it as well are way too long and sound terrible. To sum it up, this movie is terrible.

A LITTLE BACKGROUND
As previous reviewers have noted, _INHERIT THE WIND_ is a work of fiction that is based on what came to be known as "The Scopes Monkey Trial." Also previously noted is the fact that Spencer Tracy, as Henry Drummond, the character adapted from the real life Clarence Darrow, and Frederic March, playing the role of Matthew Harrison Brady, whose character is based on William Jennings Bryan, engage in a carefully choreographed and outstandingly acted "pas de deux" that, to this day, has rarely been matched in any movie.

It should be understood that this is a work of fiction, and is not meant to duplicate the facts of the Scopes trial. That's why the names have been changed -- to allow literary license for dramatic purposes.

With this as background, one needs to understand the political climate that prevailed when the play from which the movie was adapted was written. The play was written in 1950, in the middle of what has come to be known as the "McCarthy Era." The anti-Communist hysteria of the time was seen by many as a threat to intellectual freedom. It was politically dangerous, at that time, to directly take on those threats to freedom of ideas, so the playwrites (Jerome Lawrence and Robert Lee) came up with the idea of using the Scopes Trial, which was safely in the past, as a vehicle to express the importance of the constitutional guarantees of such things as freedom of speech. That the play they wrote in 1950, and its 1960 movie version, were of such dramatic intensity was just icing on the cake.

I think that looking at _INHERIT THE WIND_ from the standpoint of historical perspective should do away with some reviewers beliefs that it is some sort of atheistic plot to challenge their belief systems. Also, repeating myself, I believe that it is important to realize that it is a work of fiction and need not accurately reflect the details of the real trial.

It's worth seeing from several perspectives. As a well acted movie; as one that creates an atmosphere that makes the viewer feel that he is in that hot, humid courtroom; and as one that expresses how important our freedoms really are. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Spencer Tracy's last performance was in this well-meaning, handsome film by Stanley Kramer about a pair of white parents (Tracy and Katharine Hepburn) trying to make sense of their daughter's impending marriage to an African American doctor (Sidney Poitier). The film has been knocked over the years for padding conflict and stoking easy liberalism by making Poitier's character in every socioeconomic sense a good catch: But what if Kramer had made this stranger a factory worker? Would the audience still find it as easy to accept a mixed-race relationship? But there's no denying the drawing power of this movie, which gets most of its integrity from the stirring performances of Tracy and Hepburn. When the former (who had been so ill that the production could not get completion insurance) gives a speech toward the end about race, love, and much else, it's impossible not to be affected by the last great moment in a great actor's life and career. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (64)

An All-time Classic
Aside from calmly, reasonably confronting a social taboo of the '60s -- racially mixed marriages -- in a thoughtful, touching manner, this film features career-high performances from several of Hollywood's finest. Spencer Tracy is absolutely brilliant in his final screen appearance as the avowed liberal newspaper publisher Matt Drayton, who, along with his idealistic wife (a role that earned Katherine Hepburn her second Best Actress Oscar) learns that their barely-20-year-old daughter is planning to elope with a black physician (played with cool passion by Sidney Poitier). The story evolves from Poitier's confidence in the two shocked parents that, without their full approval, the marriage will not go on -- and there are only hours to decide. Add his parents to the mix, and as the list of dinner guests grows so does the tension. Aside from the marvelous script, memorable performances and outstanding direction, photography and music there is a chemistry in the mix that truly creates an energy greater than the sum of its parts -- and when the parts are this good, the result is a film for the ages that goes straight to the heart of themes like love, passion, prejudice and family conflict. In the end love does conquor all in Tracey's powerful final speech, made more poignant by a visibly moved and misty Hepburn -- perhaps cognizant that she was witnessing the final curtain call of a great actor. This is the magic Hollywood is capable of, a movie that re-affirms one's faith in the ideals of love and equality, and certainly belongs in every collection.

4.5 Stars; Needs Historical/Cultural Context Remembered
The Story: Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn play the parents of young Katharine Houghton, who brings home her well-educated fiancee to meet the parents. The parents are not expecting their daughter's fiancee, a physician, to be African-American, but Sidney Poitier certainly is. The film focuses on the parents' discomfort over the biracial marriage.

When the story begins, it's easy to think that the movie studios were aiming to do two things: make one more movie with Katharine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy (this was his last film, and he was quite ill during its making); and make a simple statement about racial tolerance. This film could easily have ended up with a very contrived, forced air to it. But, that doesn't happen when you put Spencer Tracy, Katharine Hepburn, and Sidney Poitier together in a film. The cast rises above the simplicity of the premise. Some have said that making Poitier's character a well-educated doctor weakened the racial conflict potential, but I lived just outside of Detroit in 1967, and ANY biracial marriage was a controversial idea to base a film upon. It also put the race issue right on the table, as the parents had no basis upon which to object to their daughter's marriage, except for their discomfort over the race issue.

Overall, if the viewer remembers when this film was made, the quality of the cast makes it a real winner.

Bit Prepackaged for My Taste
More like 3.5 stars. There's nothing particularly wrong with this movie but it's not the genius its been made out to be either. It's not nearly as daring as it likes to think it is. He's a wealthy, smart, sophisticated mature professional. She's an airhead. He's black and she's white. He's a catch and a half and she's a twit. The real question should not be why does she want to marry a black man but rather what he sees in her. Of course they will have problems with the intolerant aspects of society. Of course their children will be teased and mistreated by racist adults and ignorant children. But this film was made in the late 60's, not the late 30's. It's also set in San Francisco (Liberal Heaven) and not in rural Mississippi. The white girl's parents are liberals through and through. Poitier's character's parents are a working man & his wife from Los Angeles. Notice how Tracy's character does not object to his daughter marrying a black man but is deeply concerned by how a mixed couple & their children will be received in society. This movie gives itself every break it possibly can to ease its way down a receptive audience's throat.

Boring...
This movie has been hailed as being a great piece of work; I tried to watch it. I really did and I could not do it. Portier plays his role well; but then again it is not like he has to act; he just has to be himself. Stay away from this miserable piece(...).

Landmark film about racial prejudice
Considered a landmark film, it addresses racial prejudice and interracial marriage in a time when sixteen states in America still upheld laws that made miscegenation a crime. It is important to pay attention to past racial and ethnic issues, in order to understand those today and to see whether any 'progress' towards a more 'tolerant' society has been made. Guess Who's Coming to Dinner is an entertaining, straightforward and well-meant film that will hopefully make students aware of the controversy of interracial relationships throughout the decades and centuries even. Being a child of mixed race parents, I find the film meaningful in showing two people of different races, being very much in love and very willing to face all the social obstacles their interracial relationship is bound to encounter.
Summary
In Guess Who's Coming to Dinner the 23-year-old, white, upper class Joanna "Joey" Drayton (Katharine Houghton) brings home her fiancé John Wade Prentice (Sidney Poitier) to meet her parents. When he turns out to be a distinguished 37-year-old black doctor, the "liberal" progressive parents (Katharine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy) are forced to re-examine their beliefs regarding interracial marriage and are given one single day to do so. Before the parents can get all of their objections sorted out, they have John's parents coming to dinner as well. Both sets of parents have reservations about this union, but try to come to terms with the interracial marriage.
Discussion
Guess Who's Coming To Dinner? raises several questions or issues that might be interesting to discuss after viewing it. The film's main themes are interracial relationships and prejudice, and it advocates a mixed race marriage, which makes it a very progressive movie for the 1960s. Considered progressive as well are Joey's 'liberal' parents who have raised their daughter not to be prejudiced and they have done this successfully, with her 'lack of' prejudice extending to her being able to fall in love with an African American. The parents are then left to consider whether they really believe in their acclaimed 'liberal thinking' and this may raise important questions with the viewing audience. Are human beings really as liberal or conservative as they think they are when it comes to practicing what they preach?
If it is not race that prevents the parents (the fathers in particular), both Joanna's and John's, from approving the marriage, what is?
The only objection to the interracial marriage vocalized in the film is the harsh treatment they will most likely receive from society. Although this is a valid and probably accurate objection, it is debatable on whether the fathers do not have more personal objections. The movie glosses over the subject of interracial marriage without getting too detailed, but the concern on whether the couple understands the adversity they will face if they go ahead with their interracial marriage is very clear.
The themes addressed in the film were still much of a taboo in the 1960s, so in order to merely create a 'mild controversy', the director seems to have made the relationship between John and Joey as 'acceptable' as possible. Infallible and with impeccable credentials as a prize-winning doctor and working for the World Health Organization, John is portrayed as an in-laws dream. The character is in every socioeconomic sense a 'good catch': What parent would not want him as a son-in-law? But what if the director had made the fiancé a factory worker? Would the audience still find it as easy to accept a mixed-race relationship?
Also, to reduce the seriousness of the racial themes, the film is presented as a comedy. This means that conservative viewers can laugh about it while telling themselves that these events would never really happen. Finally, Joey and John avoid their biggest challenge by intending to live abroad for John's work. Therefore, they will not have to cope with the racial tensions in the country and they will not have to combine two communities and identities or have to pick one over the other.
When it was released it 1967, Guess Who`s Coming to Dinner reflected upon the changing race relation in America. Interracial intimacy and marriage in particular were delicate themes to discuss, which makes this film so important, both at that time as well as today. The individual right to choose a sexual partner, select a spouse and raise a family could not be fully exercised in all of the United States up until the Loving decision in 1967, which banned anti-miscegenation laws. Although these laws disappeared, the prejudices that had always accompanied them, could not be banned so easily. They persisted, despite the colour blind ideal.
The fact that the Joey's father is an intellectual liberal forced to face his own buried prejudices gives the film an important message that should still be considered today. On some deeply personal level many people are still prejudiced, no matter how hard they try to tell themselves otherwise. In Guess Who's Coming to Dinner Spencer Tracy's character comes to this realization, but is able to put his objections for his daughter's happiness. The film chooses to be colour blind like Joey's father and lets pure and simple love instead of race be the basis for a successful marriage. Or as Matt Drayton argues in his 'final analysis' in Guess Who's Coming To Dinner:
"[...] in the final analysis it doesn't matter a damn what we think. The only thing that matters is what they feel, and how much they feel for each other. And if it's half of what we felt ... that's everything". ... Read more

Reviews (212)

Comedy For All Eternity
It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World is a comedy for all eternity. This is one of those big box, big budget, long-running-time, cameo-loaded, expensive, broad-canvas farces of the 60's that I love so much. Released in 1962, this was one of Stanley Kramer's greatest and last movies. This award-winning movie is a timeless masterpiece for the whole family.

After a bouncy, splashy Saul Bass animated title sequence, the story begins with a brief car chase in the California desert. Bank robber Smiler Grogan (Jimmy Durante) wrecks his car, and with his dying words reveals a secret about buried treasure to the seven strangers who stopped on the roadside. 'Look for the big W' in Santa Rosita, he says, and then he kicks the bucket.

After a brief attempt at cooperation, the treasure hunt is on and it's every man for himself, in four teams. Mickey Rooney and Buddy Hackett decide to take to the air but their pilot, Jim Backus, gets hammered on Old Fashioneds. Husband-and-wife Sid Caesar and Edie Adams can only find a biplane cropduster. The lone truck driver, Jonathan Winters, can't get gas. And his mother-in-law Ethel Merman fatally hampers Milton Berle, with his wife Dorothy Provine.

So all four teams scamper across the landscape, across the broad canvas of this movie, wound tight by desperate greed and calmly monitored by a Sergeant Culpepper, Spencer Tracy. This is the framing story for an amazing string of billed appearances and unbilled cameos so many that at last your senses are sort of dulled. Oh, it's Carl Reiner in the control tower. Oh, look, it's Stan Freberg, yeah. The best cameo, hands down, is Jerry Lewis, who comes barreling down Long Beach Boulevard in a moment of exuberant stupidity and runs over Spencer Tracy's hat.

Probably my favorite, I have so many, co-star was Terry Thomas who plays a vacationing Englishman in a rattling station wagon, who picks up Milton Berle. He's talkative. He prattles away (accurately) about why it is that the American male is positively preoccupied with booo-sums, and says things like, "I'll wager you anything you like, if American women stopped wearing brassieres, your whole national economy would collapse overnight!" This sequence, within the context of the movie so far, has a single funny moment when this whole vast farce might come alive, find its voice, and this circus might make sense - Terry-Thomas finds the tone for the rest of the movie. I find it compelling that the aesthetic success of all this footage, all these appearances, all this thoroughly American spectacle, suddenly pivots around a few fussy syllables about breasts. But once the moment passes, Terry-Thomas is efficiently neutralized and dismissed by Ethel Merman, and on we go.

The array of challengers eventually reach Santa Rosita, and several unexplainably humorous events occur. These I will not reveal to you and allow you to view the movie on your own time. I must add though, that if you do see this movie, reserve several hours. Like most from its decade its LONG... VERY LONG... But allow me to assure you, you wont be disappointed.

Madness is Genius
Eight traveling vacationers witness the sudden car-crash and slow final death of con-man Smiler Grogan in the hills above Palm Desert, Cal.. Grogan's dying words reveal the secret location of $350,000 hidden in Santa Rosita Park, near San Diego. This sparks a wild, hectic race for the dough. Pure greed,buried treasure, and car crashes. It's all here. "It's a Mad,Mad,Mad, Mad World" was the most successful movie directed by ace Stanley Kramer. All of the famous television and film comics from 1963 appear in this wild comedy. Only Bob Hope is missing. The cast includes Milton Berle, Sid Caesar, Phil Silvers, Jerry Lewis, Joe E. Brown, The Three Stooges, Buster Keaton, Jimmy Durante, Jack Benny, Jonathan Winters, and Spencer Tracy. Ernest Gold composed an original booming, wonderful soundtrack you'll be humming for days. At two hours and 41 minutes, "Mad World" is too long, but an incredible cast and mad-cap action propel the story along. This new MGM DVD is presented in widescreen anamorphic 2.35:1 aspect. The colors are crisp and vibrant. The "Mad World" DVD includes an excellent 1991 documentary with all the major surviving cast members. There's also 1 hour of "out-takes", faded and damaged, from the original Cinerama 70mm release. And there's two trailers. The year 2001 produced an obvious remake of "Mad World" called "Rat Race", a modest hit. Stanley Kramer and Spencer Tracy made 4 classic films together. The last was the inspiring "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner" in 1967. In ill health, sadly, Tracy died just days after shooting ended. Stanley Kramer himself died in Feb. 2001. His genius is now gone. His legacy lies before you.

It's a Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad DVD
I would give this DVD 5 stars if all the movie was here, but it isn't, hence 3 stars. There's no excuse for this considering that no major restoration has been attempted here, the storage capabilities of DVDs are huge, and MGM has already released the full-length movie on VHS. The deleted scene feature is a mess. Watching the scenes seperately is tedious and not much fun. The least they could do would be to put the deleted scenes in the order that they appeared in the original film. The third and fourth scenes appear to be exactly the same as do others later on. Sometimes the scene appears the same only zoomed in. Others scenes have no sound. Some of the last scenes go on and on up to 10 minutes and contains everything that is included in the feature except for very minor snippets of dialogue. Sometimes you can't detect anything new, like in the money dividing proposal scene.

I can see why MGM would want to keep their pristine 35mm print whole and transfer that to DVD but perhaps they should have included a 2nd disc and a 2nd version that patched together all the missing scenes, no matter what condition, and reconstructed the film as best as they could to the longest originally released version.

MGM, when you finally "Special Edition" this movie offer a rebate with the proof of purchase from this inferior edition!

Best, Most Memorable Comedy Ever Made !!
I originally saw the movie in '63. I was 8. Dad started my Birthday party with it. After the movie, Dad drove the route of the Santa Monica portion of the car chase(yes, there really was a "Big W").
Just finished watching the movie on Turner TV. The narrator came on after the movie and said that THE ORIGINAL WAS 5 HOURS long(Just too much "good stuff"). The movie studio had it edited to the shortened current version of three hours.
Back in '63 it was a terrific movie-In '04 it is still a terrific movie.

An all star cast of comics, great comedy

Director: Stanley Kramer
Format: Color
Studio: Mgm/Ua Studios
Video Release Date: September 26, 1995

Cast:

Spencer Tracy ... Capt. T.G. Culpeper
Milton Berle ... J. Russell Finch
Sid Caesar ... Melville Crump, DDS
Buddy Hackett ... Benjy Benjamin
Ethel Merman ... Mrs. Marcus
Mickey Rooney ... Ding 'Dingy' Bell
Dick Shawn ... Sylvester Marcus
Phil Silvers ... Otto Meyer
Terry-Thomas ... Lt.Col. J. Algernon Hawthorne
Jonathan Winters ... Lennie Pike
Edie Adams ... Monica Crump
Dorothy Provine ... Emeline Marcus-Finch
Eddie 'Rochester' Anderson ... Second cab driver
Jim Backus ... Tyler Fitzgerald
Ben Blue ... Biplane pilot
Joe E. Brown ... Union official
Alan Carney ... Police sergeant
Chick Chandler ... Detective outside Chinese laundromat
Barrie Chase ... Sylvester's girlfriend
Lloyd Corrigan ... The Mayor
William Demarest ... Police Chief Aloysius
Andy Devine ... Sheriff of Crockett County
Selma Diamond ... Ginger Culpeper
Peter Falk ... Third cab driver
Norman Fell ... Detective at Grogan's crash site
Paul Ford ... Col. Wilberforce
Stan Freberg ... Deputy sheriff
Louise Glenn ... Billie Sue Culpeper
Leo Gorcey ... First cab driver
Sterling Holloway ... Fire Chief
Edward Everett Horton ... Mr. Dinckler
Marvin Kaplan ... Irwin
Buster Keaton ... Jimmy the boatman
Don Knotts ... Nervous man
Charles Lane ... Airport manager
Mike Mazurki ... Miner
Charles McGraw ... Lt. Matthews
Cliff Norton ... Reporter
Zasu Pitts ... Switchboard operator Gertie
Carl Reiner ... Tower controller at Rancho Conejo
Madlyn Rhue ... Secretary Schwartz
Roy Roberts ... Policeman outside Irwin & Ray's Garage
Arnold Stang ... Ray
Nick Stewart ... Migrant truck driver
Joe DeRita ... Fireman
Larry Fine ... Fireman
Moe Howard ... Fireman
Sammee Tong ... Chinese laundryman
Jesse White ... Radio tower operator at Rancho Conejo
Jimmy Durante ... Smiler Grogan
Roy Engel ... Patrolman/Police radio voice unit F-14
Nicholas Georgiade ... Detective at Grogan's crash site
Stacy Harris ... Police radio voice unit F-7
Don C. Harvey ... Policeman in helicopter
Allen Jenkins ... Police officer
Tom Kennedy ... Traffic cop
Harry Lauter ... Police dispatcher
Ben Lessy ... George the steward
Jerry Lewis ... Man who runs over hat
Bob Mazurki ... Eddie (miner's son)
Jack Benny ... Man in car in desert
Eddie Ryder ... Air traffic control tower staffer
Paul Birch ... Policeman
Doodles Weaver ... Dinckler's Hardware Store clerk
Stanley Clements ... Detective in squad room
Bobo Lewis ... Pilot's wife
Minta Durfee ... Bit Part

Intended to be the comedy to end all comedies, with a cast including virtually all the name comedians at the time.

Jimmy Durante plays a guy who is in a fatal auto accident, but before he dies, tells 5 bystanders where there is $350,000 hidden under a "W", whuch leads to a chase to find the money.

Meanwhile, Capt. T.G. Culpeper (Spencer Tracy) is aware of the stolen money and he and his policemen observe the chase with interest through the desert, mountains, and along the California coast, with the contestants using aircraft, cars, trucks, a bicycle and every method of transportation in their attempt to be first to reach the money.

Tracy was ill when the film was shot, and so only worked four hours per day. The long shots and physical stuff was performed by stand-ins.

This is a fun movie. If there is a criticism, it is that the comedy is perhaps overdone. With so many top comedians, there is certainly no dearth of funny lines, pratfalls, and laughs--that's for sure.

Joseph (Joe) Pierre

author of Handguns and Freedom...their care and maintenance
and other books

... Read more

Description

Stanley Banks is a good father who adores his beautiful daughter Kay and his well-ordered life, a life that is thrown into chaos when Kay announces her engagement. A classic MGM comedy, the story is told via flashback and chronicles the many travails, financial and emotional, suffered by Stanley (Spencer Tracy) as he tries to give Kay (Elizabeth Taylor) a wedding to remember. Year: 1950 Director: Vincente Minnelli Starring: Spencer Tracy, Joan Bennett, Elizabeth Taylor ... Read more

Reviews (22)

Some Things Never Change
I just saw for the first time ever this movie made in 1950; directed by Vincente Minnelli; and starring Elizabeth Taylor, Spencer Tracy and Joan Bennett. Ms. Taylor was only 18 when she made this film and was frightening and eternally beautiful. She is so petite that she almost could adorn her own wedding cake. The movie, however, as the title implies, belongs to Mr. Tracy who plays her father who cannot bear to see his little daughter grow up and get married. There is a lot of most fathers in Mr. Tracy's character. He has some great lines and some funny scenes and endears himself to us with his gentle humor-- the footage where he gets stuck in his kitchen making drinks and doesn't get to make a speech about his beloved daughter, just to point out one delightful instance. He is such a bungler-- can't get to Ms. Taylor at the wedding reception to bid her goodbye either.

I did not find this 54 year-old movie dated at all. Some things never change. Love may be eternal and most families the world over act pretty much the same when it comes to seeing their children leave home.

Takes the Cake--Wait There is No Cake.
There is a reason that Spencer Tracy was one of Hollywood's most acclaimed actors. He could pull off any role and make it believable. He was one of the great everymen of his day. Watch, for instance, FATHER OF THE BRIDE and you will find yourself thinking of your own father, grandfather, uncle, or perhaps even yourself.

In the film, based off the novel by Edward Streetcar, Tracy plays Stanley Banks, an upper middle class lawyer who has his nerves put to wits ends when he learns nonchalantly over dinner one evening that his only daughter, Kay (Elizabeth Taylor) has just become engaged. His life is turned upside down in a few brief moments, as the simple thing he thought of as love turns into a nightmare called a wedding. Yet as much as things change, he learns that nothing really changes at all.

This original film version of Streetcar's novel stays true to the source and (as much as I love the remake) in many ways is far more entertaining than the Steve Martin version. The movie has dated some, yet it remains as enduring as ever. Watch it and laugh, maybe cry, then--if you can--give Dad a call.

The original is still the best
I must say that this is far more charming and sentimental than the remake. The relationships presented here seem more real and less scripted.

Tracy and Taylor have an unmatched chemistry as father and daughter that actually stretched into real life, lasting until his death.

Minelli's direction brings real verve to the story without resorting to cheap physical humor. I love the verbal repartee and the cadre of classic Hollywood actors.

The DVD itself is a good transfer both in video and audio. I enjoyed the extras as well, although I couldn't seem to get audio on the two newsreels included.

A great trip down the aisle and memory lane.

A great family film...Better than the Remake...
Spencer Tracy is perfect in his role as the father of the bride. The love for his daughter played by Elizabeth Taylor rings so true in this film. Spencer Tracey gives one of the best comedic performances I have ever seen.

Joan Bennet is also excellent as the mother of the bride.

This comedy is never over the top and the characters seem very real. There are some good laughs.

The upper middle class home and lifestyle reminds me of the book "The Way We Never Were" and at the same times makes me nostagic for the 1950s.

If Elizabeth Taylor's character's call to her dad at the end of film doesn't choke you up then you are made of wood!

Get this film.

This is a classic!
If you're looking for a comedy classic with good acting and a few nuggets of truth, this would be a good bet. Spencer Tracy is delightful as a befuddled, confused, and out-of-his-depth father, trying to survive the announcement, planning, and actual wedding ceremony of his beloved daugher to a man who has taken his place as #1 in her life. He is a typical 50's father-gruff and at times uncommunicative, but always loving. Elizabeth Taylor is cast as the naive and passionate daughter, but she is overshadowed by both Tracy and Joan Bennett as his understanding and long-suffering wife. This is a real tour de force for Tracy and is a delight after all these years. ... Read more

Reviews (31)

Who Wears the Pants?
Adam's Rib (black and white; running time 101 minutes; not rated) stars two of the greatest Academy Award winning actors of our time, Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn. This movie was directed by George Cukor in 1949 for Metro Goldwyn Mayer. In a very comical and humorous way, Adam's Rib explores equal rights for women and the question of who wears the pants in a marriage.

When a wife is accused of the attempted murder of her unfaithful husband, Assistant District Attorney Adam Bonner (Spencer Tracy) lands the case. Little does he know that soon his wife, Amanda Bonner (Katharine Hepburn), who is also an attorney, will be defending the accused wife and using equality for women as the main defense. Amanda Bonner wants to know, "What's the difference?". She submits that if the accused had been a man whose wife was being unfaithful, everyone would believe he was attempting to save his marriage, while her client is accused of trying to kill her husband. As the trial progresses, so does the animosity and competitiveness between the attorneys, which in turn causes a strain on their otherwise happy marriage. The sparing between the two attorneys culminates in the hilarious closing arguments of the trial. The accused wife is found not guilty and Amanda Bonner has won her case--or has she? Adam Bonner is able to use his wily ways to get Amanda back which will leave unanswered the question, "Who wears the pants?".

This film is rated five stars (*****). This classic romantic comedy will leave you with a smile on your face. The comic interaction between Tracy and Hepburn is engaging and unforgettable.

Battle of sexes never better. Maximum wit on display
The Tracy-Hepburn duo was never better than in this supremely witty, often laugh-out-loud comedy of two lawyers on opposite sides of the courtroom involved in an attempted murder case with the classic love triangle. The triangulators? Tom Ewell, Jean Hagen, and Judy Holiday--all in their first films. The lawyers? Why, Tracy and Hepburn of course--married to each other. Hep, the defense attorney, takes the case to vent her opinions on women's lib--one of the first films to lay it all out in the open on the subject. She defends poor little Judy, the wronged wife. Spence, the ADA, prosecutes to prove that Judy is nowhere near as innocent as she claims.

The back and forth here is so sharp you could cut yourself just listening to the lines. And there's the back and forth of courtroom and homefront, too. Hep and Spence go at it in both places and the lines supplied by real life husband-wife team of Ruth Gordon (Harold and Maude) and Garson Kanin are deliciously zingy so much of the time you eat em up even as your tongue is bleeding. Just too cool.

Amazing that this film has not aged at all. One of the great comedy classics and sure to remain so. If I could give this a sky full of stars, I would.

Zingalicious.

So far ahead of its time...
Katharine Hepburn is invariably described as one of the greatest screen legends of all time, and this film embodies all of her classic screen qualities. It is romantic, hilarious, and has a relevant message, even to the modern viewer. I highly recommend this film. She and Tracy had incredible chemistry on screen in all their films, but this (and "Woman of the Year") are my all-time favorites.

Another Classic Hepburn Tracy Pairing
Hepburn is feisty and Tracy is exhasperated. That seems to be the theme here. She rants and he simmers. She's progressive and he's old fashioned. Intelligent dialogue and good acting keep this somewhat dated battle of the sexes moving along. They made 9 movies together and this is probably the best, though I enjoy Woman of the Year. Knowing now what America didn't know then makes their pairing seem incongruous. Odd that such an independent outspoken and intelligent feminist such as Hepburn would hitch her cart to an adulterous drunk for a quarter of a century.

One of my favorites
This movie was excellant. The acting was superb and the story was phenomenol. I love the last scene I could not stop laughing. Great movie. One of my favorite Hepburn/Tracy movies. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Tough stuff from director Fritz Lang(M), making his first American film with this 1936 story of an innocent man (Spencer Tracy) who escapes a lynch mob and then orchestrates his apparent murder at their hands. Tracy is superb, and the film is uncompromising, until studio interference takes some of the wind out of Lang's sails right at the end. But as the portrait of a character who comes to reflect the destiny he is trying to avoid, this is still essential Lang and a pre-noir classic.--Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (12)

Lang's First American Film
An insightful study of mob rule, director Fritz Lang's "Fury" (1936) still packs a disturbing punch -- abetted by excellent performances from Spencer Tracy, Sylvia Sidney and Bruce Cabot. The closing shot was studio-imposed and unnecessary, but does not lessen the film's overall impact. "Fury" remains a powerful, thought-provoking drama. The DVD release includes an excellent commentary track from director Peter Bogdanovich.

We've Seen the Enemy And He is Us
What is amazing about Fritz Lang's "Fury" is it's depiction of middle America gone psychotic is it was distributed by MGM, the studio that advanced the Norman Rockwell idyll more than any other.This mirror of the darkest recesses of the American heart remains an obscurity, probably because we cannot admit to ourselves that when law and order break down we are capable of some of the most abhorent behavior.Obvious parallels can be made to what was occuring in Germany at the time of this film's release but our history suggests that, yes, it can happen here.There are many images that are seared in my consciousness from this film none more than that of one of the unruly lynchers munching on a hot dog as the jailhouse burns.Spencer Tracy is simply brilliant as the average Joe who, as a victim of circumstance, becomes the lightning rod for the mob's wrath.Sylvia Sidney contributes solid work as Joe's fiancee and the film's voice of reason.An underrated actress, Sidney also did a good turn in another classic film released in 1936, "Dead End".This film has to be commended for it's brute honesty, though, it took a foreigner to reveal some harsh truths about ourselves.

Smart 1930s Morality Tale from Fritz Lang with Spencer Tracy
"Fury" was legendary German director Fritz Lang's first American film. He spoke English, but not well enough at the time to write fluid dialogue, so Lang worked on the script with writer Bartlett Cormack, who did the actual writing. Lang and Cormack based this morality tale of mob psychology and revenge on a story outline by Norman Krasna entitled "Mob Rule", but they incorporated some elements of a real lynching case that had recently occurred in San Jose, California. Lang's intention was to give the film a realistic, documentary feel. "Fury" gives the impression of looking at the laws and customs of the United States through foreign eyes, which, of course, it is, but I don't know if Lang meant that to be so evident.

Joe Wilson (Spencer Tracy) is a man very much in love with his fiancée Katherine (Sylvia Sydney). The couple are eager to get married but don't yet have enough savings. Katherine takes a job in another city to earn more money, while Joe works hard in Chicago. After over a year of this arrangement, Joe has saved enough money to marry Katherine, and he sets out in his new car to join her. But he is intercepted by police en route and arrested on suspicion of being part of a kidnapping gang. He is held in a small town jail pending further investigation, but gossip spreads of the arrest, and an angry mob descends on the jail. When the mob is unable to break into the cells, they burn and dynamite the jail. Joe is thought to have died in the fire. But he escaped and is determined to avenge his attempted murder by seeing that the lynch mob is prosecuted for murder.

"Fury" isn't the least bit subtle in its message. It states its morals outright, but that doesn't undermine its power. The film is neatly divided into 2 parts: Part one concerns the Fury of the Mob, and part two is about Joe's Fury. The fury of the mob is transferred to its victim, and, although Joe's anger is more justified, "Fury" asserts that it is just as corrosive. At one point, the town barber delivers a monologue on violent impulse. The entertainment value that the public finds in both the lynching and subsequent trial is emphasized. And the state's Governor is reluctant to answer the Sheriff's request for National Guardsmen to protect the jail on account of election politics. The film is generally complimentary of the justice system, but scathingly critical of "mob justice" and vigilantism. "Fury" wasn't a failure when it was released, but neither was it a big success. Looking at it now, I wonder if that may have been because the film is critical of its audience. That's always a recipe for dismal box office. In any case, "Fury" is a smart "social conscience" film of the 1930s that doesn't align itself with any political party or group.

The DVD (Warner Brothers 2005 release): The picture and sound quality are good, but I don't think this is a restored print due to occasional small white specks. The flaws would hardly be noticeable unless you were looking for them, though. There is a theatrical trailer and an audio commentary by Peter Bogdanovich and director Fritz Lang. Yes, Fritz Lang! The commentary alternates between Peter Bogdanovich discussing Lang and the film in the present day and an interview with Fritz Lang that Bogdanovich did in mid-1965. Lang talks about his career, writing and filming "Fury", and differences between American and German filmmaking. Lang's commentary is quite a treat and very interesting. Bogdanovich is also interesting, as he fills in some of the gaps in Lang's comments. The audio commentary is definitely worth a listen. Subtitles for the film are available in English, Spanish, and French.

The scary thing...
is that this film is, with just a little tweaking, just as applicable today as it was then. Mob mentality is mob mentality, even if it's not literal. This is easily one of the best films to illustrate just how imbecilic and lemminglike mobs can be, and how self-righteousness can supposedly cover up for a multitude of sins. Tracy is superb, as are many of the characters, and Lang's direction is near flawless. The only things that keep this from being a 5-star film: The ending, which was forced on lang by the studio, and the fact that some of the acting, including Sydney in parts, is too over the top. Still, one worth watching and owning.

Brutal film !
The inner demons hidden in a crowd will explode with all the expected fury around and innocent man acussed unfairly .

The sociological study of the human being is exposed in all its ugly nakeness .

So after you watch this sinister nightmare brilliantly played by Spencer Tracy, please remind that famous reflection of Ibsen taken from An enemy of the people : ^The majority never has the reason^ .

This movie was the first one made for Lang when he came to North America after leaving Germany .

A major cult movie ! ... Read more

Reviews (3)

One of my favorite old movies finally in DVD format!
This has been one of my favorite movies for over twenty five years.Scene after scene, there's something to watch for.What I've always loved about this movie is the great, wrenching dialogue.And watching a young Robert Wagner isn't too difficult either.

But now, on DVD, I feel as though I am seeing the movie for the first time (or at least the second time!)The quality of this DVD is impressive.I also own a DVD version from a few years back that came from China, with Chinese subtitles.Comparing the two on my 55" tv is like comparing a digital picture taken with a 2 megapixel camera to a digital picture taken with an 8 megapixel camera.The quality of this Twentieth Century Fox DVD is outstanding for such an old movie.The picture is very clear, the color saturation is deep and rich, the sound is great.I've noticed nuances about the picture, and the background scenery, that I never noticed before.

This edition also features both a widescreen and a full frame version of the movie, on a double sided disc.I don't think there were any special features, but I am happy to have this excellent version of my favorite old film.

I Have Been Waiting For The DVD Release
I remember seeing this film in theatrical release and have always liked it. It seems to be "loaded" with the best, from director to actors. It has been on my "hope soon" list for release on DVD, so I am very pleased to see it. Okay, so Robert Wagner is a little wooden, but it doesn't detract from the story. Another movie in this vein is "House of Strangers" with Edward G. Robinson, Susan Hayward & Richard Conte. It is also a wonderful telling of the same story, done in black & white, only the family is in banking.

Friendly witness to a changing West.
'Broken Lance' has many admirers, and there are many good things about this sober Western.The film has been called an updated 'King Lear' - an all-powerful, tyrannical father unwisely cedes control (land) to his children, all turning against him except for the youngest, who is the most ill-used - but the adaptation is loose and mercifully unliteral: there are no raging storm scenes or impertinently wise Fools, just a grandeur-exuding atmosphere of a great man and the power he created declining.Though filmed in Fox's ugly Technicolour - that muddy colour that would be called 'lurid' if it didn't yearn for the respectable - there is an intelligent compositional eye, filling the landscape with dramatic and symbolic imagery.The prologue is particularly striking - a moody young man, Robert Wagner, released from three years in prison, rejects a financial offer by brothers eager to be rid of him.The journey he takes into the past is one of progressive decay and danger - first he is forcibly brought to the governer, in whose building gleams an imposing portrait of his father.When he visits his father's land, with all its traces of former activity abandoned, he is shot at from a distnace by a man who turns out to be an Indian friend -- the surreal shot of a seemingly self-standing gateway in an empty plain points to the importance of this sequence, as a kind of mythical portal into another realm; when he finally enters his family home, it is a ghost house, a gothic ruin, its dereliction shrouded in shadow.Like the films noirs with which director Huac Dmytryk made his name, the movie begins with an end; a heavy air of fatalism hangs over the subsequent long flashback.

What probably most appeals to fans is the film's (relative) political sophistication - as a backdrop to the usual Oedipal structures is a portrait of the West as it moves from a mythical plane into the modern era.It especially highlights two problems that would blight the nation in the next century - race and advanced capitalism.Spencer Tracy is an Irishman whose second wife is the daughter of a Cherokee chief.He is too important a landowner to ignore, so the locals refer to her as Spanish; the wives of these friends are nevertheless terminally indisposed whenever he gives parties.Of his four sons, the elder three from his first marriage, his favourite is the youngest, Wagner, through whose eyes the film unravels, and on whom centres the crises of race (he is a half-breed who loves a WASP whose father disapproves) and property.The actual catastrophe of the film occurs when a copper company on Tracy's land dumps refuse in his river, poisoning his herd.A fight at their headquarters, in part sparked by a racist comment directed at Wagner, leads to a court case, to offset the risks of which, Tracy is advised to divide the land between his sons.The old pioneers who tamed the land have been superceded, leaving only division and hatred in their wake.

You have got to admire a Western that interweaves its themes intelligently and without sensation (although a ridiculous coda stand-off between two brothers nearly ruins the good work).The restrained use of music and the insistence on stillness (intimating burgeoning violence) adds a maturity to the action.The treatment of the Indians is sensitive for the time, with the relationship beween Tracy and Katy Jurado clearly signalled as a loving and positive thing.The title indicates the film'stheme, the (1950s?) failure of authority, family and masculinity.

Still, I found the film unsatisfying.This is partly due to miscasting - Wagner is too wooden to carry the film's moral weight; his role should have gone to the nervy, brilliant Richard Widmark, riveting as his resentful older brother who finally turns against his father's abuse.But it is mostly due to the stodgy direction which often confuses the sombre with the plain slow.Compared to the similarly-themed 'Gunman's Walk', 'Lance' lacks verve or true insight. ... Read more

Reviews (16)

Now This Is Chemistry
This is the film that started it all, and movie fans ever since have been grateful. It's the first pairing of the legendary Hepburn and Tracy, and from the moment when he first sets his eyes on her (actually, her legs - a great shot!), you can feel why they were such a perfect match on screen. They star as newspaper columnists coming from different backgrounds and perspectives, who despite the odds, fall in love, even though they have no idea how to fit into each other's worlds. Both stars give their usual top performances, compensating for some slow parts and dated elements in the story. I enjoyed the film, as I have enjoyed all their films that I have seen. Katherine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy were two of the best in the business, so any opportunity to see them together should be taken!

FANTASTIC
When you have SPENCER and HEPBURN together, it's nothing less than FANTASTIC! No others in movie history can match them as a team. They're acting in a movie, but you can see the love for each other on their faces - it makes it enjoyable to watch them. Every film they have ever made together is great. In Woman of the Year, watch for the kitchen scene. Also, great to watch Desk Set;there are several scenes that were ad lib, and the director was smart in leaving them in - Spencer caught Hepburn entirely off guard with his antics.

Off to a Pretty Good Start
Kate & Spencer began a 25 year on and off the screen romance with Woman of the Year. The movie itself is fine but unspectacular. Basically, the message seems to be that a woman can't have it both ways: work and family. Odd message considering the female lead. WOTY is more important as a piece of film history for the pairing it started. Hepburn was pretty much the only woman as ahead of her times as she was. Fortunately she could put her money where her mouth was and deliver the goods. Several of her films are classics and she is a Hollywood Goddess.

"Woman Of The Year" is Great
"Woman Of The Year" is a Katherine Hepburn Spencer Tracy comedy MGM movie story of a powerful career woman "Tess Harding" who meets a powerful career man "Sam Craig" and they marry and the problems begin because they both have careers though her career is more public than his.She's a person that just about everyone knows in the world and she knows just about everyone by 1st name.There are some Great comedy scenes and the conflicts between career and home are good and they have a happy closing scene.This was the 1st of 9 movies that Katherine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy starred in and they were good together in movies especially this one if you watched any of their movies then you would know and if not this is a good movie you would enjoy.This is the best Katherine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy movie.The movie was popular with audiences and later the movie "Woman Of The Year" was made into a musical play.Barbara Eden played the role in a national touring production of "Woman Of The Year" in 1984 and it was this movie that the musical play was based on.A Great story.A Great movie.A Great DVD.

Laughs when you least expect it...
Aside from Hepburn & Tracy's debut as a team, all credit should be given to director George Stevens for putting together this very complicated story so seamlessly. Mr. Stevens finally won an Oscar in 1951 for "A Place in the Sun" and again in 1956 for "Giant". After "Woman ofthe Year", Stevens was nominated for "The More the Merrier", another complicated plot that he handled with brilliance (remade in the 60's as a Cary Grant romp). Tracy & Hepburn are wonderful (Kate getting a nomination), and Kate's pant-suits certainly must've made a fashion statement; Kate was certainly more comfortable in those clothes than the glamour girls of the time, and though not a great beauty, she was glamorous. I still don't understand why Kate became "box-office poison" in the late 30's; I thought she was brilliant in "Stage Door", "Holiday" and "Bringing Up Baby". I don't see any difference in her choice of roles as with Irene Dunne, who did crazy comedy ("The Awful Truth") as well as sensitive drama ("Love Affair"). Who's to say what tastes were at the time? Though "Woman of the Year" has a few slow, serious moments, it's the light-hearted moments that hold interest. It won an Oscar for Screenplay, much deserved by Michael Kanin and the later black-listed Ring Lardner, Jr. And there's a particularly lovely performance from Fay Bainter who seemed to be over-looked. I enjoy this film for many reasons; it was timely, due to its release during the WWII years, as well as attacking attitudes of society which are today ever-present. I think it's most entertaining. ... Read more

Reviews (12)

Spencer Tracy gives a great performance.
In these times where ignorance (high school high is an example) is produced for the public to consume, and special effects are the driving force in many movies, it is very pleasing to watch a movie where the message is positive. The old man & the sea is a story of an aged fisherman living in Cuba who finds himself not only chasing a giant Marlin, but himself. He has reached a point in his life where he has almost lost hope in himself and in life. The ironic point is that although he landed and brought the fish back to shore, it was devoured by a group of sharks. He showed people his luck did not wear out, only that persistence (hard work) pays does pay off. If only he had a bigger boat... If you are interested in another great performance, see "Going My Way" starring Bing Crosby who won an academy award for best actor for the movie.

Eighty-Four Straight Days Without A Fish
Santiago is an aged Cuban fisherman who has not caught any fish for eighty-four straight days. Because he is considered unlucky by the other villagers, the young boy who usually assists Santiago is told by his parents to join a luckier boat which has recently been catching some fish.

On the eighty-fifth day Santiago sets out alone and after a while he hooks a huge marlin. Most of the rest of the movie is about Santiago's struggle with the marlin and his battles with attacking sharks which are trying to eat the big fish. The story is also about Santiago's relationship with the boy who cares for the old man both before and after his epic voyage. The boy is indebted to Santiago for all that he has learned from him about fishing. Santiago is a widower and childless.

Much of the film shows Santiago alone at sea struggling with the marlin. In other words the movie is mostly focused on Spencer Tracy who does an excellent job of holding the viewer's interest.

In spite of Tracy's great performance, however, I still think that Anthony Quinn would have been a better choice for the role of Santiago - except for the fact that Quinn was fifteen years younger than Tracy.

The script closely follows Hemingway's novel which makes the movie even more remarkable.

A mythical cycle!
Hemingway decide to make an apparent simple story when in reality , he would write one of his most emblematic and passionate works.
Santiago is a simple man . In all his life nothing has happened , a flat life in the middle of this fisher community.
Suddenly the fate's call comes for him . 84 days in the sea Ñ twelve weeks without getting any important piece.
This means the unavoidable journey , the invisible conflicy between the man and the nature . You have to realize that the sea has been for this single fisherman a friend and a silent lover and witeness of his miseries and hopeless.
Suddenly he catchs a gorgeous piece; a beauty blue needle fish. His triumph deserved all the hunger since three months he left his home. This means the epic fight. But the long arm of the fate smiled him just for a brief moment , the sharks will appear and the tragedy begins .
Now Santiago has to fight to preserve his piece . The fight is inhuman and awful , he must leave that zone and keep the fish .
More than a fish you've killed a man replies in loud voice our simple man.
When our hero arrives to the coast he's another man . He won the combat and no matter there were no witeness . The life in many times it's capricious , but you must never give up . You must follow your bliss , no matter how high be the prize you pay.
Spencer Tracy made a top knotch performance with this one.
The film keeps its inner force and the spirit of the original novel, since its release forty six years ago.
Watch this movie . It goes far beyond than a simple entertaining !
Dazzling direction and obviously who can fail with a script like this one?
A cult movie !

the old man and the sea review
Ernest Hemingway's The Old Man and the Sea is a story about an old sea fisherman and his struggle with a greatest fish he has ever seen. The story takes place on the coast of Cuba in a small fishing village. Due to the fact he has not caught a fish in eighty-four days, his young apprentice is forced to go fish in a more prosperous boat. Although the book seems to have a simple plot, there is a lot of symbolism and the ending was interesting.
Some criticize The Old Man and the Sea for dragging on, but the character development only makes it more interesting to find out what happens. The main character, Santiago, is modest and keeps up hope despite his circumstance. His willingness to keep on, even despite his outcome, is moving.
Hemingway's style of writing also creates a detailed environment. The plot may be too straightforward but what it lacks, it makes up for rich detail. The way Hemingway depicts man's battle with nature makes it a good book to read.
The symbolism in the book is hard to read at first. As the book goes on, Hemingway uses more and more words that link Santiago to Christ and are very hard to miss. During the old man's battle with the fish, fishing cable cuts his palms. When carrying a mast across his shoulders in the village, images of Christ's march to Calgary can be related.
I would suggest this book to almost anyone over fifteen. The book is short (around a hundred pages) and straightforward. Although it has such a simple plot, the symbolism is a littl