 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
...do you think of a particular message, or do you simply flow with the performances?What do you think after that movie is over?
Follow Ups:
He makes us think and I am a great fan of most of his films. "Inherit the Wind" has a story closely based on the Scopes "Monkey-Trial" of 1925 and courtroom dialogue that is a close facsimile of the court transcript - up to a point AND they did take a lot of license. Kramer almost always got splendid performances out of his actors and Spencer Tracy and Fredrick March are about as good as it is possible to get.This film should be shown in acting school. The quality of the performances, especially that of Tracy, March, and Harry Morgan, is magnificent and far above those in the recent remakes (although Jason Robards was exceptionally good). You wanna see good acting - watch this movie. Tracy, March, and Morgan are three old pros showing how it's done! The script could have used some tightening but it is still above average. It's the acting that lifts it to near-classic status.
Victor,I saw the Tracy "Inherit the Wind" again only a couple of evenings ago. I had seen it perhaps twice before and have harboured a little prehudice against as it as a movie as is always seemed a bit overblown, the W J Bryant or "Brady" character and "Cates'" (Stoke's) fiancee's minister father are too cartoon-like and somewhat spoil the story development. Tracy as "Drummond" (or Darrow)is excellent here- who else could've done it?
But, I forgive a lot and accept this as deriving from it's period- the most intense era of the Cold War. It always suprises me to remember that this movie is from 1960 as it feels much more a film of the "fight fascism" WWII era. It is very much a stand up for your rights and proto-civil rights movie that I would link somewhat to the mood of "Mockingbird" from about the same time.
The overall theme of freedom of thought and reactionary (religious) thought is given a suprising depth of treatment and is not as 2-D as I remembered- for example the scene in which the passionate Brady protests Cate's fiancee's father's damnation of her to Hell for her defense of Cates, is very strong.
Great humor: I still can't forget the line of Kelly's cynical newsman. Asked if he "Would like to have a nice, clean room" he says, "I left one to come here." Also, "He's (Brady) the only man who can strut sitting down."
One of the most affecting episodes for me, is the final scene between Kelly and Tracy in which Tracy -after all his defense of individual freedom of thought, warns Kelly of the tragedy of cynicism and the alienation it produces- such a person will "inherit the wind" and be left empty. It was powerful, excellent advice (and a timely theme) equally important to the principal one.
As much as is my renewed affection for the Tracy version- which was dramaticized enough to give it it's own internal freedom to explore a wider set of themes, I should like to see another version with a more historically accurate bent out of court transcripts. I know there have been more versions. Can you recommend one?
Cheers,
Bam
-as for Darwinism itself, I am a confirmed Neo-Alchemist and have a somewhat looser concept that is more inclusive- and incorporates multiple religious metaphor/allusions with natural selection for a concept of Creation.
That was a great summary, Bam, and it is not too far from my feelings.My personal feelings regarding this film have evolved with time.
When I saw it during my materialist-atheist years, it was plain easy to accept and cheer along - it simply all made sense, back then when.
Back then the cartoonish nature of the bad guys didn't bother me, simply because they were wrong - and we all knew that - didn't we? Hmmmmm....
Things are different today, as I had opened my horizons if not tremendously, then at least enough to allow more possibilities.
This time around such presentation of "bad guys" struck me right off the bat as incredibly objectinable, offensive even, as I was hoping for a more shall I say, thoughtful search for the truth, less of propaganda material.
From that perspective some moments I found irritatingly simplistic in their presentation, all the while submerged into deep appreciation of fine acting and directing. But the agenda was just getting in my eye every second, like dust while driving a convertible.
After seeing it yesterday, I believe that the script has severe faults. The fine points of the ending (you captured them well) seem to have little connection to the rather single-minder and almost bone-headed push of the main scenes, where the evil ones had no redeaming values, and the good ones had no spots.
I am not familiar with any other versions, but I would be interested to see another rendition... hopefully less agenda-driven this time.
I am in a funny position here. If you wake me at night, I will give you all the atheist answers... the answers I believe are true. Yet I am completely against the present day materialist thought control.
You might recall Tracy asking in indignation: "Imagine if one day only Darvinism was taught in schools!"
Back then that sounded as something thought provoking, but today that is unfortunately, a reality.
I need to think more about your Alchemist philosophy... maybe you could elaborate on it on the Outside?
Victor,Good points and close to the central idea of "Inherit" of open mindedness. I agree completely about the ending with Spencer and Kelly seeming too much of a casual appendix, when in fact it constitutes one of the two main points- people need to find a point of view in order to find structure (I hate to use the word "meaning") by answering the Big questions to our own satisfaction- but- but, we have to believe it internally and not have it forced on us externally. This happens only in a conditon of inclusion of fact, opinion, history, and associated emotions (culture)-and when it becomes dogma- a set of of conditions of compliance to belong to a group- free will is lost and the person becomes an automaton in the service of others' ideas.
This idea of external and internal authority is one dear to me. This is my problem with religion as opposed to spirituality- the extrenal authority of religion- "We're right, we've always been and always will be right, and if you disagree with any part of the set of conditions of the group- you're damned and might get your head knocked as well." The idea of external authority needs greater and greater force for compliance and if the population is deprived of full freedom of choice outside of a context of dogma, totalitarianism results: religion, communism, and capitalism unbridled all end in their extremes denying free will. We can see by the failure of free will on a lrge scale by the fragmentation of religion into sects, and politics into parties and extremism by the way these two schools of thoughts rely on dogma- and even or clearly by the necessry enforcement.
I think "Inherit" has these two components in force: the necessity of free will in creating a set of personal core beliefs- in "Inherit" the rejection of Darwinism is a subjugation- and secondly, it is the responsibilty of the individual when having this great gift- and it is so hard won it can only be thought of as a gift- to discover the macrocosm of meanings for themselves in an environment of inclusion- in our example, the warning of Tracy to Kelly. In this way, I feel a bit better about the ending having integration to the first idea- they are inseperable. I agree completely that this second principle- that of personal responsiblity should have not been a "P.S" to the movie.
Now, just let me climb down off this soapbox..
Cheers,
Bambi B
PS: I would very much like to have your thoughts on my little Neo-Alchemical project, which like traditional alchemy involves "microcosm" and "macrocosm"- the subatomic to creation of the Universe, Unfortunealty, my text is already over 400 pages- as you know I never use one word where six will do- and far from complete! The main premise has to do with the evolution of matter (subatomic'unifed field> atomic> molecule> proto-life> life > and back to subatomic) within a hiearchical set of increasingly complex systems that then revert to simple and unified field. It is the relationship of simpler systems within an environment that causes a complexity that then reverts to simplicity - mainly about cycles and oppositions. You can see how naive and simplistic a quick explanation sounds! Oh yea, thanks, I'm sure THAT explains eveything in the Universe!"
When I'm further along, I hope to derive a unified theory and in which the eventual 900 pages I've planned can be expressed in one paragraph.
PPS: I'm glad you mentioned "Outside" outside of Outside. There is so much intelligence and energy there crushed into gainsaying by dogma, posturing and others' agendas. I suppose it's a fun as a sport, but sports are too reliant on keeping score..
I'm convinced that if we could get Vinylly, darkmobious, Audiophilander, LWR, edta, DUI, and the usual cast all in the same room and properly plastered, that site could probably achieve World Peace if there were any survivors.
I recommend brandy for this kind of job.
He-he Bam, a one-paragraphs summary sounds about right - please subject us all to it when you are ready.Outside... as I see it it has perfect reason to exist, as the place for all such discussions.
Me - I am an easygoing guy, so if someone here wants to discuss cars of brands of cognac, that is fine with me, I only read a small percentage of posts anyways. But I am sure you know we have many voluntary policemen who have that thing over the sin they usually call "waste of bandwidth".
Kinda reminds me of a grade school class when suddenly everyone is starting Shhhhhh!!!!! Quiet!!!!! everyone else.
The beauty of the Outside is not that they are not there, but that you and I and even Patrick can tell them what we think about their effort.
But in the forum like this one I would much rather look like Bond... James Bond... you know, a white shirt, a Walther PPK and a freshly pressed pants (you should see mine now!), and a cool babe nearby.
But you are right about the Outside creatures. Most of them are actually nice folks, except for a VERY few exceptions, and in fact it is like a bar you go to at the end of the day.
Victor,Yes, the single paragraph that explains Everything- it will probably start, "Oh, what the hell!".
I continue to be fascinated by Outside- what a group! Somtimes I feel I'm watching the home version of "Fight Club" and upon looking into it more closely, the protagonist is actually pummeling himself.
It's interesting to me too that Audio Asylum keeps branching out into so many realms and specialties unrelated to audio and how a (seemingly) common interest makes such strange bedfellows!
Cheers,
Bam
Long time ago..But I still remember thinking..A good film for..the wrong cause...as I still have my problem with Darwin... ( there was a Scottish guy before him with an analog theorie )....
But the film did very well deserve the bigotry of the south, and that was the GOOD cause and VERY well played, of course too!
Spencer was just the greatest American actor of his time.
nt
.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
