Cast:
Juano Hernandez (Lucas Beauchamp), David Brian (John Gavin Stevens), Claude Jarman Jr (Chick Mallison), Porter Hall (Nub Gowrie), Elizabeth Patterson (Miss Eunice Habersham), Will Geer (Sheriff Hampton), Charles Kemper (Crawford Gowrie), David Clarke (Vinson Gowrie), Elzie Emanuel (Aleck), Lela Bliss (Mrs. Mallison), and Harry Hayden (Mr. Mallison) Directed by Clarence Brown (#423 - A Woman of Affairs, #433 - Angels in the Outfield, #484 - Plymouth Adventure, #1351 - The Rains Came)
Review:
The real reason that people care about the film in any way besides the usual crime movie elements is Juano Hernandez. He was born in San Juan, Puerto Rico in 1896 (two years prior to the region being acquired by the United States). Before becoming an actor, he worked as a sailor, a circus entertainer, and a boxer. He entered vaudeville in the late 1920s, doing various shows in New York City that included a Broadway debut with Show Boat in 1927. He did work for radio on programs such as Cavalcade of America. Hernandez had gotten his start in film with who else but Oscar Micheaux with the 1932 film The Girl from Chicago, the first of three appearances in a Micheaux feature (there were a few uncredited appearances in films here and there as well, but Intruder in the Dust was his first starring role). Until his death in 1970 at the age of 74, Hernandez was a regular presence in film, such as The Breaking Point (1950) and Trial (1955), although this film has generally been the one that he is best recognized for, in part because of his standout performance that paved the way for more involving roles for black actors. The movie is an adaptation of the 1948 novel of the same name by William Faulkner (which like a variety of his works employed a stream of consciousness style of narration). Incidentally, in order to make money, Faulkner served as a screenwriter for various films from 1932 until the 1950s (which resulted in scripts such as the 1944 adaptation To Have and Have Not). Faulkner was only semi-involved with the production, but it was shot in Oxford, Mississippi (where he had lived most of his life); it should be noted that while most of the cast got to enjoy the hospitality of the University of Mississippi, Hernandez was housed separately at the residence of an undertaker. The choice of director was the one who pushed to do a film of the book in Clarence Brown, who had been raised in Tennessee, had known Faulkner for a time in the late 1930s when Brown was a key director for MGM. Of course, the film only got the greenlight when Dore Schary, fresh off being hired as vice president of production, backed doing it despite the objections of studio head Louis B. Meyer. Ben Maddow wrote the script for the film.
The movie was not a major hit at the time, perhaps because of its minimal promotion or being on the tail-end of "message movies" (imagine watching Pinky or Home of the Brave and then deciding to ditch Intruder in the Dust). But at least it had a fan in Faulkner, who said it was a "fine job." As an 87-minute feature, it works quite well in the art of creating a careful yarn that is part-whodunit and part-look into oneself. It isn't so much about finding the truth about who committed the crime as it is finding the truth in how one could get wrapped up in a possible lynching in the first place. It is a film that does not wrap itself in pretentions of being something that it is not, being a Southern tale with biting truth all the way through (which is why Brown, a craftsman of various successes, deserves credit for making sure the film was not done within a studio backlot), one that is firmly made in a time for one to experience themselves in levels of uncomfortableness (such as its use of the N-word, for example). Obstinate is probably the best way to describe the character played by Hernandez, which is to say he is firmly confident in each scene he commands the screen, which doesn't require copious amounts of dialogue to get the point across of how engaging he proves to be. He isn't just a symbol utilized for some sort of message of tolerance for the sake of it, as he is no servant to misplaced pride. It is funny too, because Brian and Jarman are actually pretty good too, acting in their own type of tolerance angle with Hernandez in nuance that makes it an uneasy coming-of-age film as well, where adult figures are not cut and dry in helping one find easy answers in the building blocks of life. Sure, books/films such as To Kill a Mockingbird ended up enduring more in the public consciousness when it came to children and the destruction of innocence and moral heroes over a decade after the release of the film (each involve an accuser's family being of ill repute). However, Intruder in the Dust and its portrayal of the struggle to understand an adult world that doesn't make much sense with its teen character in Jarman is not to be forgotten to go with Brian and his double-act of prejudices and principles. This goes for Patterson as well, quietly effective in elder sophistication without intrusions of unsubtlety. At any rate, this is a movie to watch for Hernandez and company as a whole, with his cool confidence providing the spark for a rivetingly uncomfortable crime movie that is more than meets than the eye in the parts that matter most. It endures after over seven decades because it shows us how much work one still has to do in the matter of understanding and pride, whether in a small town or beyond.
Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.
Next Time: Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song.
No comments:
Post a Comment