Tweet
I Am A Fugitive From A Chain Gang 10/10
This movie, simply put, was a case of superlative delivery and filmmaking. The ending was creative and didn't fall short. Some may have gripes about it, but I felt it was powerful and well done. It was originally crafted and wonderfully executed. It is everything one can expect out of the "prison-chaingang" type movies. In fact, movies such as Papillon, or Cool Hand Luke, wouldn't have been what they were, had it not been for this movie. This movie started the whole "prison-chain gang-escaped convict" genre of movies. It set the standard.
Produced in 1932, it sets a regular World War I veteran played wonderfully by Paul Muni, who is returning home, to a stagnant society. A changed man who has seen war, he had matured and grown. However, his brother, who is a preacher, tries to boss him around. He tries to talk to him about "duty to your job". He tries to convince him to go back to work in the factory like before he left. This man is trying to find a new freedom, and a new life, only to be thrown back into the pit of redundancy, and routine, daily grind, uniformity like in the army. A man who wants to experience new euphorias and make decisions for himself, is butressed against his insensitive brother who cannot think outside of the tedium of routine, but more important an insensitive justice system and society which revolves around tedium.
Going from one job to another, city to city, he is a stealth character always on the move. With no permanant job, and nearly broke, he is wrongfully implicated in a restaurant robbery. And from then on the shackles are set. He is sent to a chain gang in some nameless southern state. He makes a radical escape and eventually fulfills his dream by becoming an engineer. Of course, freedom comes with a price, as he had the unfortunate luck of having made the deal with the devil who betrayed his identity. After landing back in the chain gang, he made another desperate second escape toward the end of the film. After that the movie focused on him only once in the dark, unshaven, dirty and desperate. He makes a final visit of goodbye to the woman he loves. The closing line has her asking him, "How do you live?" to which he replies, "I steal."
The movie is filmed wonderfully for its time, and those who are used to seeing modern "talking pictures", you will be thrown into a different style and era of film making. There is constant movement in the movie, following the main character. From his arrival home from war, to his travels in pursuit of his dream, to the chain gang, and to his escape, there is fluidity and it allows for the viewer to constantly inquire and keep up with interest. It doesn't lull you to sleep and never leaves any room to wander, but always achieves its goal of keeping you constantly immersed into the next corner the film will take. A hard-hitting style, the film's progression revolving around the life of the character ends powerfully.
You are allowed to chime in and witness the desperation of the main character to the point where at times you cannot help but feel anger toward public authority. More than anything the movie is a daring expose of ruthless public authority and a critique of the inflexible, insensitive justice system that doesn't understand the individual, his dreams, his life history, or for that matter, how he was wrongfully committed to a life of control. Filmed during the Depression years, and the growing Federal government, this movie was in line with several movies of the time that questioned the social mores as well as the institutions of law and order.
This movie, simply put, was a case of superlative delivery and filmmaking. The ending was creative and didn't fall short. Some may have gripes about it, but I felt it was powerful and well done. It was originally crafted and wonderfully executed. It is everything one can expect out of the "prison-chaingang" type movies. In fact, movies such as Papillon, or Cool Hand Luke, wouldn't have been what they were, had it not been for this movie. This movie started the whole "prison-chain gang-escaped convict" genre of movies. It set the standard.
Produced in 1932, it sets a regular World War I veteran played wonderfully by Paul Muni, who is returning home, to a stagnant society. A changed man who has seen war, he had matured and grown. However, his brother, who is a preacher, tries to boss him around. He tries to talk to him about "duty to your job". He tries to convince him to go back to work in the factory like before he left. This man is trying to find a new freedom, and a new life, only to be thrown back into the pit of redundancy, and routine, daily grind, uniformity like in the army. A man who wants to experience new euphorias and make decisions for himself, is butressed against his insensitive brother who cannot think outside of the tedium of routine, but more important an insensitive justice system and society which revolves around tedium.
Going from one job to another, city to city, he is a stealth character always on the move. With no permanant job, and nearly broke, he is wrongfully implicated in a restaurant robbery. And from then on the shackles are set. He is sent to a chain gang in some nameless southern state. He makes a radical escape and eventually fulfills his dream by becoming an engineer. Of course, freedom comes with a price, as he had the unfortunate luck of having made the deal with the devil who betrayed his identity. After landing back in the chain gang, he made another desperate second escape toward the end of the film. After that the movie focused on him only once in the dark, unshaven, dirty and desperate. He makes a final visit of goodbye to the woman he loves. The closing line has her asking him, "How do you live?" to which he replies, "I steal."
The movie is filmed wonderfully for its time, and those who are used to seeing modern "talking pictures", you will be thrown into a different style and era of film making. There is constant movement in the movie, following the main character. From his arrival home from war, to his travels in pursuit of his dream, to the chain gang, and to his escape, there is fluidity and it allows for the viewer to constantly inquire and keep up with interest. It doesn't lull you to sleep and never leaves any room to wander, but always achieves its goal of keeping you constantly immersed into the next corner the film will take. A hard-hitting style, the film's progression revolving around the life of the character ends powerfully.
You are allowed to chime in and witness the desperation of the main character to the point where at times you cannot help but feel anger toward public authority. More than anything the movie is a daring expose of ruthless public authority and a critique of the inflexible, insensitive justice system that doesn't understand the individual, his dreams, his life history, or for that matter, how he was wrongfully committed to a life of control. Filmed during the Depression years, and the growing Federal government, this movie was in line with several movies of the time that questioned the social mores as well as the institutions of law and order.
I'm not a big fan of Tarantino either.
Comment