Thursday, November 4, 2010

Dr. Brooklyn goes to Washington

I didn't review it, but a few weeks back I watched All The King's Men (1941) in which a humble small town dreamer turns into a backstabbing Politician... a tad redundant, I know. For decades that movie has been seen as the true face of politics, hearkening back to the old quote "Power corrupts and Absolute power corrupts absolutely." But, with the elections of last Tuesday (for any Americans reading this) the American public went out and struck down Republicans and Democrats in a manner showing they are tired of the tried and true descent to corruption usually found in politics, and instead said they want men and women like... Jefferson Smith (Jimmy Stewart) from the movie which will be reviewed here Mr. Smith goes to Washington (1939).

The movie is surprisingly relevant, with the press being called out for half truths, politicians lying and making back room deals, and the Congressmen forgetting that they were elected by the people to serve the people. And with today's political climate, this movie speaks as loudly now as it does then. There's discussion of over-complicated bills, and the people that write them. As an American this movie speaks to me because it both criticizes and reminds me of all our Legislative branch can be.

Warning: The next paragraph has some political opinions in it, which may be offensive to some readers, proceed at your own choice, or jump to the paragraph after ti for a return to straight up reviewing.

Also, at the risk of alienating some readers, this movie seems like it was advocating The Tea Party before the Tea Party was even a fever dream. Stewart's Smith is the quintessential Tea Partier, a patriotic, Jefferson quoting man who truly believes every word of praise he spouts about the glories of the constitution and believes everyone's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness should be defended.

The Sidney Buchman screenplay is stunning, painting the career politicians as the ruthless men (at the time they were all men) who care more about lining their pockets and getting under the table favors than serving their constituents. But Buchman also shows Smith as a naive man at first, quickly developing into a politician in his own right, but the kind that Americans want: honest hardworking men who think of their people back home before they think of themselves.

Also of note is Jimmy Stewart, the only man I've ever seen in cinema who could play this role. Stewart made a career for playing folksy down to earth guys (See George Bailey, Ransom Stoddard, Tom Jeffords, etc.) but here he takes it to a new level, in probably his best performance that I've seen him give. His ability to play a "Joe Six-Pack" is unparalleled and his ability to make the audience fall for his characters in each movie is unrivaled as well, the man was truly one of, if not the, greatest American actor.

All that being said, I can see how some people wouldn't like this movie, mainly political insiders and pro-big-government people, especially with the way Buchman and Capra present all the senators except Smith. I personally feel that the reasoning would be the fact that the man in the mirror is sometimes the ugliest person you'll ever see.

Perhaps the greatest political movie of all time, with a high running for greatest American film, Mr. Smith goes to Washington is a beautiful movie with a tight script, great acting, and a truly great look at smoke filled back rooms of Washington.

Dr. Brooklyn says: LIKE this movie (10/10)


 

2 comments:

  1. Not a bad review, amigo.

    I totally agree with you that Jefferson Smith is very much a Tea Party guy, which is why I feel the need to point out that he was cruising for a very public bruising pretty much immediately. He would never have made it through the movie without Saunders' intellect and temperance. Thus, the movie proves that intelligence and passion are both needed in equal measure to change the world -- something the Tea Party would do well to learn.

    Also, I disagree with you on the "tight script." Remember that point early on in the film when Smith wanders into his office for the first time? Everyone's in a hurry to get him back on schedule, but not so much in a hurry that they can't hear him dazedly ramble about the wonders of Washington D.C. Stopped the film in its tracks.

    Still, not a bad review.

    --"Curiosity Inc."

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hmmm, I can kind of see what you mean about that point of contention over the script, but I don't feel like that stopped the movie. True they were trying to get him bac on track but someone like Jefferson Smith wouldn't have gotten on track before saying everything he wanted to say. I felt like they realized they had to let him go sideways before he could go forward.

    ReplyDelete